Sharks
- From: Marc Verhaegen <m_verhaegen@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 00:34:34 +0100
Michael Burns at AAT:
Hi Falasha,
I'm sure you are right that clear water is a far better setting for human
aquaticness. Sight is by far the best sense we have, and I believe that is
also true of all our close surviving relatives, so it is likely to be true
of any key ancestors. The difficulties presented by sharks come up every
once in a while here, but I believe that in most cases the problem is solved
for humans in clear water, especially if working in groups. Vigilance, as
you mention, is a first line of defence, but humans are also on record as
succesfully fighting off all types of sharks, even Great Whites -and even
when attacked by surprise. What is more, I am still waiting to hear of the
first time a human is succesfully preyed upon by a shark when the human sees
the shark before the attack and tries to defend him- or herself (obviously
large sharks would still be dangerous in this situation). To borrow a
terrestrial term, sharks seem to be 'cursorial', designed to catch fleeing
prey, not to fight it out with resisting prey. Sort of like cheetahs or (to
a lesser extent) leopards. I once saw a television broadcast of two idiot
snorkelers who deliberately provoked a large group of bull sharks, but were
able to succesfully fight off all the sharks with punches and kicks without
injury to themselves when the sharks did turn on them (which they did in
spectacular fashion).
Note: I recall reading long ago that current human diving populations are
careful around sharks, but do not necessarily stop harvesting shellfish and
the like even in the presence of a tiger shark.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Sharks
- From: Lee Olsen
- Re: Sharks
- Prev by Date: Re: Airsacs (Re: Ealine Morgan
- Next by Date: Re: Sharks
- Previous by thread: New Ape Fossils Found in Africa
- Next by thread: Re: Sharks
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
