Thursday, February 19, 2009

Sharks - Leading Economic Indicator?

All the financial Titans of Wall Street needed to do was look at the shark world to predict the slumping economy.

They look at their numbers to divine and predict the future of the financial markets and we look at ours.

According to the International Shark Attack File recorded shark attacks in 2008 slumped by 24%. If that's not a leading economic indicator please tell us what is these days.

So, in 2008 sharks took a break munching humans (thank you Mr.Shark) and in 2008 the housing debacle started to unravel in a big bad way. We will be the first to predict, based on our indicators, that 2010 will be an unheard of year for shark attacks on humans.

This shocking news will also dovetail nicely into the "great global recovery" story of markets near or at par with previously recorded highs - and all will be well with the universe again.

With the uncharted nature of global financial markets many ex industry titans have turned to jello, snow flakes, and oracle bones to peer into the future. We'll stick with sharks. A 24% slump is good news in our world.


WhySharksMatter said...

I've read that the cost of relative cost of the Big Mac is one of the most reliable ways to detect upcoming changes in currency exchange rates.

DaShark said...

Looks like the new motto of the Great Shark Bloviator is KISS - as in Keep It Stupid, Stupid!

May this in any way be related to George's frequent cameos on you-know-where?
May issuing preposterous quotables result in better Media exposure and cement one's position as token expert? As in: improving one's telegenic value?

Honi soit qui mal y pense!

Anonymous said...

You can get media attention in a number of ways. Personally if you happen to run the ISAF that's a neat trick.

Bloviator? He does have the data, no one else has it or even wants to get it and until that day comes he owns the stomping ground and the worlds media attention.

Not sure about the telegenic value though.

DaShark said...

Yes he collects data about Shark attacks.

But then he feels free to make ludicrous correlations, as in linking his whopping data sample of two attacks in Mexico to the La Nina, or linking the global decline of attacks to the global recession.

This all happens on the website of an Academic Institution.
In science, once one comes up with Hypotheses, one goes and collects the evidence in order to verify or falsify them.

That's where he fails.
His is nothing more than idle pseudo-scientific Conjecture and Intuition. Kinda reminds me of that popular New Age and Conspiracy Theory rubbish - no wonder the media love it!

Granted, the sample sizes are probably too small for any meaningful scientific analysis - but if so, he could simply keep his mouth shut, couldn't he.