Worse than Michael Jackson's stunt?

  1. Tsu

    Tsu 528
    Gold Member


    Link to video can be found at:

    Your views?
  2. jcsd
  3. Hurkyl

    Hurkyl 15,987
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I don't see why there's the outrage.

    Ok lemme rephrase that; I see why there's an outrage, but I don't think there should be an outrage; I certainly tend to believe Irwin's assessment of the risk over the average Jane and Joe's.
  4. Monique

    Monique 4,445
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    "[..]it was important to teach his children crocodile awareness."

    A one month old?

    "It is all about perceived danger. In front of that crocodile I was in complete control. Absolute and complete control. That is my profession," he said.

    "I would be considered a bad parent if I didn't teach my children to be crocodile savvy because they live here, they live in crocodile territory."

    Savvy as in standing next to the pond in a 2 meter distance is safe?

    I guess he just carried away though.. it IS his profession, unlike dangling a baby over a balcony..
  5. Yah. He should tell that Siegfried and Roy. Honestly I am not sure where this sort of hubris comes from but some day I am willing to bet it will come back to bite him in the ass (literally).
  6. Tsu

    Tsu 528
    Gold Member

    1. How can a 150# man be in complete control of a 500#+ crocodile, while holding a one-month-old in one arm and a dead chicken in his other hand. I don't think it's possible. Any more than it's possible to control a 500#+ tiger at a Las Vegas night club. And then he half turned his back to the croc as he danced the baby over to the pond. A smart move? He's still 'in control' in this turned-away half-crouching position?

    2. How do you teach a one-month-old ANYTHING much less how to be 'crocodile savvy'?

    3. **** happens. Ask Roy of Sigfried and... Did you see what the croc did to that chicken? It's about the same size as the baby... The visuals on this one are too gruesome to even contemplate.

    edit: OK 'Siegfried' then. (Thanks BigRedDot) Sometimes I just can't spell!
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2004
  7. Hurkyl

    Hurkyl 15,987
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    He doesn't need to be in control of the crocodile, just the situation. It doesn't even mean he needs to keep the crocodile docile, he just needs to give himself enough of a margin to react if necessary.

    But I'm not a crocodile expert; I don't know what sort of margin he needs. And, I somehow suspect that none of the irate callers nor the Australian child welfare office knows either... and the only crocodile expert that has commented on the situation (AFAIK) has stated that there was no danger.

    There is no way the layman could possibly have enough information to conclude that Irwin was acting recklessly. I'm waiting to see what the experts think.

    By exposing them to stuff. It's not like babies are 100% oblivious to the world around them. It won't be much, but it will be more than if you didn't try to teach it anything at all.
  8. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,122
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    For a few years now I have believed that the pressure for ratings will continue to leverage this fool into more and more dramatic stunts until someone gets killed; most likely him. I think this incident is an example of him getting desperate for publicity.
  9. I think not. Did you see how many people where at that show? the arena was packed, and i doubt that he advertised it as "1 month old baby used as crocodile bait!"
  10. 1) I have never heard of a crocodile eating a baby, at least not in Australia. American tourists, sure, but no babies.

    2) The guy lives around crocodiles. Should he not be allowed to have kids, simply because he lives around those lizards?

    3) Humans are far more dangerous than any crocodile. More human infants are killed by humans than are killed by crocodiles.

    4) I would definitely trust Steve Irwin about crocs, even if he is a silly nuffer. The guy has been around them all his life, and knows what he's doing.
  11. Well said.
  12. What? Why is any of that well said?

    1) I have never heard of a crocodile eating a baby; I've also never heard of someone holding a baby at arms length from a crocodile maw, either.

    2) Where did anyone say anywhere that he should not have kids? No one ever said that; they just said he shouldn't hold the kids he does have right in front of a feeding crocodile. Are you merely confused or deliberately setting a red herring?

    3) Because humans are are "more dangerous" than crocodiles to infants, it's ok to put an infant in a dangerous situation with a crocodile? The first observation seems utterly irrelevant to me, but feel free to explain your train of reasoning.

    4) Maybe he knows what he is doing, but despite what he or anyone else thinks, he does not know what a wild animal is doing or will do with certainty. Again, go talk to Seigfried and Roy. That's the point.
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2004
  13. Do people get accused of bad parenting when they take their child out in a car? You can never tell what another driver is going to do with certainty. Despite what anyone thinks.
  14. Ivan Seeking

    Ivan Seeking 12,122
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    He has a lot of competition emerging these days and I see less and less of him on TV. I also watched the interview with him this morning on the Today show...he is worse than I thought. We finally had to turn down the volume because he was so obnoxious.
  15. BigRedDot

    The point being, crocodiles do not eat babies. Statistically, humans are far more dangerous to human infants. So rather than the press complaining about him holding a baby while feeding the crocodile, they shoud complain about him holding a baby around other humans. The numbers don't lie. Humans are the bigger danger to that baby.

    The press are complaining about Irwin having a baby around crocs. Since his life involves cros, they are effectively saying "You can have either you life or a baby". Why should he have to choose? There is a tribe in Africa which lives hand-in-hand with crocs, the kids play around them, et cetera. Nothing wrong with it. He should not have to give up his life. He is allowed to have a baby.

    You entirely missed the point there. Having a baby around humans is "to put an infant in a dangerous situation", yet people do it every day, and babies die from it every day.

    The point is, you are confusing other peoples' lack of knowledge and experience with crocs, and the fear it creates, with Irwin's own knowledge and experience with crocs. The fact that others are scared of them makes no difference to the facts. Crocs are safer than people. Crocs kill fewer babies than people do. Experience with animals does grant one some insight into their thoughts and behaviours. The fact that you don't have such experience and are worried about animal behaviour has nothing to do with anything.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thead via email, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?