Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Message Display

> > The fact of the matter is, there is no fundamental
> > difference between data gleaned from scientific experiments than there is
> > from anecdotal experience.
> 
> No, you don't usually have any control data; that's the real difference.

That's a difference in degree, not in kind.  Ergo: no fundamental difference.

> But as I said (you must have missed the implied <G>) "non-random
> experience or anecdotes" often accounts for much of the so-called
> scientific data we have.

"Random" is a tricky word.  "Haphazard" seems to be the word of choice 
these days - at least in non-medical biology.

> So we have some data: a few events and your belief in the fishermens'
> tales (a usually reliable source, right?) Are we interpreting the limited
> data correctly?

Not really. "Data" probably isn't the best word - it's a word used for 
observations made further along the scale towards controlled 
"scientific" experiments and rigorous survey results.  The evidence I use 
to form my opinion about sharks & scooters is out towards the other end 
of the spectrum - more along the lines of "gut-feeling" (or "SWAG").  
"Gut-feelings" and "SWAG"s are generally formulated by a much broader 
amalgamation of "haphazard" events - in this case, my personal 
experiences, the reported experiences of others, shark documentaries I've 
seen, a greater-than-avaerage understanding of shark behavior and 
biology, the fact that my brother studies patterns of natural Great White 
Shark attacks on seals and sea lions at the Farallon Islands, the fact 
that some of my best friends here in Hawaii study sharks (a couple of 
them just *did* have an article published in the recent issue of 
Science), etc.  So it's hard to pinpoint the entirity of the body of 
evidence pool from which the "GF"s and "SWAG"s are drawn.  The 
reliability of the GF's & SWAG's is more a function of the quality of the 
algorithm (fuzzy logic) and processor (brain) of the person drawing the 
conclusions.  So it all depends on what faith you have in mmy abilities 
to assimilate a broad base of information and formulate an opinion with 
relatively high levels of prediction accuracy.

> Is a scooter a dinner-bell or just something extra to make
> a shark curious or territorial? 

I dunno - when you see one of these big bastard Tigers or Whites, you 
usually don't want to hang around to find out.  Talk to Mike DeGruy about 
the hazards of interfereing with a Grey Reef Shark's territoriality 
(doesn't involve a scooter, but does give one a healthy respect for 
posturing behavior in these animals).

> The question of you-who-knows-the-fishes
> is am I going to sleep with the fishes or are they just going to roust me
> like the farmyard dog? 

I would probably have to conduct a set of controlled experiments to give 
you an answer which I had any confidence in.  Right now, my SWAG opinion 
(which is what I originally posted) is that you probably don't want to 
take any chances on this one.

> Should shark chummers shove the chum and buy
> scooters to attract sharks to their tourist cages or is this a mild
> irritant in the eye of the average shark that just happens by?

Good question - John, Rod?  Any insights?

> Because
> for many people with access to scooters in open water, this difference
> really will make a difference.

Well, you can now add my SWAG to the heap of info that you plug into your 
algorithm to make such decisions.

> ..And no, I really do want to know, I am not pigwrestling.

But at least this pigwrestling isn't personal!

Rich

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]