Guest Post by Bob Tisdale
There has been a series of shark attacks off the Carolina coasts. As of last count, the number is 11 shark bites since mid-May.
As one might have expected, from mainstream media’s let’s-see-what-we-can-blame-on-global-warming department comes the CBSNews article “Strange” spike in shark attacks puzzles experts. The news report includes (my boldface):
The recent spate of shark attacks has left many beachgoers nervous.
Dr. Samuel Gruber, the director of the Bimini SharkLab research facility in the Bahamas, says the spike in attacks suggests something strange is going on.
“The trend is normally zero or one attack in that area in any one year,” said Gruber.
Theories as to why this is happening range from time of day, to bait fishing, sea turtle migration, lunar cycles and global warming.
Whose theories? The author doesn’t say.
Maybe, just maybe, there’s another factor at work. Let’s call it the dufus factor, which states anyone who goes swimming in North and South Carolina waters, where there have recently been shark attacks, is very likely a dufus…plain and simple, a dufus.
WHAT ABOUT THE SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURES THERE?
Using the coordinates of 32N-37N, 82W-75W for the North and South Carolina coastal waters, according to NOAA’s new ERSST.v4 sea surface temperature dataset, the May 2015 sea surface temperature anomaly was +1.36 deg C referenced to 1981-2010. See Figure 1. But that’s not unusual there. Sea surface temperature anomalies have been higher in the past…especially in the 1930s and 40s. Note also how low the warming rate there has been since the start of the dataset in 1854.
Figure 1
Clearly, the sea surface temperatures off the Carolina coasts have cooled since the 1930s and 40s, so let’s see how far back in time we can go, in 5-year increments, until the data show no warming for that region. The results are shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2
Based on the linear trend, NOAA’s new ERSST.v4 data show the surfaces of the waters off the coasts of North and South Carolina have not warmed in more than a century.
Once again, mainstream media has failed to do its homework.
SOURCE
NOAA’s ERSST.v4 data are available at the KNMI Climate Explorer
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Just out of curiosity, where is the Mid Atlantic Shark Area located????
I will be at the Outer Banks in a couple of weeks.
Should be interesting
In 2000 there were five confirmed attacks in North Carolina.
Would they call this an anomaly?
A few weeks ago I looked into the question of shark attacks to counter a very stupid eco-poster someone put up on Facebook (yes, yes, I know) with very obviously dubious so-called statistics. In short, since the mid-1500s the number of unprovoked fatal attacks by sharks can be counted on the left hands of about 130 Yakuza. Most shark attacks result from provocation by humans and I’d guess that is what has been happening in the Carolinas – too many stupid humans pissing off the sharks.
In waist deep water no less!
Murder rates in many large US cities seem to be up substantially this year…probably the same cause!
Humans aren’t on the sharks menu. Too bony, which wreaks havoc on their digestive system. They bite all kinds of things. It’s their way of investigating. Kind of like real-world scientists, in a way.
The main stream media is a propaganda arm of the central government. The government wants to exert ever more control over every aspect of your life — witness EPA actions — and, of course, steal ever more of your money via taxation. This story is just more science fiction presented to please the state and all its minions. We would hear more about this if sharks were as cute as polar bear cubs.
There has been darn little anthropogenic global warming, and what AGW there has been has been things other than CO2 release. (land use, deforestation, data fudging, etc)
The US Empire has gone Trillions into debt. Now they want to tax breathing. I wonder why.
Just reviewed the saltwater fishing regs for Florida, S./N. Carolina. It seems the ban on shark fishing and the low catch limits have resulted in a huge success regarding the shark populations. I’ve heard about the shark nets in Australia, but don’t know a lot about them, other than there haven’t been many shark attacks. The only problem is that some animals die in the nets that aren’t dangerous or are on the endangered list.
Reminds me of the Jaws story. At the start of the beach season a shark attack scares off the people and the money they were going to spend locally. I wonder what will be the reaction by the local government in these areas?
“Glenn999
July 3, 2015 at 7:02 am”
Shark nets are used at beaches around Australia, however the nets usually trap other animals rather than sharks. Other systems like bait hooks, which seem rather brutal to me, are used in some places. Usually there is strong disapproval to their use. I tend to stay out of the open sea and use the local seaside swimming pools that fill with sea water, and sometimes, animals.
We’ve had two shark attacks here in Australia in the last two days, both were surfers and one was seriously injured. So far, not attributed to AGW, but there is still time in the lead up to the Paris gab fest!
Thanks for the info.
The shark ban here in the SE US allows for one per person or two per vessel, whichever is lower. So three guys in a boat, and only two get to keep their catch.
Main reason I don’t fish anymore. Too much money to try to catch the one fish I’m allowed. If I lived on the coast, I could fish nearly every day and the expenses would be justified.
I don’t know anything about ocean currents along the east coast. However it has occurred to me that the scent of all that rotting garbage scooped up by the snow plows in Boston this past winter, might now be washing out as the snow melts and heading south to the Carolinas in a nice smelly slurry, attracting the sharks closer to shore.
Oh lord above. Sounds like you do not like driving in Boston anymore than I do. But really, blaming this on us is a bit of a stretch. Anyway, on the east coast, we have the Gulf Stream, a powerful current which flows from south to north, then east to Iceland and on to northern Europe. Boston trash would not end up off the Carolinas.
I have been lucky to travel the Caribbean quite a lot in my time. I very often would encounter tourists concerned about sharks off the beaches. I would explain that it is not a problem, stifling my inner desire to scare the hell out of them. I just saw them as know-nothing tourists. Eventually, I saw a trend, the people most concerned were always from the mid-Atlantic states. Then I had occasion to go to Myrtle Beach, SC for a holiday. I got an education in 11 species of dangerous sharks, along with two pages of “Do’s And Dont’s” around the water, from the hotel’s activity desk.
I got the feeling that the locals view shark attacks much the way we look at car crashes. Regrettable, but if you pay attention and do things right, the actual risk is minimal.
Needless to say, when such tourists show up on a Caribbean beach, I am much more understanding. What else would you do with people who will knowingly swim with man-eating sharks.
On the other hand, I have been known to terrorize people from Kansas (never seen the ocean before) with tales of killer Barracuda and Giant Squid, right off the beach.
Terrifying fossils there though. You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet.
=============
Has anyone examined if the victims used the same sunblock? Could be a new formula that inadvertently attracts sharks. Just sayin, some brilliant back room chemist may have included free range fish oil in the formula this year?
More bad news…http://www.newsbiscuit.com/2014/07/21/hot-summer-could-wipe-out-goth-population-experts-warn/
Thanks for the chuckle.
Is this something to do with the increasing numbers of shark-jumping media stories recently?
”anyone who goes swimming in North and South Carolina waters, where there have recently been shark attacks, is very likely a dufus”
Statistically, you’re much more likely to be harmed driving than swimming along NC/SC coasts. I’ve been swimming in these waters all my life (approaching half a century) and I’ve eaten more sharks than have tried to eat me. Actually, the only time I’ve had sharks try to bite me is when I’m taking them off the hook. Follow John’s 4 simple rules for swimming at the beach and you’ll probably never be shark bitten while swimming: 1) Never swim at dusk or dawn; 2) never swim near a pier; 3) never swim alone and I’m not just talking about the buddy system here, if you look up and down the beach and no one else is swimming you might want to hang back a minute until you figure out why; and 4) know what to do if you get caught in a rip current. In my experience you’re much more likely to be caught in a rip current than attacked by a shark. This has happened twice to me vs. no shark attacks; somewhat anecdotal evidence but still, just saying. If you do get caught in a rip current: 1) don’t panic; 2) don’t swim against the current; 3) swim perpendicular to the current until you’re away from it; 4) swim back in.
Back in to shore, not in to current.
=========
True that!
And don’t forget this one — if you see something that looks like a blue-violet baggie floating along in the surf, get out of the water. When the wind is just right, portuguese-man-of-war(s) are blown from the gulf stream into the beach. Nobody in our family has been bitten by a shark. My youngest son, however, has needed stitches from grabbing a wire leader with a shark at the other end just as it made a run and sliced the leader right into his hand. He’s also (amazingly enough) been hit by a PMOW in the surf right off of Fort Macon. A perfect line of small black dots, each of the pure pain, no remedy but time. From what I understand, if you get hit with enough of the stinging cells, the pain alone can put you in shock and kill you.
rgb
ClimateCentral.org always has fresh fantasies.
More than 100 plant species can cause skin irritation, but among the most well known is poison ivy. With our greenhouse gas emissions climbing and the atmospheric concentration of CO2 building, we expect poison ivy to thrive. A 2007 study by Lewis Ziska, a plant physiologist at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, supports this concept. His study exposed poison ivy plants to four different concentrations of CO2 (300, 400, 500, and 600 ppm). The lowest two levels correspond to observations from the 1950s and the present. The highest two levels mirror projections for the years 2050 and 2090 from the 2007 AR4 IPCC report. In this analysis, we updated those projection dates based on the 2013 AR5 IPCC report, which are reflected in the graphic and animation.
You have to be one twisted human to grow poison ivy on purpose.
In the UK they grow it as an ornamental ivy. (Also, I suspect, as a burglar deterrent).
Kudzu and CO2: ” At 60 days plants grown at 1000 uL/L CO2 had 51% more biomass, 58% longer stems and 50% more branches than plants grown at 350 uL/L”
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4044544?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Drive along any CT interstate and you can see how vines are gaining an advantage over trees. It’s a jungle out there!
A person can gain immunity from poison oak by eating it. During my explorations of the local creek as a kid I found I was very allergic to it. Had to get a steroid injection. My dad
found an extract made from poison oak which was mixed with a little water and drunk. Never got it again. But I wasn’t trying either.
http://yankeebarbareno.com/2011/03/03/eating-poison-oak/
Interesting about the poison oak. I found as a child that poison ivy didn’t affect me and would often show off that fact to friends. Poison oak did affect me though. Haven’t seen much of either since I moved to Colorado over forty years ago.
So the carbon dioxide will also retard the growth of all the flora that was competing with the poison ivy for sunlight? Fascinating!
…along with pretty much every other green leafy plant or grassy plant or algal plant on the planet, yes, one expects poison ivy to thrive. Sheesh!
Why doesn’t climatecentral.org publish exactly the same numbers for (say) wheat? Or corn? Or rice? Or brocolli? Or potatoes? Or tomatoes? Or squash? Or pine trees? Or any other useful plant?
Because seriously, just about all of these plants grow some 10 to 15% faster for every additional 100 ppm of CO_2 they are grown in. Given that photosynthesis basically turns CO_2, H_2O, and nitrates into protein, sugar, and starches including cellulose, CO_2 at mere parts per million of the atmosphere is a rate-limiting bottleneck in plant growth for nearly every species of plant. Plants grown at higher concentrations are more robust, more drought resistant, grow faster (all other things being equal) and are just plain healthier.
So yes, poison ivy is no doubt growing faster, but so is my grass, so are my flowers, so are my trees, and so are the deer that nibble all of the above. The Earth’s biosphere was starved for CO_2, especially at the nadir of the last glaciation when it went down to 180 to 190 ppm, just over the point where it might have caused a mass extinction of at least some species of plants. There is some evidence, weak so far, that the increased CO_2 is starting to green-in some of the world’s deserts. It will be very interesting to see how this proceeds as the atmospheric CO_2 level continues its inexorable march upwards towards 500 ppm.
I personally rather think that our planet’s “optimum” CO_2 concentration is likely somewhere between 450 ppm and 550 ppm (as far as its biosphere is concerned). The interesting question will be whether or not we reach this. If we get fusion in the next decade, probably not. If not, maybe yes. But either way, technology and physics advances will make it unlikely that we are still burning coal for energy in fifty years not because it is “bad” to do so but because it is no longer cost effective to do so.
Shark attacks in South Carolina? I blame the Rebel Flag.
jeez
The only thing causing global warming is global warmists…
North Carolina probably won’t be able to find an old sea dog fisherman that survived the sinking of the Indianapolis to go out to “find ’em, catch ’em, KILL ’em”
https://youtu.be/cHttXgo0PkI
Good job Bob!
Maybe it’s new swim suit material that helps you swim like a seal?
or look like an SUV?
I tell ya this is all because the government banned the poisonous stuff from suntan lotion. Swimmers used to smell like any other chemical discharge but now smell like they were marinated in coconut oil.
Another one is how so many more people are taking Omega 3 supplements many of which are made from fish oil which makes you smell like a fish. It wouldn’t hurt to canvas the survivors about their diet and vitamin supplements.
Is it remotely possible that there is any basis to these ridiculous claims?
Along the lines of the excess heat disappeared into the ocean/the dog ate my homework?
“Global warming scientists have determined that sharks can detect minute electric fields. They think that the same mechanism can detect temperature changes of 0.01C (caused by CO2 emissions).. They may also be able to detect minute changes in salinity and ph (caused by CO2 emissions).”
So the sharks are attracted to people wearing their Apple iWatches ?
So it’s sharks. I was wondering what was going to make humans go extinct. Sharks
Looking like COP21 Paris will be the cirque du soleil event of the UNFCCC.
Now if we could just get the sharks to show up in the Ballroom!
Ha ha
Sharknados will undoubtedly hit the COP21 meeting.
Thanks Bob! While I do not wish bites on anyone. So many encounters shows a quite healthy shark population. A healthy population of apex predators is the halmark of a healthy ecosystem. Where there are lots of beasts there are lots of critters.
Beautiful beaches and water! There are lots of dolphins and you can see them skirting the surf and shore when feeding. Of course there are other hungry diners too.
Maybe the sharks are just getting bored, after over a century’s complete absence of warming.