US/NATO navy exercises... and more dead whales

[Rickg]

Hi MR Murchison

LFA is used all around the world. It may not have been the US.

cheers

Hi Wolf Eel,

Actually the USN is the only Navy in the world that has an operational "LFA" system at this time. The current LFA system is operated in conjunction with a passive towed array system called SURTASS. Other countries may be doing R & D work on something similar but haven't deployed them yet.

Here is the USN's website on SURTASS LFA:

http://www.surtass-lfa-eis.com/

It is written from the USN's perspective but has a lot of interesting info about the system, testing to date, and recent court decisions.

Rickg

 

[Boogie711]

I don't know about anybody else here but I don't trust anybody when they tell me something is perfectly safe.

Michael - thats MY point. There is no such thing as perfectly safe. Ever. Everything has risk. The argument is over acceptable degrees of risk.

 

[Donnie]

Wolf Eel, (Derik)

The fact that whales washed up on shore and the aluet people used bones say's nothing at all. They die and float with the best of us. Fact we do not know for sure.

Actually, you have touched on one of my points, Whales "DO" wash up on shores all the time, and it has been happening long before the Navy got involved.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the Navy, or any other "Big Business" isn't going to do anything wrong. (Because they do!) I guess what is so frustrating at times is the "Knee-Jerk" reaction that many individuals get when they see something that disturbs them, such as a dead whale... or how about a "Spotted Owl?"

I started working in the woods at 18 years old, setting "Chokers". Some long haired, "Hippy" found a little owl and started crying that the Spotted Owl would become extinct if we dint stop cutting virgin timber. I considered this to be the "Writing on the Wall" (Sort of speak,) and got out of the woods.

Well... they have since learned that the spotted owl can live in practically any environment, and have even been observed roosting in sage brush near "Burns" Oregon. The Knee-Jerk reaction of the tree huggers hurt a lot of families, and decimated the economies of several small towns in Oregon.

I'm sure that there is no one on this forum that would want any continued use of a piece of equipment (like sonar) if it were proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was damaging our Oceans. People are just fed up with the "Bed-Wetting" Knee-Jerk reactions by many of the (for lack of a better word,) "Tree Huggers".

PS my side line job when not diving is a logger. So no tree hugger here and I wear a hat and drive a truck with a closed back window so no red neck iether.

Yea... those "Extended Cabs" sure have Soften Up a lot of good men! (You don't wear "Berkinstocks" do ya?)

Donnie

 

[dlwalke]

Hey...I disagree with that!! Study results might be 'tainted' by a researchers theoretical perspective (this is perfectly acceptable), but not by any deliberate attempt to manipulate the data so as to agree with the funding source. I've been doing neuroscience research for two decaades and wouldn't even know in what direction to taint my results even if I were so inclined. There may be some areas in which, if you go up several levels (i.e., past the committees which decide which projects get funded), you can find an elected official with an axe to grind, but those axes have no power to influence the results, to determine what articles get published, or who gets hired and not rehired (this is one reason why tenure is a good thing). In the late 80's, for example, funds were made available to examine the effect of marijuana on all sorts of psychological and health-related issues and, I suspect, that the people who write the budgets were hoping data showing tht pot smokers were at great risk. In the main, it just wasn't there (not saying that it's harmless BTW, just that the studies didn't find much evidence of it) and wasn't reported. I'm sure that this administration would like to show that fossil fuel burning does not contribute to global warming but there hasn't been any real shift in the 'evidence' which has led the scientific community to conclude that greenhouse emisions and global warming are not really a concern.

Your point may have greater validity with respect to a small subset of the small percentage of studies that are funded by private companies (e.g., research funded by tobacco companies). I suspect, but do not know, that most of the bias here comes about not by the researchers themselves, but by contractual clauses imposed on the researcheres about what they can and cannot say regarding their results, and the exclusive right of company executive to "interpret" the results (e.g., to determine what constitutes sufficient evidence). That is abysmal, but not very common IMHO.

Anyway, I respect your cynicism but, for the most part, don't agree with it in this particular case.

I would like to add that most studies are also tainted by the researchers. When considering the conclusions of any study, keep in mind who's funding the study. Researchers always need funding, and often will slant the conclusions in favor of the source of the funding, in case further research is required.

 

[divenut2001]

Yes, government and big business have caused us to distrust them. Anyone who entered the military after talking to a "Recruiter" or bought car from a "used car salesman" knows about that.

How many of us have heard that living too closee to "high power lines" or using a "cell phone" too much "MAY" cause you brain cancer? I myself do not know how factual these statements are but it's something I keep in mind, especially when I'm sitting at home and my boom box starts crackling right before I'm about to get a call on my cell phone.

Now, I'm not saying that the sonar testing is or is not the cause of some whales beaching themselves to die, just one of "many" posibilities none of us can ignore. The fact that testing was going on in the vacinity of the 2 whales in question "does" make the Navy suspect but not necessarily the cause.

This is where we all depend on Marine Biologists to give us the right answers. I've seen where they have done autopsies on beached whales and found parasites that had infested the brain.

So, was there an autopsy done on these 2 and what were the findings?

How do they prove or disprove that the deaths were or were not caused by sonar waves?

Lets keep an open mind and let the "real" experts tell us why and how. JMHO!

 

[wolf eel]

[

Rick MurchisonNope.
Hasn't been used anywhere in over a year.
Rick]

I thought they where testing when the whales beached is that not true?

They stopped calling me Batman after I stopped wearing tights :lol2:

Cheers

But can you please explain the dease part again Robin

 

[Rickg]

[

I thought they where testing when the whales beached is that not true?

They stopped calling me Batman after I stopped wearing tights :lol2:

Cheers

But can you please explain the dease part again Robin

wolf eel,

They may have been testing some other kind of sonar but they were not testing the USN's "LFA" sonar. That system has not been in the Atlantic Ocean for over a year and even then had not
transmitted for a number of years before that because use of LFA was tied up in the US court system. Please see my earlier post in this thread on USN LFA.

Dive safe,
Rickg

 

[wolf eel]

wolf eel,

They may have been testing some other kind of sonar but they were not testing the USN's "LFA" sonar. That system has not been in the Atlantic Ocean for over a year and even then had not
transmitted for a number of years before that because use of LFA was tied up in the US court system. Please see my earlier post in this thread on USN LFA.

Dive safe,
Rickg

Thanks for your information
Really I thought that was the entire big deal over this.

Still you do not have history saying or telling of this mass beaching.

Cheers
Deerek