Don't give away spoilers... I haven't seen it yet! :lol:

:eek: poor sharks! I haven't seen this yet but I have my pvr set up to tape it.

Sorry I will have to disagree with the save the earth crowd.

Any animal that wants to eat me, I have no pity for. That goes for sharks, grizzlies, or any other carnivores that view me as their dinner.

Any person that gets eaten by something bigger (or not) than them just learned a valuable lesson... survival of the fittest.

It generally goes like, man catches shark, man cuts off shark's fins and makes soup. I mean, what about the rest of the shark?

When a shark eats a man, he eats the man whole. No waste. I think the shark is smarter :biggrin:

WOW!! I cant believe you said that. You should be watching this movie before you make a statement like that. When they throw up stats like "in the last 10 years humans have reduced the shark population by 90%" or "we kill 2,000,000 sharks a year for soup" or "sharks only kill 5 people a year, elephants kill 100....." of thoes 5 people that they kill they dont eat them they die of blood loss after the shark figures out that they dont really want to eat us. The impact on killing sharks is way bigger than "oh well we killed them all because they want to eat me". Need I say more?

Clearly besides the cruelty issue there are effects on many other species when you remove a predator/scavenger like sharks from the ecosystem. So finning or otherwise killing sharks which do not endanger humans cannot be justified.

I do feel that for those few species known to attack humans with any frequency (Tiger Sharks, Great Whites and Bull Sharks) we should mount an aggressive cull program. Of course this is not the popularly accepted view, I have never cared much for going along with the crowd. For me, if something kills people, we shouldn't tolerate it. There is only room for one apex predator on this planet and that is us.

Oh boy. Sorry but do some research my friend as your position is just not a viable one given the actual statistics. In 2007 there were 71 unprovoked shark attacks in the entire world with only 1 fatality. The mean number of annual fatalities due to shark attacks is 5. Yes, 5; five; cinq; cinco; cinque. What's the population in the world right now? More than 6.7 billion. So sharks kill about 0.000000074% of the world's population each year. How many people die of car crashes? Somewhere around 1.2 million. Are we going to take all cars off the roads? How many people die of diseases due to cigarette smoke? Something like 6 million every year. Why do we still allow cigarettes to be sold?

Really, why don't you find some cause that is an actual problem instead of going around spouting this nonsense. Sorry if that sounds insulting but the idea of culling sharks because a very small number of people are hurt by them each year is ridiculous.

No it doesn't sound insulting, just not well-reasoned.

You are saying that there is an acceptable number of people that can be killed by sharks.

The same sort of reasoning is used by the pit bull people. Eg. the occasional four year old gets his face ripped off by a pit bull, we should accept that because most pit bulls are peaceful and poodles bite people too.

Just wondering how you set your cutoff number.

Five people a year is OK.

How many people a year would need to be killed by sharks before you would object?

Just wondering.

I would have to say that it is actually your position that is not well reasoned. Bee and wasp stings kill far more people than sharks (something like 50 plus deaths in the US each year) so do you think we should go cull bees? For shark attacks to really be a problem that required human intervention and culling I think you would have to see many hundreds if not thousands of unprovoked shark attacks each year and hundreds of deaths. 5 deaths worldwide is not a problem that requires culling. I just don't see how you can rationalize that argument?

So what you are saying is there is no acceptable number of people that can be injured or killed by other animals without us intervening? According to the CDC there are over 4.7 million dog bites in the US each year. That is far more than sharks so by your reasoning we should cull dogs. Far more people die each year from hitting a deer with their car? Should we start culling deer to reduce the risk?

Your pit bull analogy is not a good one as pit bulls were bred to fight and have an aggressive nature. They must be well trained and well controlled and even then they occasionally go off. Nobody has bred sharks to attack humans. They usually do so accidentally when they mistake humans for their natural prey.

I just don't understand your position and you have provided no reasoning for it. Why do you suggest culling sharks? What facts or figures can you present to support such a a position?

I think it makes much more sense to ban tobacco products than waste time and money culling sharks. Tobacco kills millions. Sharks kill 5. Why don't the U.N form a multinational peace enforcement force to go into countries plagued by civil war and ethnic cleansing etc. to put an end to that? Far more people die due to war and famine then are killed by sharks.

Your position is not just unpopular it is illogical and unsupportable with any real facts or numbers.

So i guess what your getting at is that if we can kill 2,000,000 sharks a year then sharks killing 2,000,000 of us would be acceptable in your eyes. So they have a lot for work ahead of them to catch up to us i guess poor sharks are only at 5/year. :wink: