Why is everyone so afraid of sharks and crocs?

#81BigBee2005Posted 1/9/2013 6:44:50 AM
LOL at the folk here asking why sharks becoming extinct would be a problem. Do you really think that a predator evolving over literally millions of years suddenly disappearing would have no effect on anything? Are you for real? The WHOLE food chain from plankton to whales each have a vital role to play and if you remove any one of them it will effect the rest. Sharks don't just eat fish anyway, they're also quite partial to the odd seal and other small mammal.

We get quite a few wasps here where I work and my colleagues are scared of them, try to kill them while I try to let them out. They've said in the the past 'duh, what do wasps to anyway? They only hassle you when you're eating / drinking something sweet and try to sting you.' It only takes a tiny amount of time to google such things and realise that EVERYTHING (even wasps and sharks) have a vital role to play on our planet. In fact the one and only species on our planet that has no place in the food chain and does nothing positive to contribute is us. Arrogance and ignorance all roled into one - that's the human race for you.
---
XBL Headwind PSN Headwindz
#82rk_711Posted 1/9/2013 11:59:12 AM
LandfillAO posted...
rk_711 posted...
Son, you are misinformed.

1) Most sharks are coastal. If you live in a major coastal city, then chances are that you've been within 10 meters of a shark and just didn't know it. They live their because that's where the food is.

2) Sharks are not close to being the biggest predator in the ocean. Dolphins, all whales that eat fish, (which is a large number) and rays are larger than sharks. And just because a large predator disappears doesn't mean that fish population will skyrocket. Other species will spread out the fish so it will not existent.

3) People die in r.

4) Sharks can live in shallow water, a depth of 5 feet is quite enough room them. In fact most tend to stay at that range.


I love condescending people.

Son, you misinterpret my use of the word "biggest". It was not to do with stature or size. It was used in the context that they are among the

Sharks are also used by fisherman and scientists as indicators for the fish population. Sharks indicate there is prey near by, better aiding humans to find fish.

Also it's said that if sharks were to go extinct, it would completely alter where fish resided. That many fish would leave the area, making it much more difficult for fishing etc. I believe something along these lines has already happened with the sea otter.

Not to mention you say that other fish would just eat the fish that the sharks ate, but who eats those fish? Unless Orca move into the area (as they tend to stay away from Shark infested areas), then there is nothing that is taking the Sharks place in killing the 2nd biggest (not in size, just in case there is another misunderstanding about the context of the word) predator in those areas.

You simply cannot take a predator as high up on the food chain as a shark and expect that the impact will be non existent, and that is proven to be the case more times than not.


I'm sorry but you don't know what you are talking about. The earth has been here for 4.6 billion years with life being here nearly that long. Their has been an estimated 50 billion species in total. And on our planet now we have roughly 50 million left. That means for every species that has existed 99.9% are extinct. Animals go extinct at the rate of about one per day since the earth was born, its nothing new.

This happens all the time with species flourishing, and going extinct about a million years later. A way to describe this is known as the chaotic edge, and it tells us that dominant species can and will go extinct all the time.

You can do a simple nonlinear equation and find out that nothing major will happen. There are so many animals that eat fish that the rise in fish population will easily balance itself out.

The idea that any species going extinct will have a catastrophic impact on the environment is just people not looking at the full picture. Society thinks that everything on this planet has a place and it all fits in delicately. That is simply not true. To prove my theory all you have to do is look at a predator/ prey graph of the last 100 years. If you take the siberian fox and the rabbit population in Russia you can see the fluctuations in the chart are identicle. There will always be only as many predators as the food supply allows. If the rabbits population were to suddenly sky rocket, the fox population would as well. But once that happens it bring the rabbits population back. This game of tug o war happens everywhere since there has been predators. The same would happen in the ocean.

Also ignore all of the grammar errors, I'm on my EVO keyboard and it is the definition of hell.
---
Tom Brady
#83squiggy9996999Posted 1/9/2013 12:12:14 PM
wow, this topic is still going?
#84XioJenesisPosted 1/9/2013 1:29:33 PM
squiggy9996999 posted...
wow, this topic is still going?


It's an interesting topic.

Someone wants to mock me for being afraid of an ingame shark, go for it. I'm also afraid of deep bodies of water. When I was forced to swim in this game, I had to pause just to take a deep breath and try and continue. When it came to shark skin, I'd scope the area, find every shark, kill them all, then take the NEAREST skin and be done.
---
Your God is as real as the Tooth Fairy. Deal with it.
#85LandfillAOPosted 1/9/2013 1:31:24 PM
rk_711 posted...
I'm sorry but you don't know what you are talking about. The earth has been here for 4.6 billion years with life being here nearly that long. Their has been an estimated 50 billion species in total. And on our planet now we have roughly 50 million left. That means for every species that has existed 99.9% are extinct. Animals go extinct at the rate of about one per day since the earth was born, its nothing new.

This happens all the time with species flourishing, and going extinct about a million years later. A way to describe this is known as the chaotic edge, and it tells us that dominant species can and will go extinct all the time.

You can do a simple nonlinear equation and find out that nothing major will happen. There are so many animals that eat fish that the rise in fish population will easily balance itself out.

The idea that any species going extinct will have a catastrophic impact on the environment is just people not looking at the full picture. Society thinks that everything on this planet has a place and it all fits in delicately. That is simply not true. To prove my theory all you have to do is look at a predator/ prey graph of the last 100 years. If you take the siberian fox and the rabbit population in Russia you can see the fluctuations in the chart are identicle. There will always be only as many predators as the food supply allows. If the rabbits population were to suddenly sky rocket, the fox population would as well. But once that happens it bring the rabbits population back. This game of tug o war happens everywhere since there has been predators. The same would happen in the ocean.

Also ignore all of the grammar errors, I'm on my EVO keyboard and it is the definition of hell.


You just argued one small part of sharks going extinct. You failed to address all the other problems that come along with that. The problems it would create for humans. Sure we'd figure it out eventually, but it'd still be a big problem while it lasts.

And you're also countering your own argument. Saying first that the other fish would balance it out to keep the population in check, yet also saying that more prey would equate to more predators (a point I already made). Most fish reproduce a hell of a lot faster than rabbits, I fail to see how this is even a comparison. This spike in the fish population, once again, would make the sea level rise. And the ocean level is not something we have tens or hundreds of years to wait to balance out. Like you said, most of the world's population lives on the coast. You don't see any way that this could affect the environment? lol.

I didn't say all animals have some huge impact on the world, but I believe sharks are one of those animals that has an important role to play.

I look at Yellowstone National Park and think about the fact that certain animal populations tripled in the park when wolves left a few decades ago. Even with the grizzly bear remaining, wolves needed to be brought back to the park in order to restore balance. I find it hard to believe that a predator like the shark would have no impact at all on the ocean's ecosystem.

Also, ignore all of the grammar errors, I have no excuse for it, it's just awful.
#86rk_711Posted 1/9/2013 9:26:11 PM
The ocean levels would certainly not rise from more fish existing. Fish are mostly water anyway, humans are 70% so i would imagine fish are more than that. Fish don't create matter as they grow, they eat nutrients found in the ocean and grow from that. To think the ocean would rise from that is absurd.

And my point remains, a simple equation would show that there wouldn't be any lasting effects from sharks going extinct. History shows us time and time again just that.

And your example with yellowstone doesn't work here. The ocean is 70% of the earth with a massive ecosystem with too many variables. Yellowstone is just a park.
---
Tom Brady
#87roperpokerPosted 1/10/2013 6:50:15 AM
BigBee2005 posted...
LOL at the folk here asking why sharks becoming extinct would be a problem. Do you really think that a predator evolving over literally millions of years suddenly disappearing would have no effect on anything? Are you for real? The WHOLE food chain from plankton to whales each have a vital role to play and if you remove any one of them it will effect the rest. Sharks don't just eat fish anyway, they're also quite partial to the odd seal and other small mammal.

We get quite a few wasps here where I work and my colleagues are scared of them, try to kill them while I try to let them out. They've said in the the past 'duh, what do wasps to anyway? They only hassle you when you're eating / drinking something sweet and try to sting you.' It only takes a tiny amount of time to google such things and realise that EVERYTHING (even wasps and sharks) have a vital role to play on our planet. In fact the one and only species on our planet that has no place in the food chain and does nothing positive to contribute is us. Arrogance and ignorance all roled into one - that's the human race for you.


How dare you defend wasps when you're called Big Bee, just whose side are you on? Think you need to get your allegiance in order young man as everyone knows wasps are just ****'s. Don't even get honey from them - complete waste. :D
---
The only time MacMillan was wrong was when he thought he had made a mistake. - ( ')
ARTE ET LABORE
#88BigBee2005Posted 1/10/2013 8:49:32 AM
roperpoker posted...
BigBee2005 posted...
LOL at the folk here asking why sharks becoming extinct would be a problem. Do you really think that a predator evolving over literally millions of years suddenly disappearing would have no effect on anything? Are you for real? The WHOLE food chain from plankton to whales each have a vital role to play and if you remove any one of them it will effect the rest. Sharks don't just eat fish anyway, they're also quite partial to the odd seal and other small mammal.

We get quite a few wasps here where I work and my colleagues are scared of them, try to kill them while I try to let them out. They've said in the the past 'duh, what do wasps to anyway? They only hassle you when you're eating / drinking something sweet and try to sting you.' It only takes a tiny amount of time to google such things and realise that EVERYTHING (even wasps and sharks) have a vital role to play on our planet. In fact the one and only species on our planet that has no place in the food chain and does nothing positive to contribute is us. Arrogance and ignorance all roled into one - that's the human race for you.


How dare you defend wasps when you're called Big Bee, just whose side are you on? Think you need to get your allegiance in order young man as everyone knows wasps are just ****'s. Don't even get honey from them - complete waste. :D


:-)
---
XBL Headwind PSN Headwindz
#89KiwiTerraRizingPosted 1/11/2013 5:56:20 AM
Had to post as I ran into my first croc last night. Just collecting a relic in a nice secluded spot at night when I see that son of a ***** in my face. Freaked me out, had to crouch in the weeds and collect myself.