Deepest ever dive finds plastic bag at bottom of Mariana Trench

[Jetster]

Indeed. The summit at Mt Everest is actually rather coated in both garbage, and feces. It's become a serious issue.

And over 200 human remains

 

[NoJuan999]

I wouldn't. This dive was recorded from begining to end and planned months in advance.

If the story isn't Sensationalist BS, WHY did they focus on the mention of Plastic instead of the dive itself and the possible 4 new species he discovered.
And according to his team they don't really know what it was that he actually saw:

His team later said tests were ongoing to determine what exactly he saw, but it's believed to be man made.

 

[juiseman]

Why didn't they capture the creatures and study them?
Seems kind of wasteful to go that deep and come back with something...

 

[Gasaraki]

"Trash found littering ocean floor in deepest-ever sub dive"

Literally 1 piece......

So a piece of trash is not trash...?

 

[NoJuan999]

Here's A Non-Sensationalist version of the same story:

Explorer Reaches Bottom of the Mariana Trench, Breaks Record for Deepest Dive Ever

Explorer and businessman Victor Vescovo descended 35,853 feet (10,927 meters) into the Pacific Ocean last week, breaking the record for deepest dive ever.

www.livescience.com

Notice how the story actually focuses on the dive and the species he discovered versus the possible piece of plastic.

 

[R-T-B]

WHY did they focus on the mention of Plastic instead of the dive itself and the possible 4 new species he discovered.

"BS" implies untrue. It's true. That being said...

It's symbolic. Some of us care about the spread of pollutants to the most extreme places on earth.

That, and new species in an unknown region like this are expected, plastic bags are not.

Why didn't they capture the creatures and study them?
Seems kind of wasteful to go that deep and come back with something...

I believe they did. Or was it minerals? I forget.

And according to his team they don't really know what it was that he actually saw:

That's called proper science. I'd be very surprised if it's not what they suspect.

 

[NoJuan999]

"BS" implies untrue. It's true. That being said...

It's symbolic. Some of us care about the spread of pollutants to the most extreme places on earth.

That, and new species in an unknown region like this are expected, plastic bags are not.



I believe they did. Or was it minerals? I forget.



That's called proper science. I'd be very surprised if it's not what they suspect.

I said BS because the person who wrote that article has NO idea if it is plastic or metal or rock or something else.
Focusing a story on Possible facts and Not actual facts is BS and sensationalism.
No it has NOT been proven to be true that the item in question is plastic and probably won't be unless they collect and test the item that may or may not be plastic or metal or rock or something else.

And a Proper scientific story would be one like the one I linked to, NOT the one in the OP that focuses mainly on one small (Not proven to be plasctic) item and not what is scientifically important.

FYI:

sen·sa·tion·al·ism
/senˈsāSHənlˌizəm/
noun
noun: sensationalism

1. 1.
   (especially in journalism) the use of exciting or shocking stories or language at the expense of accuracy, in order to provoke public interest or excitement.
   "media sensationalism"

PS
If you are really concerned with plastic pollutants in the Ocean you should read this:

Infographic: The Countries Polluting The Oceans The Most

Annual metric tons of mismanaged plastic waste and total amount ending up in global waters

www.statista.com

 

[juiseman]

https://www.statista.com/chart/12211/the-countries-polluting-the-oceans-the-most/​

"estimated 3.53 million metric tons of it ending up in the ocean"
I hate statistics. Its not true math or science; just speculation based on
a small sample of data.

I always wonder where they get those numbers from?

Did they test each plastic to find that it was in fact from China?

or Was it all of the plastic shit that other countries buy from China; then
dump it in the ocean?

Does China keep track and publically publish "this year we dumped X-amount of plastic waist"

How can this be science? All statics are a small sample of data; then making up the rest of the numbers out of that small sample of data.

if they only can verify 1/1000TH of the origin of the trash; what about the rest?
Basically stereotyping, estimation, opinion & B.S. propaganda in my opinion...call it that.

Don't call it scientific factual data.

I'm not some China sympathy guy; but lets be fair....I want to
take a guess and say that was published from a US site? Correct?​

 

[NoJuan999]

Obviously stats can be manipulated to suit just about any view point.
I was simply pointing out that there are Millions of tons of plastic dumped into the oceans.
And historically it has mostly come from South East Asian countires due to their lack of waste management.

I can say from personal experience traveling the Pacific Ocean (from California to Guam and quite a few islands in between) in the 1980's it was a big problem then and it still is.

 

[juiseman]

Yea, I 100% agree with that. Nothing against what you posted; or personal.
I bet they do dump tons of waist. ..cant say for I've never been out of the US..

I just find most statistics inaccurate In general.
I've always hated them for some reason.....
Its a personal thing I guess...

 

[advanced3]

So a piece of trash is not trash...?

I am just pointing out the sensationalized headline that's clearly embellishing the one piece of (trash?) that's "littering the ocean floor".... if that's what it even is.

I would be more concerned about the enormous amount of space trash that's orbiting the planet first.

 

[Deleted member 24505]

"Trash found littering ocean floor in deepest-ever sub dive"
Gypo's they get everywhere.

 

[R-T-B]

I said BS because the person who wrote that article has NO idea if it is plastic or metal or rock or something else.
Focusing a story on Possible facts and Not actual facts is BS and sensationalism.
No it has NOT been proven to be true that the item in question is plastic and probably won't be unless they collect and test the item that may or may n

It is pretty likely a plastic bag. No, we haven't chemically tested it, but if it looks like a rose, smells like one etc... it really isn't a tricky visual ID to perform.

Focusing a story on Possible facts and Not actual facts is BS and sensationalism.

I do not agree. It may be sensationalist (but as a journalist I'd say it still passes the "need to know" test) but it really does not make it BS. The two terms imply seperate things and conflating them is sensationalist in it's own right.

I am just pointing out the sensationalized headline that's clearly embellishing the one piece of (trash?) th

No one is really arguing the harm of this piece of trash, no one would say it's very dangerous. It is however a good symbol of mankinds reach via pollution, and some of us do care about that. Sensationalism need not apply.

 

[Caring1]

So a piece of trash is not trash...?

Correct, it is A piece of trash, the sensationist headline implies trash is literally covering the ocean floor, ie littering.

 

[OSdevr]

Whatever it was I wish they brought it up. It's probably been down there and under pressure for some time, figuring out what it was, how old it was, and what shape it's in could have been interesting.