OMG, how is this idiot a judge?

[Gonad the Barbarian]

From CNN:

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- In response to a lawsuit filed by environmental groups, a federal judge blocked scientists from studying the impact of a newly developed form of sonar on migrating gray whales.

Environmentalists say the high-frequency sonar could disorient whales and separate calves from their mothers during their migration.

The testing by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution of Falmouth, Massachusetts, and Scientific Solutions Inc. of Nashua, New Hampshire, was set to begin Wednesday a mile off the central California coast near San Luis Obispo during the whales' southward migratory season.

The National Marine Fisheries Service approved the experiments last year.

U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti set a new hearing for January 17, when he is expected to decide whether to make Wednesday's temporary order permanent or allow the three weeks of testing to begin.

"How do we know it's doing any damage to the whales?" Conti asked.

So his reasoning for blocking a test to see if something is harmful is because we don't know if it is harmful?

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
From CNN:

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- In response to a lawsuit filed by environmental groups, a federal judge blocked scientists from studying the impact of a newly developed form of sonar on migrating gray whales.

Environmentalists say the high-frequency sonar could disorient whales and separate calves from their mothers during their migration.

The testing by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution of Falmouth, Massachusetts, and Scientific Solutions Inc. of Nashua, New Hampshire, was set to begin Wednesday a mile off the central California coast near San Luis Obispo during the whales' southward migratory season.

The National Marine Fisheries Service approved the experiments last year.

U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti set a new hearing for January 17, when he is expected to decide whether to make Wednesday's temporary order permanent or allow the three weeks of testing to begin.

"How do we know it's doing any damage to the whales?" Conti asked.

So his reasoning for blocking a test to see if something is harmful is because we don't know if it is harmful?

If the study was "Testing of new type of Acid to begin on cute kittens next week". And the objection was "I think this kind of acid dissolves kittens" would you feel the same way? Pour it on the kittens and see if they dissolve? I mean, I can see if you just don't care, or disagree, but at least understand what the purpose of the court order is.

 

[d33pt]

there have been worse judges

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
From CNN:

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- In response to a lawsuit filed by environmental groups, a federal judge blocked scientists from studying the impact of a newly developed form of sonar on migrating gray whales.

Environmentalists say the high-frequency sonar could disorient whales and separate calves from their mothers during their migration.

The testing by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution of Falmouth, Massachusetts, and Scientific Solutions Inc. of Nashua, New Hampshire, was set to begin Wednesday a mile off the central California coast near San Luis Obispo during the whales' southward migratory season.

The National Marine Fisheries Service approved the experiments last year.

U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti set a new hearing for January 17, when he is expected to decide whether to make Wednesday's temporary order permanent or allow the three weeks of testing to begin.

"How do we know it's doing any damage to the whales?" Conti asked.

So his reasoning for blocking a test to see if something is harmful is because we don't know if it is harmful?

If the study was "Testing of new type of Acid to begin on cute kittens next week". And the objection was "I think this kind of acid dissolves kittens" would you feel the same way? Pour it on the kittens and see if they dissolve? I mean, I can see if you just don't care, or disagree, but at least understand what the purpose of the court order is.

Acid disolving kittens is a certainty. You don't need a test to confirm that. I'd think this would be less of a sure thing, a test would confirm it one way or another.

 

[gopunk]

Acid disolving kittens is a certainty. You don't need a test to confirm that. I'd think this would be less of a sure thing, a test would confirm it one way or another.

some kinds of acids are quite weak...

 

[Zenmervolt]

This guy sounds like a great candidate for the 9th circuit.

ZV

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
From CNN:

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- In response to a lawsuit filed by environmental groups, a federal judge blocked scientists from studying the impact of a newly developed form of sonar on migrating gray whales.

Environmentalists say the high-frequency sonar could disorient whales and separate calves from their mothers during their migration.

The testing by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution of Falmouth, Massachusetts, and Scientific Solutions Inc. of Nashua, New Hampshire, was set to begin Wednesday a mile off the central California coast near San Luis Obispo during the whales' southward migratory season.

The National Marine Fisheries Service approved the experiments last year.

U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti set a new hearing for January 17, when he is expected to decide whether to make Wednesday's temporary order permanent or allow the three weeks of testing to begin.

"How do we know it's doing any damage to the whales?" Conti asked.

So his reasoning for blocking a test to see if something is harmful is because we don't know if it is harmful?

If the study was "Testing of new type of Acid to begin on cute kittens next week". And the objection was "I think this kind of acid dissolves kittens" would you feel the same way? Pour it on the kittens and see if they dissolve? I mean, I can see if you just don't care, or disagree, but at least understand what the purpose of the court order is.

Acid disolving kittens is a certainty. You don't need a test to confirm that. I'd think this would be less of a sure thing, a test would confirm it one way or another.

Vinegar is acidic and I'm pretty sure it won't dissolve a kitten.

Anyway, the point of the ruling is to say "there's too big a risk that this will be harmful to the whales, so we shouldn't test it on them yet". He wants more research to be done before they jsutpoint the thing at a whale and turn it on.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Acid disolving kittens is a certainty. You don't need a test to confirm that. I'd think this would be less of a sure thing, a test would confirm it one way or another.

Question to ponder: If you aim a high frequency beam of sound at a whale and it's in agony, but shows no outward sign of that fact, how will you know whether your test is successful? "The whale didn't react, so I guess we're ok.."

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
From CNN:

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- In response to a lawsuit filed by environmental groups, a federal judge blocked scientists from studying the impact of a newly developed form of sonar on migrating gray whales.

Environmentalists say the high-frequency sonar could disorient whales and separate calves from their mothers during their migration.

The testing by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution of Falmouth, Massachusetts, and Scientific Solutions Inc. of Nashua, New Hampshire, was set to begin Wednesday a mile off the central California coast near San Luis Obispo during the whales' southward migratory season.

The National Marine Fisheries Service approved the experiments last year.

U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti set a new hearing for January 17, when he is expected to decide whether to make Wednesday's temporary order permanent or allow the three weeks of testing to begin.

"How do we know it's doing any damage to the whales?" Conti asked.

So his reasoning for blocking a test to see if something is harmful is because we don't know if it is harmful?

If the study was "Testing of new type of Acid to begin on cute kittens next week". And the objection was "I think this kind of acid dissolves kittens" would you feel the same way? Pour it on the kittens and see if they dissolve? I mean, I can see if you just don't care, or disagree, but at least understand what the purpose of the court order is.

Acid disolving kittens is a certainty. You don't need a test to confirm that. I'd think this would be less of a sure thing, a test would confirm it one way or another.

Vinegar is acidic and I'm pretty sure it won't dissolve a kitten.

Anyway, the point of the ruling is to say "there's too big a risk that this will be harmful to the whales, so we shouldn't test it on them yet". He wants more research to be done before they jsutpoint the thing at a whale and turn it on.

I'm assuming this is technology with a lot of people and money behind it pushing it to be used widely. Would you rather not have the tests done before that happens?

 

[ElFenix]

judge.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
judge.

Corrected. At least I caught the 'idot' before I posted. 🙂

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
I'm assuming this is technology with a lot of people and money behind it pushing it to be used widely. Would you rather not have the tests done before that happens?

No, I think the testing should be done before it goes into widespread use. However, I don't any of the specifics of the technology or it's possible effects on whales. It very well could be prudent to spend a little more time testing the thing in the laboratory before they try it in the open ocean. I'd assume that the judge knows a lot more about the effects of this thing than I do.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Acid disolving kittens is a certainty. You don't need a test to confirm that. I'd think this would be less of a sure thing, a test would confirm it one way or another.

Question to ponder: If you aim a high frequency beam of sound at a whale and it's in agony, but shows no outward sign of that fact, how will you know whether your test is successful? "The whale didn't react, so I guess we're ok.."

That can go both ways, if the experience causes no adverse reaction, how can it be labeled harmful? Fact is, every living thing reacts to stimuli. If the whale is being harmed, it will react in some way.

 

[ScrapSilicon]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
From CNN:

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- In response to a lawsuit filed by environmental groups, a federal judge blocked scientists from studying the impact of a newly developed form of sonar on migrating gray whales.

Environmentalists say the high-frequency sonar could disorient whales and separate calves from their mothers during their migration.

The testing by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution of Falmouth, Massachusetts, and Scientific Solutions Inc. of Nashua, New Hampshire, was set to begin Wednesday a mile off the central California coast near San Luis Obispo during the whales' southward migratory season.

The National Marine Fisheries Service approved the experiments last year.

U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti set a new hearing for January 17, when he is expected to decide whether to make Wednesday's temporary order permanent or allow the three weeks of testing to begin.

"How do we know it's doing any damage to the whales?" Conti asked.

So his reasoning for blocking a test to see if something is harmful is because we don't know if it is harmful?

isn't this lawsuitable under DRCMA ..? 😉

 

[Orsorum]

I can empathize with the rationale behind his actions... since whales communicate by sonar, it would probably be akin to testing high-frequency noises on random humans.