Politically incorrect For a “darker view” of the oceans, see the Netflix documentary: its dim view.
A new Netflix movie with no one wants to see makes wild claims that exposes the ignorance of its viewers.
‘By popular demand, a controversial Netflix documentary about saving the world’s oceans has been put out.
Seaspiracy documentary has taken the ocean by storm due to its call to action, which is urging people to give up fish consumption.
While the movie has skyrocketed to become one of the 10 most popular programs on Netflix and enjoyed praise from artists like Bryan Adams, it has been criticized by experts who believe it represents fishing in a simplistic way and misleading view of the current marine ecosystem.
In the film, they liken the industry to the blood diamond controversy and labeling is given the analogy of “blood shrimp”.
Set out to show the devastation humans cause to ocean life, award-winning director Ali Tabri “travelsolutely” attempts to reveal.
However, in the film, the issue of dolphin slaughter, garbage at sea, ocean disposal, ocean acidification, and oceanic plastic waste are all shown as a result of overfishing.
If people stopped eating fish, the ocean would no longer be in danger.
He described the response of the Daily Mail as “shocking“, learning “how far it extended into the darkness”
He went on to say that the most powerful thing we can do every single day to help protect our ocean and all of its residents, as well as the entire planet, is to reduce our meat consumption and shift to a plant-based diet.
To go from lack of interest to anxiety: Australian marine biologist Dr Bryce Stewart began to worry as soon as he heard about the film’s impending release because he thought there were misleading links in it.
He added, “Scientists are quite upset with my decision.”
Sustainable fisheries aren’t an issue in films or on television.”
The scientific consensus states that two-thirds of the world’s fisheries are being fished in an unsustainable manner.
In fact, he pointed out that many of the studies in the film were extremely old and inaccurate.
Stewart had called the claim of 20% ocean pollution as a “completely inaccurate,” and estimated that figure to be closer to 10%
The Executive Director also told us that many NGOs that were doing wonderful things were being poorly regarded and made to look horrible
What we’re offering is a very simple solution to all those who want to stop eating fish, but if it is not something that can be done for a majority of those millions or billions of people, then it isn’t really helpful.
Dr. Stewart agreed and said the film should have been done differently.
The Aquaculture Stewardship Council of Australia had a “dim view of both wild and farmed seafood and the consumer certification schemes collaborating with those industries”, according to a University of New South Wales lecturer.
A well-managed farm has virtually no impact on biodiversity, while a farm where fish are farmed has the lowest per-impact per unit of protein production is used for food.
the greatest source of loss of species diversity on Earth, and particularly in Australia, is deforestation for agriculture on the land
However, this doesnWhile this does not mean no one should eat anything, it does mean that all production has an impact on the environment.
Farmed seafood can be operated in a way that has a low carbon footprint and does not cause environmental harm.
Aquaculture has always played a central role in feeding the world’s population; we also, we believe that well-managed aquaculture will be able to do so in the future
Raising these serious issues is worthwhile, but people should know the size and difficulty of the task you are tackling them with it.”
There are effective solutions as well as well as individuals, organizations, businesses, and start-ups that are working on them today.
Many seafood labeled “seasonscure” were in fact harvested using unsustainable methods by the MSC.
In contradiction to what the filmmakers claim, however, certification is a difficult process, and some fisheries spend many years training and fine-tuning their processes in order to obtain that level of certification.
In fact, our research shows that the majority of fisheries which conduct pre-assessment on our criteria fail to qualify.
In addition, Tabri and his wife have added a signature request to the government’s agenda: to allow ‘no-catch’ zones.
