Pacific Trash Vortex! Wow! I had no idea it was this bad!

[scubadrewvideo]

Granted, 10 meters depth of plastic garbage would not be evident in a photo, but the surface area would help to put this in perspective for me. A picture speaks a thousand words, and I can see more people getting behind the project if they had a visual of this massive thing, and there's no aerial picture that I've been able to find.

I guess I can try this analogy. Imagine this scenario...and I repeat this is a hypathetical scenario...I dont want anyone thinking otherwise.
But, imagine reports of an growing insect infestation within middle of the Amazon Rain forest. Anyone who travels to the middle of the rainforest can find these tiny bugs all over the trees, and bring back samples and counts of how many bugs per tree they found. They can also sample in different spot areas to determine the range of the infestation.
However when they return, skeptics say "show me a picture of the insects over the whole area that is infected". The picture would only show lots of trees and no bugs because they are too small and camouflaged to see by air.

This is similar to what is happening with regard to the plastic problem.
When we sample the gyre regions, we skim the surface of the water with a device called a Manta Trawl ghost net. The opening (or mouth) of the trawl is about 3 ft across and catches all objects within the first 12 inches of the surface. All objects gathered by the mouth are then funneled into a fine mesh collection bag about the size of a small coffee can. We drag this net for set time periods (15 min, 30 min, 1hr).

The pictures seen with jars of clogged and cloudy water are the result of that collection process, so the contents of the jars are collected over a narrow, but long strip of the ocean. The primary analysis of these contents is comparing the quantity of inorganic plastic matter vs. natural lifeforms that should exist in the area. These collections over the last 10 yrs have shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that the concentration levels of plastic are increasing in the sampled areas.

If we wait until this problem is so bad that it is visible by a fly over aerial photo, then our ocean will be dead by then. And that doesn't even touch the problem of the polymers released into the ocean that are microscopic and cannot be collected with a net.

The ironic part of all this is, Humans will die in defense of their Gods existence, yet there are no pictures of God.
So why is it so difficult to get people to understand this problem when we actually have physical evidence supporting these claims. We just don't have pictures that show the whole thing because it is physically impossible to get such a photo.

So...for the record...coming from someone who has been there to see this first hand...there is no floating island, or floating mass that can be seen by air, but if you swim in the water out there, you will exit with tiny plastic bits stuck to your body and in your hair. And this will happen if you swim anywhere within the Gyre. And the Gyre is bigger than Texas.

 

[scubadrewvideo]

Drew,
I choose not to prove who I am which might give some a false reality that my profession or background somehow makes everything I say fact.

Thank you for at least directing a reply in my direction!!
I guess I can understand that thought process, but if you are debating a topic as this then why would you NOT want your statements to be interpreted as factual based on credibility of the source.

This way everyone can choose to investigate and learn about issues instead of being pathetic sheep that believe everything heard.

The funny part of that is most of your comments in this thread have been just that...similar to "pathetic sheep" believing everything they read. You have been arguing all your points with a "sheep like mindset" only from the other side.

All too often people assume that those with higher education or socioeconomic status are speaking the truth without agenda. All too often that is untrue. Al Gore is a prime example.

I don't understand why you keep bringing Al Gore into this, I dont believe that myself or anyone else speaking out in support of this research, has used any higher education or socioeconomic status to validate or enhance credibility.

In this case, the "agenda" question can be applied to you...what is your agenda through all this?
Is it to get people to question and investigate? If so then that is great, but you picked a really odd way to do that...i.e. not showing identity, not backing up statements with fact, joining in the extreme opposing side with derogatory and inflaming remarks.

I am all for having an educated debate over this.
Being someone who has been there in 2002, I feel I have earned the right to be a spokesman regarding this topic. And as I stated before, my only agenda is not wanting to see our oceans become toxic, and doing what I can to help in whatever way I can.

My age,race, religion, profession or party affiliation should have no restriction on my ability to express free speech.

Very true! It has no restriction on your ability to express free speech, but it does have a great deal to do with credibility. In an earlier post, you yourself used your faith to apparently establish some sort of validity to your opinion.

So if you wish to actually discuss opposing views then please feel free to raise points and ask questions, but please keep the points to those we have investigated and lets keep the emotocons and name calling out of it so it will be educational for all.

Wouldn't it be nice if our discussion was, in fact, a credible source of debate?

Drew

 

[rgbmatt]

In 2002 we found a plastic tub floating swamped with water. Inside the tub was fish that later was found to be 1200 miles from its regular habitat. The tub was intact and about 18in x 12in x 10in in size, with little sign of degradation. There is now way to tell how long it would take to break down.

What kind of fish was it? This is interesting.

 

[bluebubble1995]

Thank you for at least directing a reply in my direction!!
I guess I can understand that thought process, but if you are debating a topic as this then why would you NOT want your statements to be interpreted as factual based on credibility of the source.



The funny part of that is most of your comments in this thread have been just that...similar to "pathetic sheep" believing everything they read. You have been arguing all your points with a "sheep like mindset" only from the other side.


I don't understand why you keep bringing Al Gore into this, I dont believe that myself or anyone else speaking out in support of this research, has used any higher education or socioeconomic status to validate or enhance credibility.

In this case, the "agenda" question can be applied to you...what is your agenda through all this?
Is it to get people to question and investigate? If so then that is great, but you picked a really odd way to do that...i.e. not showing identity, not backing up statements with fact, joining in the extreme opposing side with derogatory and inflaming remarks.

I am all for having an educated debate over this.
Being someone who has been there in 2002, I feel I have earned the right to be a spokesman regarding this topic. And as I stated before, my only agenda is not wanting to see our oceans become toxic, and doing what I can to help in whatever way I can.


Very true! It has no restriction on your ability to express free speech, but it does have a great deal to do with credibility. In an earlier post, you yourself used your faith to apparently establish some sort of validity to your opinion.

So if you wish to actually discuss opposing views then please feel free to raise points and ask questions, but please keep the points to those we have investigated and lets keep the emotocons and name calling out of it so it will be educational for all.

Wouldn't it be nice if our discussion was, in fact, a credible source of debate?

Drew

You "earned the right" to discuss this when you were born American, not when you saw some trash. Having seen some trash and failing to take a picture doesn't make you credible. If you would have replied early on that the claims were grossly exaggerated and that you had been in the area and the trash was an issue but nothing like the video claimed THEN you would have been a credible source. Having a Facebook account doesn't make you credible either...just visible. If I post my biography I am no more entitled to an opinion than anyone else on earth...neither are you. We are on the same side here, we all want the earth to be a cleaner place. You jumped on board with the radical claims linked in the original post. That's the controversy. The cause would be served better if you postponed your obsession with my biography and the semantics involved. Go take a pic...you seem to have the time.

 

[bluebubble1995]

What kind of fish was it? This is interesting.

Agreed!

 

[scubadrewvideo]

Agreed!

If I can find the footage (I cant remember if I filmed or if the other videographer did) I will post a picture of the fish in the plastic tub.

Can someone show me a picture of God?

 

[scubadrewvideo]

You "earned the right" to discuss this when you were born American, not when you saw some trash. Having seen some trash and failing to take a picture doesn't make you credible. If you would have replied early on that the claims were grossly exaggerated and that you had been in the area and the trash was an issue but nothing like the video claimed THEN you would have been a credible source. Having a Facebook account doesn't make you credible either...just visible. If I post my biography I am no more entitled to an opinion than anyone else on earth...neither are you. We are on the same side here, we all want the earth to be a cleaner place. You jumped on board with the radical claims linked in the original post. That's the controversy. The cause would be served better if you postponed your obsession with my biography and the semantics involved. Go take a pic...you seem to have the time.

Still have a very negative attitude I see. If we are on the same side , then why are you so insistant on trying to disprove the claims on this thread without backing up your claims?
Please indicate the video you are referring to because I cant seem to find the one you say has such exaggerated claims. Only those people that latch on to the idea that it was floating island are misled. Poor choice of words?...maybe Reason enough to try and debunk the whole issue?...NO
I still have seen no reason why anyone should remotely believe anything you say

 

[bluebubble1995]

If I can find the footage (I cant remember if I filmed or if the other videographer did) I will post a picture of the fish in the plastic tub.

Can someone show me a picture of God?

Did you finally get it? The trash is not God, therefore I must see it to believe it.

 

[scubadrewvideo]

Did you finally get it? The trash is not God, therefore I must see it to believe it.[/QUO

Ok I give up...you are pointless.
I thought for a moment that you wanted to have intelligent debate, but apparently not. If You just want to be the voice of the pathetic sheep, I will not debate you.

If you want to see it, Volunteer to come with us!

 

[skypierce]

Wow. I'm slightly embarrassed to admit that I just spent the last 45 minutes reading this entire thread - all 13 pages. I know, too much time on my hands and all that, but it's sunday night and it's either educate myself on something, or plop in front of a movie.
I've got a couple comments to make...
First, public awareness of the issue of improper waste disposal, and it's potential impact on the environment and the food chain is the most important thing. To that end, the squeeky wheel gets the grease, and like it or not, morons who claim the problem doesn't exist contribute to the squeeking. As much as I think a few people who have posted here have their heads up their ass, their comments are imortant to spread the word. Otherwise, it's easily forgotten. As PT Barnum said, any publicity is good publicity.
I would like to propose Bluebubble and Scubadrew make a bet, to be decided on the trip drew is taking. Bluebubble goes along to see for himself. If he is right, and there is no massive accumulation of floating plastic (soupy, not solid), or it covers an area only the size of a football stadium rather than texas or larger, then he wins and scubadrew (or the nonprofit he's working with) has to pay for his trip, plus any wages he lost by being gone so long.
But if Scubadrew is right, or even close to right about any of his claims (only half the size of texas even), bluebubble has to spend the return part of the journey in the bathroom, leaving only to let others use it. When he returns, he must contact every media outlet he can to spread public awareness. By that time, he will have "seen god" and believe in the problem, and I think even he will feel the need to spread the word and help.
And if it turns out there is no problem... yeah right, never mind.