Severed hand points to shark attack on missing diver

Matthias Voss <spammat.voss@gmx.de> wrote in message news:<3FCF5D62.162EC6F8@gmx.de>...
> Salty schrieb:
>
> >
> > "JOHANNESBURG, Nov 28 (Reuters) - South African police searching for a
> > missing scuba diver found only his severed left hand, suggesting he
> > fell victim to a rare shark attack, police said on Friday."
> >
> > That sure does stir up quite an image. The chances of it happening are
> > very slim though.
>
>
> Can porcupine fish count to five ?
> Are they gregarious eaters ?

I hope not !! <grin>

Salty wrote:
> "chilly" <slarson@shaw.canada> wrote in message
> news:<cZJzb.557955$pl3.65656@pd7tw3no>...
>
>> "Salty" <babette7401@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:e673a058.0312040650.28bd482a@posting.google.c om...
>>
>>> rwjg40 <identity.available@upon.request> wrote in message
>>
>> news:<3FCCF9C8.52163A44@upon.request>...
>>
>>>> I'm getting in here late, but did anyone else note the
>>>> unfortunate choice of words in the subject of this thread? It
>>>> conjurs up quite an image...
>>>
>>> Gordy, read the article. It says :
>>>
>>> "JOHANNESBURG, Nov 28 (Reuters) - South African police searching
>>> for a missing scuba diver found only his severed left hand,
>>> suggesting he fell victim to a rare shark attack, police said on
>>> Friday."
>>>
>>> That sure does stir up quite an image. The chances of it
>>> happening are very slim though.
>
>
>
>> I'm not sure that the chances are quite so slim in south Africa.
>
>
> IIRC, S Africa is actually many steps behind in the list for shark
> attacks on humans, whether swimming or scuba diving. In N America;,
> Florida, Hawaii and Calif seem to be the big contenders. And in the
> world picture, Australia seems to be the leader. Perhaps I'm wrong.

On the basis of the 2002 figures from the most comprehensive source I've
found:

http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/Sharks...acksummary.htm

You'd be wrong:

> Three fatalities occurred in 2002, down from five in 2001 and 13 in
> 2000. The 5% fatality rate was significantly lower than the 1990's
> decade average of 13%. The three fatalities occurred in Australia (2)
> and Brazil (1).
>
> As in recent years, the bulk (82%: 48 attacks) of incidents occurred
> in North American waters, including 47 from the United States and one
> in the Bahamas. The 47 attacks in the United States were less than
> the 2001 (53) and 2000 (54) yearly figures. Elsewhere, attacks
> occurred in Australia (6), Brazil (3), South Africa (2), and Costa
> Rica (1).

Thus if you just want to be attacked North America is the place to go
whereas Australia is the best place for getting fully worked over. In
reality if you don't choose Australian sites known for potentially
dangerous sharks and especially don't spearfish then the dangers to
divers in Australia are minimal.

Simon

Simon Dakin <simon@REMOVETHISdakin80.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:<bqsqi6$hp$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>...

> Salty wrote:
> > IIRC, S Africa is actually many steps behind in the list for shark
> > attacks on humans, whether swimming or scuba diving. In N America;,
> > Florida, Hawaii and Calif seem to be the big contenders. And in the
> > world picture, Australia seems to be the leader. Perhaps I'm wrong.

> On the basis of the 2002 figures from the most comprehensive source I've
> found:
> http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/Sharks...acksummary.htm

> You'd be wrong:

Simon, am I confused while reading your post or...?? Please compare
what I've said to the article for the website you posted here.
According to your article, I'm not wrong. It says that Fla, Hawaii and
Calif are leaders in the USA and that Australia is the leader
elsewhere. Perhaps you thought I meant that Australia was the leader
out of all of the world ?? Nope... I meant Australia was big on bites
outside of N America, while the other locations were the leaders for N
America. It seems to me that the article that you posted here supports
my statements instead of contradicting them. Am I misunderstanding you
??


> > Three fatalities occurred in 2002, down from five in 2001 and 13 in
> > 2000. The 5% fatality rate was significantly lower than the 1990's
> > decade average of 13%. The three fatalities occurred in Australia (2)
> > and Brazil (1).
> >
> > As in recent years, the bulk (82%: 48 attacks) of incidents occurred
> > in North American waters, including 47 from the United States and one
> > in the Bahamas. The 47 attacks in the United States were less than
> > the 2001 (53) and 2000 (54) yearly figures. Elsewhere, attacks
> > occurred in Australia (6), Brazil (3), South Africa (2), and Costa
> > Rica (1).
>
> Thus if you just want to be attacked North America is the place to go
> whereas Australia is the best place for getting fully worked over. In
> reality if you don't choose Australian sites known for potentially
> dangerous sharks and especially don't spearfish then the dangers to
> divers in Australia are minimal.
>
> Simon

Salty wrote:

> Simon Dakin <simon@REMOVETHISdakin80.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:<bqsqi6$hp$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>...
>
>
>>Salty wrote:
>>
>>>IIRC, S Africa is actually many steps behind in the list for shark
>>>attacks on humans, whether swimming or scuba diving. In N America;,
>>>Florida, Hawaii and Calif seem to be the big contenders. And in the
>>>world picture, Australia seems to be the leader. Perhaps I'm wrong.
>
>
>
>>On the basis of the 2002 figures from the most comprehensive source I've
>>found:
>>http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/Sharks...acksummary.htm
>
>
>
>>You'd be wrong:
>
>
> Simon, am I confused while reading your post or...?? Please compare
> what I've said to the article for the website you posted here.
> According to your article, I'm not wrong. It says that Fla, Hawaii and
> Calif are leaders in the USA and that Australia is the leader
> elsewhere. Perhaps you thought I meant that Australia was the leader
> out of all of the world ?? Nope... I meant Australia was big on bites
> outside of N America, while the other locations were the leaders for N
> America. It seems to me that the article that you posted here supports
> my statements instead of contradicting them. Am I misunderstanding you
> ??
>

In the paragraph I quoted, you were talking about shark attacks on
humans. In the last sentence you say that in the world picture Australia
seems to be the leader.

Are you saying that the USA isn't part of the world? Perhaps what you
should have said was that other than in the USA Australia has most shark
attacks.

Simon

Simon Dakin <simon@REMOVETHISdakin80.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:<br1jea$pek$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk>...
> Salty wrote:
>
> > Simon Dakin <simon@REMOVETHISdakin80.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:<bqsqi6$hp$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>...
> >
> >
> >>Salty wrote:
> >>
> >>>IIRC, S Africa is actually many steps behind in the list for shark
> >>>attacks on humans, whether swimming or scuba diving. In N America;,
> >>>Florida, Hawaii and Calif seem to be the big contenders. And in the
> >>>world picture, Australia seems to be the leader. Perhaps I'm wrong.
> >
> >
> >
> >>On the basis of the 2002 figures from the most comprehensive source I've
> >>found:
> >>http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/Sharks...acksummary.htm
> >
> >
> >
> >>You'd be wrong:
> >
> >
> > Simon, am I confused while reading your post or...?? Please compare
> > what I've said to the article for the website you posted here.
> > According to your article, I'm not wrong. It says that Fla, Hawaii and
> > Calif are leaders in the USA and that Australia is the leader
> > elsewhere. Perhaps you thought I meant that Australia was the leader
> > out of all of the world ?? Nope... I meant Australia was big on bites
> > outside of N America, while the other locations were the leaders for N
> > America. It seems to me that the article that you posted here supports
> > my statements instead of contradicting them. Am I misunderstanding you
> > ??


> In the paragraph I quoted, you were talking about shark attacks on
> humans. In the last sentence you say that in the world picture Australia
> seems to be the leader.
> Are you saying that the USA isn't part of the world? Perhaps what you
> should have said was that other than in the USA Australia has most shark
> attacks.

Ahhh. I see the problem. Yes. I made a distinction between the N
Americans and said that Fla, California, and Hawaii were the top
leaders there.... and then said that in the rest of the world was
Australia. I certainly do not think that the USA isn't part of the
world. I live here. LOL You are correct in that my explanation was
not clear. I'm sorry. Thank you for the web site post though... that
was very informative and I enjoyed reading it. :)
~Salty, CID~