"Establishment science is colouring outside the lines when it comes to the reality of shark attacks on humans."
Another surfer disappeared by a Great White shark in Australia. This time at Duke of Orleans Bay, east of Esperance on West Australia’s uber-sharky south coast.
It’s hard to even begin to imagine the situation facing the loved ones and friends of the unfortunate surfer involved. Not to mention the coastal community in that beautiful part of the world. It’s not presumptuous to say that the thoughts of the surfing world are with them.
Yet once again the response from authorities tends towards misinformation. The official line of reportage is that the surfer was involved in a “serious shark bite incident”.
Orwell’s dystopian classic Nineteen Eighty Four deals with a state untethered from the society it governs. Its institutions are not only removed from the people they purport to serve but from any semblance to reality itself.
In our current times when the bashing of elite institutions rates as highly as sportsball amongst the misshapen and unsightly plebeian masses, there’s no shortage of punters willing to becry a return to such Orwellian circumstance. Perhaps with justification.
As surfers, we are at the coal face of apparent institutional chicanery. We appear to find ourselves confronted by a scientific establishment which seems determined to undermine any street cred it may have once had and replace it with hollow appeals to authority. The surfer/scientist relationship is teetering on becoming combative. Surfers are faced with statements and claims from the scientific establishment which are based on no empirical science whatsoever and we are expected to consume these subjective opinions wholesale.
For example the scientific community, which is not a monolith but its media facing Talking Heads presents as such, is steadfast in its insistence that sharks don’t attack humans. No, they merely bite people. The insinuation is that sharks don’t want to eat people and that attacks are nothing more than unfortunate incidents arising from mistaken identity on the innocent shark’s behalf.
This despite the regular full consumption of shark attack victims. This despite hundreds – thousands! – of recorded episodes of sharks returning time and again to finish their human meal in front of eye witnesses. This despite historically infamous accounts such as the people-buffet after the sinking of the USS Indianapolis in WW2.
Yet still the Orwellian dictate that every surfer chewed and swallowed into the gullet of a shark must be reported as a bite. Lest those toothy carnivores develop an unsightly reputation as consumers of flesh…
Then there’s the utter dismissal of the concept of the Rogue Shark. An idea that’s portrayed by the scientific establishment as a kooky conspiracy up there with invading Martians and their penchant for anal probes on unwitting flyover country farming folk.
Yet is there any empirical evidence at all that certain individual sharks aren’t open to the idea of chowing down on a surfer every now and again if the seals, dolphins and snapper are a bit elusive at the moment? Particularly if they’ve had a bit of previous success in the game.
Just because all sharks don’t enjoy the taste of humans, doesn’t mean that some particular individuals might not find it quite acceptable in a pinch. Metaphorically, most people I know would rather eat a yard of undercooked foreskin than an Australian Salmon but I also know a bloke who eats them on occasion because they’re easy to catch.
Point being, that there’s no accounting for taste. So where does the scientific community get off dismissing the notion of a large predatory fish occasionally trending outside the realms of known behaviour ….especially when the science itself always comes with a caveat regarding the impenetrable conditions confronting discovery of such an elusive species.
Where is the humility of science in all this?
It seems to have been subjugated to political activism. A skewed and almost misanthropic desire to reconcile the worldwide reality of overfishing with the mortal threat posed by surfers who play among these XXL flesh eating super predators.
Just to put my colours to the mast – I’m against the culling of potential man eating fish. Because killing sharks accused of potential threat is nothing more than punishment for thought crime in the aquatic realm. If a shark harms a human then dispatch it to Davey Jones’ locker ASAP.
Until that time it’s another innocent animal going about its business.
In this instance it’s no less than the business of being majestic and magnificent and representative of the irreducible power of nature. This remains true despite the similar hyperbole bleated by the urban Greens who’ve never strayed beyond knee deep at a chlorinated public pool.
Establishment science is colouring outside the lines when it comes to the reality of shark attacks on humans.
Recalibration of the field is in order if credibility is to be maintained. Surfers are natural allies with the scientific community, our voices and perspectives should be valued, not dismissed.
