Great White shark at Wharton Beach, Western Australia.
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.

Surfer-scientist relationship teetering on becoming combative after latest Great White attack on surfer

"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. 

Witnesses report seeing a “massive” Great White shark and a surfer in chest deep water was then reported to be in great distress before failing to make it to the shoreline. 

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.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
73 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
FlintyBadman
FlintyBadman
1 year ago

“Carry on Retard” – that’s the movie they’re making about the Trump/Vance/Musk administration isn’t it?

FlintyBadman
FlintyBadman
1 year ago

Wait – if its a history book & we’re halfway through the last book – are we in the past? When is now? How is future? What is time anyway? Deep stuff.

FlintyBadman
FlintyBadman
1 year ago

I looked it up & I think I see what you mean. Aren’t geologists & archaeologists amazing? To extract verifiable, testable hypotheses that so clearly debunk venerable, supernatural fairytales is like a modern day miracle. All praise to the sciency ones!

FlintyBadman
FlintyBadman
1 year ago

The fact you find scientists incredible speaks more to your abilities than theirs. Oh, & culling an apex predator to extinction, couldn’t possibly have a downside could it? Trump’s yesterdays news, you are clearly the stable genius we need making the big decisions!

FlintyBadman
FlintyBadman
1 year ago

Yes, and that sophisticated approach to managing complex food webs & ecosystems is in no way related to the current Anthropocene mass extinction event. You are all definitely geniuses who could teach those scientists a thing or two! </s>

channelbottom
channelbottom
1 year ago

Sharks ‘natural’ (typical) prey ain’t humans. The statistics will show that sharks kill / eat sealife 99.9% of the the time.

But hey, throw a dog, cow, human in the water where big hungry sharks are, and likely as not if they have a taste they might just finish it off. There’s your simple logic for you.

Hang-gliders still crash a lot. “Cull Gravity!”
Drivers still do stupid shit for thrills. “Cull all the trees because my drunk cousin smashed into one doing 120mph!!”

Water users need to be AWARE of the risks of that any particular spot may hold.

Peeps up north don’t casually go swimming when Box Jellies are around. Why?
They’ll die in agony.

A mass cull of thousands of large sharks for the benefit of a relatively few surfers makes no moral or ecological sense.

FlintyBadman
FlintyBadman
1 year ago
Reply to  channelbottom

No moral or ecological sense, eh? Have you looked around you recently? No moral or ecological sense seems to be exactly the right criteria for humanity’s next big project. Fuck you, sense!

Ted Judah
Ted Judah
1 year ago

So what you’re saying; if there is a shark attack, all surfing in the area should be banned until the offending shark is apprehended? Or should we, as surfers, take responsibility for our actions (going surfing where sharks exist) and accept the calculated risk?

Rocks local
Rocks local
1 year ago

My point is that no one is exactly cozying up with scientists right now, not just limited to surfers. Agree that the health care system needs a major overhaul , and yes the health insurance system has some very wacky shit going on, at levels most people are blind to

channelbottom
channelbottom
1 year ago

SCIENTISTS HAVE NEVER PROVIDED ANY EVIDENCE THAT MY GREEN WHEELIE BIN IS NOT BEING ANALLY PROBED AT NIGHT WHEN I’M NOT LOOKING!!!

Wayne Lunch
Wayne Lunch
1 year ago

10 years ago, there wouldnt have been a soul in the water at that spot on a day like it was.

Barnycle
Barnycle
1 year ago
Reply to  Wayne Lunch

Because of less surfers? Please explain

Wayne Lunch
Wayne Lunch
1 year ago
Reply to  Barnycle

No because there was mad man with an M60 taking people out, non discriminatory. He didn’t care if they were surfers or not. He just loved slaughtering people who got close the beautiful white sandy beach, watching the blood of those who he had ripped apart with his murder machine, turning the sand pink. Word got out so no one went there. Those that did were never seen again! It was rumored to be Harold Holt and he rode a beautiful quiver of Petersons, as he got to the age he couldnt manage the M60 as deftly as he once could , he retired up to Cottesloe and lived out his days sipping ponies of shandy, throwing bowls down the neatly manicured lawn of the bowls club. It all turned to shit after that.

Wayne Lunch
Wayne Lunch
1 year ago

and dogs and cows!! they’re all evil!

Happy Camper
Happy Camper
1 year ago

“A shark is just a fish. Just an animal. Just like you and I.”

difference being, I don’t eat humans and have a better dental plan….and HAR1

Happy Camper
Happy Camper
1 year ago

agreed. 100%
interesting the end of that Revelation verse.

It always amazes me reading the NT, written 2000 years ago and see how almost everything in it, forecasted the times we are currently living in.

Otto
Otto
1 year ago

Okay. No drone
How could they catch you?
Speakers submersed.
Don’t see how they could hang anything around someone’s neck.
Water does such a good job propagating sound that any vessel culprit ID would be difficult without resource dedication the Aussie govt. is probably unwilling to put to task.

Brutus
Brutus
1 year ago

LOL….and fisherman have never exagerated ……??

Brutus
Brutus
1 year ago

the ones I know have their own research vessels

Brutus
Brutus
1 year ago

actually scientists don’t work much with fisherman……..they actually go out and do their won research…I am actually starting a campaign to stop the poolies……35 people last year drowned in pools in Australia……we should close the wave pools before someone dies??

Brutus
Brutus
1 year ago
Reply to  Brutus

just for the record……288 people drowned in Australia’s oceans….in 2024

channelbottom
channelbottom
1 year ago
Happy Camper
Happy Camper
1 year ago

In 2001, I was living in SF when a Presa Canario escaped it’s home and attacked and killed a woman.
The dog was put down and their owners convicted of 2nd degree murder and manslaughter, one of which is still in jail and recently denied final parole, is serving a life sentence.

Q. should the sharks that kill people be put down and the people that promote these dangerous beasts to roam freely and attack and kill at will, be imprisoned?

Brutus
Brutus
1 year ago
Reply to  Happy Camper

OK I bite,LOL!

how do you track down the shark and give it a presumed innocence until proven guilty….??

Happy Camper
Happy Camper
1 year ago
Reply to  Brutus

from my understanding most sharks are pretty territorial and have patterns so, if there is an attack it is a pretty good chance that shark will linger in proximity to the attack zone for a period of time. if I were F&G I’d probs have drones in the air immediately after an attack, at least to track Da Buggah. Drones with laser beams.

re: innocence, yep you may not get the exact shark and if there are others in the area they may fall victim to the hunt for the bad guy, but last I checked sharks don’t have a presumption of innocence….or constitutional rights.
and if they don’t want to become a case of mistaken identity they should not be hanging around bad guys.

Brutus
Brutus
1 year ago
Reply to  Happy Camper

not sure you know that GWS have been tracked coming from South africa, via Maldives/Indo….down the West OZ coast along the bottom of australia all the way up to the Great Barrier reef………so they are not as territorial as we think….I think the biggest problem is big sharks being attracted by commercial shark cage operators who just keep chumming the water but don’t feed them …so the sharks are now being teased by commercial cage operators…..
we love our GWS’s , seeing them live is such an amazing feeling…FFS they look like nuclear subs….
so few people get taken…not worth worrying about….

Happy Camper
Happy Camper
1 year ago
Reply to  Brutus

I probably mis-worded my response.
By territorial I meant that sharks are creatures of habit and tend to follow individual migratory patterns. however, if a shark finds a good feeding area they will often linger or return to those areas annually.

for instance: in Hawaii, for years it was believed (through tracking) there were 4-5 GWS that travelled to the islands from the Farallon every year.
that was until a whale carcass ended up floating of Oau’s east coast a few years ago, and the divers/researchers identified over a dozen different great whites, one of which they believed could be the legendary “Deep Blue”, from Mexico.

I have not seen a great white in person but saw one of the biggest tiger sharks (over 15 ft.) imaginable. Over 3/4 the length of our 20 ft. boat. Huge, Wide, Impressive, Beautiful and downright frightening up close.

my opinion on the Oz attacks is that rather migratory or not, it appears some GWS have found fertile pastures in S, SW and Central Coast Oz, and it’s become a pretty serious problem.


73
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x