'Whale Wars' on Animal Planet HD - Page 5

Would that make Peter the moose?

And all that ice is really ping pong balls!

It's really just another reality show, only this one has a political purpose. Some might like it while others will be turned off.

Did anyone see last nights episode (yet)? Anyone believe that there was really a missing person from that Japanese ship Keishan (spelling guess) Maru?

I Googled some words right now but could not find any info.

The Jpn are getting smart and leveraging propaganda (my suspicion) to their benefit, when the opportunity arises.

I was highly amused (with the last episode- finally got caught up with the show) when it seemed like our merry band of eco-warriors got themselves in a life-threatening situation on the count of not enough global warming (glaciers gone mad).


I could swear that's the same guy that was in a mail order cd commercial about 15 yrs ago- "Is that Feedom Rock?! Turn'it up, dude!!!"

I really didn't understand how they screwed up missing the turn. Seriously, all the pilot had to do is copy down the GPS coordinates of where the glaciers where. Once the "Steve Irwin" was anywhere near those coordinates, it wouldn't be that hard.

And they complained that it was night-time, they couldn't really see. I'm sorry NVGs don't cost that much. Kill all external lights, and use the goggles.

EDIT: It's sad because I believe in the cause (of saving whales), but every time I watched this show, I'm actually rooting for the Japanese to get away, or do something back to them. I guess it's the whole, "If you're that stupid and incompetent, you deserve to fail" mentality that I have.

I missed the last episode, and it hasn't been posted on animal planet's website yet. Sounds like it was a fun one. I hope they get it up soon; usually it is up by now.

I think the trick with the ice chart and making the correct turn is that by time they reach this critical turn, the positions/formation of the chart data is already well over 24 hrs old. By then things shift around, openings may become less defined or gone altogether. Possibly new openings may have formed, as well.

Maybe the escape route was there, maybe not. I don't really know. I won't discount that it would be a precarious task to identify and navigate such a dated path in the dark of night. If it wasn't defined enough to acquire it visually at the predicted coordinates, that would still be quite an executive decision to turn right into the ice at the predicted spot on the hunch that a path should be there or may become more apparent once you drill in further. I'm not sure what decision I would make in those shoes.

Question is- for such a critical point in this operation, why didn't that ice chart guy make sure he was on the bridge at that time to help reassess the conditions? If he was asleep in his bunk, why didn't that old guy send to wake him once they reached that spot? I think they are both guilty of not doing all they could to exploit this opportunity.

I'm not sure we are presented in the show with clear enough information to say either way if the turn should have been taken. I think all of that drama was more about directing attention on that old guy as being a real luddite (whether he was truly right or wrong).

Im glad they missed the turn, greater chance of watching them sink now.

It repeats again on Sundays at 10:00pm!

That's one case where 1st Mate Peter Brown is actually right. As he said, the ice maps never match what they can see since the data is at least 24 hours old and the ice is moving.

And what shocked me was that Watson seemed to be going to help them find the missing person('s body).

It's a sailors code to help them out, no matter what the consequences.

Yes, I realize that, but I wondered if they drew a line somewhere. I suspect some of them feel "he kills whales, screw him". In fact, didn't one of the American crew members allude to that (middle-aged guy, light-colored or maybe graying hair, cut short ... maybe his name was "Joe") ?

Yes, I thought I heard the same thing. In my book, send in the SEALS and take em out. The captain alone would be strung up in the Navy I belonged to for endangering his crew with his idiotic stunts. If the Sea Shepard would have attacked my last ship the way they did the Japanese, they would have had a couple of 50 cals up their collective rear ends and probably treading water if they survived our response.

Now if we were at war with a real hostile force, sacrifices will have to be made, but this is silly. We are talking about a bunch of fisherman running under questionable but still legal circumstances being terrorized by a bunch of very dangerous thugs driving a weapon on the high seas. I say take em out.

Just my .02

Mike

They may be crazy but they are not dumb enough to pull these stunts on a navy ship. Besides, they are not the ones killing the whales, the fisherman are, hence the whole concept of the show!

Something has gone drastically wrong with our international maritime laws when the Japanese vessels don't feel free to attack and sink the Steve Irwin for the actions it took in the last show. They should be able to do so with no ramifications.

What set of laws governs the open ocean? Are there any laws, or is it every man for himself. Does it depend on what flag the ship sails under?

Not to me. I thought it was clear he was going to attack them. The low life Scum.

What happens when their little bottles of acid cause someone to fall off a ship and die?

Keep in mind just because they are being harassed, doesn't mean anyone should advocate them using deadly force (unless I missed that you are all joking).

Just like I can't pull out my pistol and shoot the person in head who cut me off and almost ran me off the road and killed me. It simply doesn't work that way, although, I know it makes you feel like a big, tough guy by saying it.

If they damage the Japanese ship or hurt a crew members, I'd suggest taking the appropriate legal action (although I honestly don't know how it works for maritime incidents) and try to use the incident to shut them down. By advocating the ships start firing at the Sea Shepherds or sink them, you become just as bad as them by dropping down to their level.

I doubt there is any legal authority to convict people of crimes in the middle of the ocean. What country has jurisdiction?

The USA Navy has a policy if an unauthorized ship gets too close they will shoot first and ask questions later. We learned that from what happened to the USS Cole. Why can't a private ship react the same way?

Presumably the country who's ship the incident occurred on or whatever country controls the water the incident occurred on. However, like I said, I know next to nothing about maritime law.

Armies/Navies/Etc can take offensive and defensive actions, that's their entire purpose of their existence. Private citizens aren't given that power, unless it's in direct defense of their life. IE, the Sea Shepherds get AK's and aim them at the Japanese ships, etc.

Like, I said, it's the same if someone almost rams my car and kills me. I still can't pull out my handgun and shoot them in the head. It's doesn't work like that, regardless of whether we are talking about a car, ship or whatever.

I just started watching this show. I hold a OUPV license (the smallest of Captain's licenses you can get) and am just floored at the Captain's total disregard for the lives on his vessel and others. His excuse that a vacuum pulled the 2 ships together is bull. He got too close and when he tried to turn away, his stern swung into the other ship (ships general pivot near the center). The Steve Irwin is not rated for ice yet he lets himself get stuck in an ice pack.

Can you image the lawsuit if/when he hurts/kills someone?

I believe in the cause but I don't believe we put animal's live in front of our own.

There are international maritime laws and admiralty laws would come into play.

Baloney.

I wouldn't trust my life and the lives of my crew to the skill and unknown intentions of the "captain" of the Steve Irwin.

Ramming a ship is an act of aggression. You don't wait until you are sinking to decide that you should have done whatever possible to neutralize the threat.

You'd have to be absolutely clueless to suggest that you should wait until you are hurt, or killed, and only then should you (or your widow) take legal action.




If he runs your family's car off the road on the edge of a cliff, then puts his bumper against the side of your car and revs the engine in neutral. You absolutely can pull out your gun and shoot him in the head. It doesn't make you big and tough, it means you have the most basic grasp of common sense.

If someone doesn't take that action, they are single and childless - or should be.

I'm sure that the "volunteers" on the Steve Irwin sign a waiver, though I don't know if it's truly binding, that is, "signing your life away".