Why does the US Supreme Court side against the whales?

[BillyTheMountain]

Not just because there are no whales on the Supreme Court.

At a 2004 International Whaling Commission symposium, more than 100 scientists signed a statement asserting that the association between sonar and whale deaths "is very convincing and appears overwhelming." This was backed up by a 2005 report by the Natural resources defense Council: "Sounding the Depths II: The Rising Toll of Sonar, Shipping and Industrial Ocean Noise on Marine Life"

Google: "Winter, Sec. of Navy v. Natural Res. Defense Council, Docket No. 07-1239"

Which side are you on?

[Peripatet]

You can save all the whales you want, but without active sonar, you can't find a sub. That means the bad guys can park whatever missiles they want on any coast they want. And the cartels can move as much yayo as they want into suburbia. And the pirates can take whatever merchant ships wherever, whenever they want.

You know what? Car emissions kill birds. Why doesn't the supreme court ban automobiles? That's an easy question to answer. And to those who work with sonar 24/7, the first question is just as simple and just as critical to preserving our way of life.

[SqueakyOnion]

Originally Posted by Peripatet

You can save all the whales you want, but without active sonar, you can't find a sub. That means the bad guys can park whatever missiles they want on any coast they want. And the cartels can move as much yayo as they want into suburbia. And the pirates can take whatever merchant ships wherever, whenever they want.

You know what? Car emissions kill birds. Why doesn't the supreme court ban automobiles? That's an easy question to answer. And to those who work with sonar 24/7, the first question is just as simple and just as critical to preserving our way of life.

So we decriminalize and regulate drugs, thus eliminating the giant black market for drugs and begin arming merchant ships to resist pirates. Do pirates even use submarines? I thought ship-to-ship locating was determined with radar, not sonar (which operates only underwater)?

No we don't ban autos, we change their emissions, presumably by changing their primary energy source. No false dichotomies needed.

I think we should ban the ocean. You know, get giant pumps and put all the water in space. More land for everyone! Of course, we could breed some whales in captivity for food and entertainment.

[Peripatet]

Originally Posted by SqueakyOnion

So we decriminalize and regulate drugs, thus eliminating the giant black market for drugs and begin arming merchant ships to resist pirates.

These are very much non-trivial issues, requiring a major paradigm shift in both areas for them to happen. So, while I may like where your head's at: this isn't happening anytime soon.

Do pirates even use submarines?

Yes, the better-equipped ones, like those who have been operating with relative impunity in SE Asia for quite some time. In South America, semi-submersibles are the new hot toy. As soon as Iran starts selling off their midget subs(< 5 yrs), we'll see them in the gulf, too.

I thought ship-to-ship locating was determined with radar, not sonar (which operates only underwater)?

Sure. But how do we go sub to ship or ship to sub? Sonar, baby.

And here's one to rock your world: air to surface and air to sub tracking and detection is largely a sonar business. Partly because sonobuoys are a lot cheaper than high-fidelity surface search radar and partly because sounds travel so much farther and cleaner in water than air. (It's also a lot easier to carry one tool for two jobs, rather than two for one each, on an airplane where weight and space are critical.

No we don't ban autos, we change their emissions, presumably by changing their primary energy source.

We're working on it, trust me. But it's going to take a lot of R&D $$$$$$$ to get it ready for prime time, and a ton more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to replace current equipment and implement fleet-wide. Money that, well, nobody has to give or wants to give right now.


The crux is we're all about not killing things unnecessarily, but we will take a massive security hit if we just shut down all our active sonar. We as a nation have collectively decided that we'd rather take the few dead whales than a 9-11 from the sea. But, please, we're certainly open to suggestions that don't compromise security.

[johnfoss]

I think it's because the whales don't pay any taxes.







Then again, I do and they don't listen to me either.

[UniBrier]

So is the Whaling Commission finding that the sonar is killing the whales before the whalers can?

[Michaelgoround]

Originally Posted by johnfoss

I think it's because the whales don't pay any taxes.

Then again, I do and they don't listen to me either.

You must be misspronouncing your Whalish or be using the wrong dialect. I find watching Finding Nemo a great way to refresh my Whale speak.

[BillyTheMountain]

Th sonar noise causes them to beach themselves with signs of the "bends" on autopsy.

It;s like being driven from a LOUD noise-art-rock band, running from the room and out the window!

[JJuggle]

The US Supreme Court sides against whales because there are no whales on the court the richness of whose experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Hispanic woman who hasn't lived that life.

Why Shamu was not nominated I'll never understand.

[BillyTheMountain]

Originally Posted by JJuggle

The US Supreme Court sides against whales because there are no whales on the court the richness of whose experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Hispanic woman who hasn't lived that life.

Why Shamu was not nominated I'll never understand.

The language barrier, for starters.

[Michaelgoround]

Originally Posted by JJuggle

The US Supreme Court sides against whales because there are no whales on the court the richness of whose experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Hispanic woman who hasn't lived that life.

Why Shamu was not nominated I'll never understand.

I hate to break this to you Raphael, but Shamu died.

[Peripatet]

Originally Posted by Michaelgoround

Shamu died.

Must have been that @#$% SONAR!!

No whale is safe, I tells 'ya!!

Call your congresscritter right now and urge them to pass HR 1D107 "The Emergency Funding for Whale-sized Tinfoil Hats Referendum".

[JJuggle]

Originally Posted by Michaelgoround

I hate to break this to you Raphael, but Shamu died.

I thought Shamu was the name they gave all their killer whales at Sea World. What about Baby Shamu, surely Baby Shamu is still alive.

Has anyone thought of having the Shamu family hawk the ShamWow?

[johnfoss]

Originally Posted by Michaelgoround

I hate to break this to you Raphael, but Shamu died.

Shamu is an institution. If there are two Sea Worlds (there are at least two, used to be a third in Ohio) there are two Shamus.

Shamu in San Diego, 2004

I think Lassie is still alive somewhere too...

[Michaelgoround]

Originally Posted by johnfoss

Shamu is an institution. If there are two Sea Worlds (there are at least two, used to be a third in Ohio) there are two Shamus.

Shamu in San Diego, 2004

I think Lassie is still alive somewhere too...

The original one is dead now though (along with quite a few others I would think). I guess you could say Shamu is alive in spirit.