Cheap Thrills

[sarongsong]

December 31 2005 (http://www.starbulletin.com/2005/12/31/news/story01.html)
"...Hall and his crew soon realized that the animal was not a whale, but a great white shark, 18 to 20 feet long...After about 10 minutes of recording video and noticing that the large animal was not behaving aggressively, Hall realized this was his chance to fulfill a lifelong dream...He exited the cage to swim with a great white shark..."

[LurchGS]

...He exited the cage to swim with a great white shark..."

awk! some people are just too stupid to be allowed to live.

I hope he doesn't waste his money on lottery tickets - he done used up all his good luck.

(I don't know jack about great whites, but anybody foolish enough to place themselves in the power of an apex predator - particularly for a lark (a shark lark?)is just plain stupid)

[DukePaul]

December 31 2005 (http://www.starbulletin.com/2005/12/31/news/story01.html)
"... the large animal was not behaving aggressively..."

The last thought Roy had when the tiger grabbed him.

[LurchGS]

my thought exactly - and he knows a thing or two about tigers.



If I want a thrill, I look for a roller coaster (wooden ones are better)

[montebianco]

awk! some people are just too stupid to be allowed to live.

I hope he doesn't waste his money on lottery tickets - he done used up all his good luck.

(I don't know jack about great whites, but anybody foolish enough to place themselves in the power of an apex predator - particularly for a lark (a shark lark?)is just plain stupid)

While my opinion is rather similar to that of the other posters (so far) in this thread, I am sure many people feel the same way about these foolish astronauts...

[LurchGS]

but astronauts aren't placing themselves at the mercy of a predator - they are just taking a drive on a very dangerous highway (it's pretty safe, really, but if one little bitty thing goes wrong, the results are generally messy) you have a huge team of people who are very good at their jobs working to make sure you come home safe..

ergo, whole different ball of shark ... stuff

(and when I win the lottery, 20M is going to put me on ISS for a week)

[Gullible Jones]

Exactly. A vacuum can kill you if your space suit screws up, but it won't actively try to rip your suit off.

[Hugh Jass]

awk! some people are just too stupid to be allowed to live.

I hope he doesn't waste his money on lottery tickets - he done used up all his good luck.

(I don't know jack about great whites, but anybody foolish enough to place themselves in the power of an apex predator - particularly for a lark (a shark lark?)is just plain stupid)

Funny, my first reaction was "cool, in Hawaii to that's crazy! warm clear water, and a huge one at that! Lucky Bum!"

Lucky he is, for having the opportunity, stupid he's not.

[The_Radiation_Specialist]

I thought the human body could survive for a few seconds in pure vacuum.
Quote by The Bad Astronomer:

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/movies/m2mreview.html (scroll down a bit more than half way)

[Gillianren]

Someone in Oregon just survived a great white shark attack, too.

[montebianco]

but astronauts aren't placing themselves at the mercy of a predator

True, and the guy swimming with the shark isn't placing himself on a the top of a big metal can filled with highly explosive material that is then lit on fire.

Both the astronauts and the guy swimming with the shark are engaged in a dangerous activity. More than 1% of space shuttle missions have catastophically failed with a loss of all on-board personnel. What are the odds of this guy getting eaten by the shark? (Personally, I don't know. Is anyone here a shark expert? Did he have sufficient expertise to know from its observed behavior that his odds of survival were high?) Back to the astronauts, why do they face a risk that has historically offered a more than 1/100 chance of coming home nice and crispy? Why do they face this appalling risk? Just to live their dreams?

[Moose]

(Personally, I don't know. Is anyone here a shark expert? Did he have sufficient expertise to know from its observed behavior that his odds of survival were high?)

Not an expert by any means, but for kicks a few months ago I looked up some reports. Seems that you're far more likely to die slipping in the tub than you are to be injured by a shark (the vast majority of shark attacks are non-fatal.)

[Gullible Jones]

I thought the human body could survive for a few seconds in pure vacuum.
Quote by The Bad Astronomer:

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/movies/m2mreview.html (scroll down a bit more than half way)

30 seconds of consciousness maximum, then 60 more seconds until gas embolisms get you. If you're rescued within the first 90 seconds, and you're lucky, you'll live. If not... tough luck.

(Do a bit a of searching, this has been brought up a bunch of times. NASA did studies on it, and IIRC "Cecil Adams" did a reasonably accurate article on it in The Straight Dope.)

[sarongsong]

Photos and (QuickTime) video (http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051231/NEWS11/512310330)

[LurchGS]

Not an expert by any means, but for kicks a few months ago I looked up some reports. Seems that you're far more likely to die slipping in the tub than you are to be injured by a shark (the vast majority of shark attacks are non-fatal.)

I bet that's based on total number of people-hours in the water, not people-hours swimming next to sharks. And yeah, from the reports I've seen, fatal attacks are actually pretty uncommon.

I still maintain that the guy was stupid, though. Astronauts are placing themselves in a dangerous position (so are race car drivers and pedestrians), but every conceivable step has been taken to ensure that it's a safe ride. The equipment is not going to turn around and bite them in the wallet on a whim. It's as welll thought out a trip as possible, and *unnecessary* risks are kept to a minimum - nobody is allowed to ride on the outside of the shuttle during liftoff, for instance.

The diver in the shark cage is also in a dangerous position - but if the cage is designed well, the trip is only dangerous, not suicidal. Getting OUT of the cage in the presence of an unpredictable predator is insane. You know next to nothing about the beast. You have no reason to place any trust in it - quite the opposite, in fact.

There's a huge difference between going into a dangerous situation after having prepared as best you possibly can, and jumping into a dangerous situation on a whim.

----------

I don't pet bears, I don't pet tigers, I don't swim with sharks, I don't fly commercial (Sorry, Candy)

[Moose]

The diver in the shark cage is also in a dangerous position - but if the cage is designed well, the trip is only dangerous, not suicidal. Getting OUT of the cage in the presence of an unpredictable predator is insane. You know next to nothing about the beast. You have no reason to place any trust in it - quite the opposite, in fact.

Keep in mind that most of the time people are filming sharks from cages, they are also luring the sharks in close using offal. The sharks that show up are the hungry ones who would like to feed. These sharks behave accordingly, tasting everything available.

It's a little like baiting a fishhook, then being surprised when a fish actually nibbles.

As for this situation, I guess it depends on whether or not they were luring sharks, the shark was interested in feeding (by the description, I'd have to agree with "no"), and if the swimmers were behaving like prey, which they weren't.

[montebianco]

and *unnecessary* risks are kept to a minimum

The risks would be lower still if they stayed at home...

The diver in the shark cage is also in a dangerous position - but if the cage is designed well, the trip is only dangerous, not suicidal. Getting OUT of the cage in the presence of an unpredictable predator is insane. You know next to nothing about the beast. You have no reason to place any trust in it - quite the opposite, in fact.

Well, I don't know enough about shark behavior to say. Did this fellow have enough expertise to be able to judge when the shark was more or less dangerous to him?

I don't pet bears, I don't pet tigers, I don't swim with sharks, I don't fly commercial (Sorry, Candy)

I've done all four of those things, although the sharks weren't great whites. Why don't you fly commercial? Because it is too dangerous? If so, I'm curious as to why you would fly to the ISS, as historically space flight has been thousands of times more dangerous than airplane flight. I'm uncertain about whether spaceflight is more dangerous than swimming with great white sharks...

[LurchGS]

The risks would be lower still if they stayed at home...


so long as they don't live in New orleans :)


Well, I don't know enough about shark behavior to say. Did this fellow have enough expertise to be able to judge when the shark was more or less dangerous to him?


the article doesn't state explicitly, but it certianly gave me the impression that the guy was just some Joe Tourist.


I've done all four of those things, although the sharks weren't great whites. Why don't you fly commercial? Because it is too dangerous? If so, I'm curious as to why you would fly to the ISS, as historically space flight has been thousands of times more dangerous than airplane flight. I'm uncertain about whether spaceflight is more dangerous than swimming with great white sharks...

Well, to be honest, I have pet a bear a couple times, and been face to face with a kodiak sow once... but I should have added the word "wild" in there. (the sow was wild, but didn't see me as an immediate threat to her cub. I was lucky)

Not flying commercial for me is not a matter of safety - I know full well it's safer to fly that it is for me to drive to work. That little bit was simply my little dig at the airline industry. I used to fly a fair bit - every couple weeks. My complaint is that air travel is unsanitary (other thread) and provides a comfort level that Torquemada would be proud of.

Personally, though, I equate space travel (such as it is) with aviation 100 years ago. There are bugs and kinks to work out. Of course, 100 years ago, if something went wrong, all you had was a crater and a dead pilot.. now disaster is truely spectacular. 7 or 8 people dead, and a crash site the size of Rhode Island. In the end, the loss of life (even if it be mine), tragic though it may be, is not pointless. We've learned something important. Design changes. Procedures are modified. The next trip is that little bit safer.

For every Hindenberg, there are millions of safe flight hours.

I'm soapboxing again.

The point is, when going to space, you are facing calculated risks. They are pretty well known before you ever don the jumpsuit. There is a specific object to the task, and even if the object is not met, we learn things.

When dealing with a wild animal, the only way to assess risk is by basing it on long-term observed behaviour - and that's only a loose guide. The only one who gains if you assess the risk incorrectly is the shark, even if you live.

[Dave Mitsky]

I suppose Timothy Treadwell was convinced he knew the risks of dealing with wild animals too.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0812_050812_grizzly_man.html

[SolusLupus]

I suppose Timothy Treadwell was convinced he knew the risks of dealing with wild animals too.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0812_050812_grizzly_man.html

How many people actually do work with wild animals without getting bitten, much less killed?

It's easy to point out the extremes. Every expert told that guy that he was making a big mistake.

I'm not really making any argument, just saying that it's easy pointing out to any example and saying, "well, look at him."

[montebianco]

the article doesn't state explicitly, but it certianly gave me the impression that the guy was just some Joe Tourist.

Well, if that's the case, then I'm inclined to agree that swimming with the shark wasn't the best idea anyone has ever had...

In the end, the loss of life (even if it be mine), tragic though it may be, is not pointless. We've learned something important. Design changes. Procedures are modified. The next trip is that little bit safer.

Is that why you want to go to the ISS? Because things will be learned on your trip?

For every Hindenberg, there are millions of safe flight hours.

Not in space, at least not yet!

When dealing with a wild animal, the only way to assess risk is by basing it on long-term observed behaviour - and that's only a loose guide.

I don't know that we have any better than a loose guide as to the safety of spaceflight. We've got a pretty small sample, so it is hard to estimate empirically (and a space flight in 2006 may well be different than a space flight in 1986, for example, so much of the limited data we do have may well be obsolete), and trying to calculate the safety record theoretically on such a complex system won't be much better than guess work.

I certainly would not swim with a great white. But this site is filled with people who would love to go into space, despite the risks, which are quite substantial. If that's the case, I don't see why someone else would not be willing to do something to live out his dream, despite the risk...

[montebianco]

I suppose Timothy Treadwell was convinced he knew the risks of dealing with wild animals too.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0812_050812_grizzly_man.html

Perhaps he was so convinced. And perhaps the crews of the last flights of Columbia and Challenger were convinced that they knew the risks of spaceflight. And perhaps they were all right...

[paulie jay]

"...Naughton said the shark is easily more than 15 feet long, with a very large girth. He said a shark that size would weigh several tons..."
15 feet? And they though it was a whale...?

[Gillianren]

15 feet? And they though it was a whale...?

Did they say what species or how old?

[SolusLupus]

Did they say what species or how old?

"It was so incredibly big, we thought it was a baby humpback whale," said Jimmy Hall, owner of Hawaii Shark Encounters.

Hmm...

A BABY whale.

[LurchGS]

15 feet? And they though it was a whale...?

there are pleny of small whales.. beluga, for instance (not that I know of any in Hawaiian waters...but didnt' they say they were thinking b aby whale?


Is that why you want to go to the ISS? Because things will be learned on your trip?


For every Hindenberg, there are millions of safe flight hours.

Not in space, at least not yet!

Yes - granted, I think I'd learn more from my trip to ISS than anybody else would, but there WOULD be something learned by others (probably: never never never send that jerk up there again)

And we're at the Hindenberg stage.. the flight hours are in the future.


How many people actually do work with wild animals without getting bitten, much less killed?

Few of them. Most of them, though, know enough to know to never trust. Thus, they get bitten, not eaten.
From that story, it sounds as though Treadwell made that exact mistake - he was talking of being accepted by the bears. The only animals that accept human presence are domesticated.
I don't think we'll ever know what happened - did Treadwell forget to shave that morning? Did the bear finally decide that 12 years of Treadwell was enough? Did the bears decide that the fiance was an intrusion (I think this was her first trip - not looked that up)?

That said, though, we DID benefit from his work. Hours and hours of video, and thousands of still shots. We know a bit more about those bears than we used to, but we have not learned that they're safe to be around

[SeanF]

the article doesn't state explicitly, but it certianly gave me the impression that the guy was just some Joe Tourist.
...Jimmy Hall, owner of Hawaii Shark Encounters...
Not quite "Joe Tourist."

[paulie jay]

there are pleny of small whales.. beluga, for instance (not that I know of any in Hawaiian waters...but didnt' they say they were thinking b aby whale?



snip
I thought they mentioned hump-back?

[LurchGS]

Not quite "Joe Tourist."


oi. I did miss that. that does put a slightly different complexion on the thing.

I still think it was stupid, but probably not insane.

-----

must... read... every.... word....

[Gullible Jones]

Wait a minute... They thought it was a whale?

Uhh... Hello.... Gills?!

[SolusLupus]

Wait a minute... They thought it was a whale?

Uhh... Hello.... Gills?!

Maybe it was rather murky in the water?

[LurchGS]

probably not - but at a distance, even in clear water, details are hard to make out. though, now I think on it, the tail motion should have given it away if they could see it underwater.. maybe they were seeing the dorsal fin on the surface, at a distance?

[Gillianren]

Re: the whole space travel vs. wild animals thing--there's nothing to be learned from people getting eaten by sharks other than "don't get eaten by sharks," with the possible exception of "don't do that stupid thing those guys were doing." However, every failure of space flight ideally makes the next trip that much safer. ("Don't use the O-rings that get brittle in the cold during cold weather.")

[montebianco]

Re: the whole space travel vs. wild animals thing--there's nothing to be learned from people getting eaten by sharks other than "don't get eaten by sharks," with the possible exception of "don't do that stupid thing those guys were doing." However, every failure of space flight ideally makes the next trip that much safer. ("Don't use the O-rings that get brittle in the cold during cold weather.")

I can easily imagine people who are fascinated by nature and animal behavior but will little interest in astronomy or physics saying, "There's nothing to be learned from blowing yourself to bits in space other than 'don't blow yourself to bits in space,' with the possible exception of 'don't do anything as idiotic as climbing on top of a tin can with millions of pounds of explosives in it and then lighting it on fire.'"

If the reason to bear the risk of spaceflight is because failure provides a learning opportunity to reduce the risk of the next flight, I can offer an alternative: don't go at all. That brings the risk down enormously. Now, if there is some other reason to go...

[sarongsong]

Now a whale shark (http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/sharks/species/Whaleshark.shtml) would have been safe and awesome:The whale shark is the biggest shark and the biggest fish. It is NOT a whale...a filter feeder and sieves enormous amounts of plankton to eat through its gills as it swims...

[LurchGS]

there most definately a reason to go. It's imperative for our survival as a species that we expand off this rock. Spread through the solar system, and ideally, out of it to the stars.

At present, all of our eggs are in one basket. We are on the threshold of opening new baskets. Any step in that direction is worthwhile.

So, I'll dispute that - not trying actually increases risk. Not just to a few individuals, but to the entire species.

Furthermore, failure always provides a learning opportunity. The question is, is the cost worth the knowledge? Does the knowledge gained make other people safer? does it improve their quality of life?

I'm not sure if you are playing devil's advocate, or you really do think space travel is pointless, but...
Face it. We are going to space. Maybe not in your lifetime or mine, but we will go. Anything we learn today will help them tomorrow.

How many wild animals will we take with us?

[LurchGS]

Now a whale shark (http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/sharks/species/Whaleshark.shtml) would have been safe and awesome:

yeah - I believe there are other, similar sharks - krill feeders - but I could be wrong.

[SolusLupus]

How many wild animals will we take with us?

How short term a time are you talking?

If you're talking space colonies, they WILL take animals with them. Whether livestock, pets, or even zoos, depending on the size of the colony.

I wouldn't want to live in space without a piece of what I left behind with me.

Also, are you saying that there is no benefit to studying wild animals?

[LurchGS]

How short term a time are you talking?

If you're talking space colonies, they WILL take animals with them. Whether livestock, pets, or even zoos, depending on the size of the colony


none of those animils are wild (well, those in a zoo are, technically - but they have vets, feeders, tenders, etc... they're kinda inbetween wild and domesticated)


I wouldn't want to live in space without a piece of what I left behind with me.

neither would I. I'd fully expect to see dogs/cats/birds/ etc. I'm guessing the only really wild animals we take along will be rats and mice and insects.


Also, are you saying that there is no benefit to studying wild animals?

nope. not at all. If done properly, and not by some fuzz-headed Dr Doolittle. I'm absolutely at a loss for words when I contemplate Dr. Goodall, for instance. That lady impresses me more than I can say. On top of that, she's got class.

I think getting into space is more important, though.

[Hugh Jass]

How many wild animals will we take with us?

That depends on our depth of understanding of them and why we are leaving this planet. It may be very desirable to take many different animals, and undoubtedly some of them would be predators. In order to understand them they need to be studied. I'm not saying this guy was doing clinical research, but he did get plenty of really good video, Thanks sorongsong for that, that could be of Huge value to shark experts. The wild animal vs space argument/analogies are really not ok, basically it sounds like you’re saying “we’re going to leave this planet eventually so why give a snot about all this other organic fluff that is taking up some of OUR habitat.” I don't think you are, it just sounds that way.

As far as the tourists in the shark cage who said they thought it was a whale, well even in exceptionally clear water something 30 meters away is just going to be a large shape. By the time you are able to see gills, or for certain determine the tail motion (not as easy in a 3D environment as you might think) they knew it was a great white shark. When it was out at the edge of visibility, which as would be normal for a great white shark was probably a bit of time, they saw a very large dark shape that was bigger with much more girth than they were expecting. Humpbacks our in the Islands right now birthing so a baby humpback would not be a total surprise (having not seen Mom from the surface breathing by the time a baby got that close would be a bit odd, but not impossible).

They probably did have some kinda chum in the water, maybe a few small tuna or some such. What they would have been hoping for is blue sharks (thin maybe 5-7 feet long) oceanic white tips (little thicker 6-8 feet long) variety of “whaler shark” species (similar to the oceanic white tip, as the article said IF they were lucky a hammer head or Tiger shark. Now a tiger shark could potentially have been as long as this shark, I think that would have been a record, but they are 12-14 feet in the islands. But a tiger has a very flat head and nowhere near the same girth as a great white. So when they saw the general outline from far away, the obvious first thought is whale, I probably would have thought basking shark, (the other large plankton feeder, that usually are seen in pictures with their huge mouths agape) with their mouth closed look very very similar to a great white.

Again I would have jumped right in there. This guy, being the owner of a shark watching company probably loves sharks, and although I would guess not a classically educated expert there is every reason he may still more than a thing or two about them. He may or may not have known, but I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt, that it is considered, more info is needed (and this guys actions and video actually help with the research), that great whites migrate from their normal cold water homes like where I live, to tropical areas to birth. Many large species of marine animals while birthing stop feeding for that time, so it is possible that this large apex predator, that was probably drawn to the boat because of the chum, had no interest in eating anything, its action in coming to the food source was just an uncontrollable instinctive curiosity. There is almost nothing known of the reproduction of the great whites so even the people that study them for a living are just guessing at why they are out there, but what is known is there is very little that is considered food for this exact animal in Hawaii.

[LurchGS]

Hugh - I think I answered that.. I hope, so, anyway. If not, let me know and I'll try again.

As far as the animal/space issue - I didn't start that - I think it was Montebianco. I was just trying to keep with the analogy already in use.

I don't think I was ridiculing the diver's initial perception that the critter may have been a whale - though from when I dove Hawaii I'd suggest it would be the aspect ratio rather than the blurryness at even 50 meters that would make tail movement undiscernable. I was trying to suggest that at a distance, it would be a better way to tell than looking for gills.

[LurchGS]

I just had an odd thought, brought on by my rememberance of Dr Goodall...
does anybody else find it fun that the world's foremost expert on Chimps in the wild shares the same first name as Tarzan's mate?

[Hugh Jass]

Hugh - I think I answered that.. I hope, so, anyway. If not, let me know and I'll try again.

As far as the animal/space issue - I didn't start that - I think it was Montebianco. I was just trying to keep with the analogy already in use.

I don't think I was ridiculing the diver's initial perception that the critter may have been a whale - though from when I dove Hawaii I'd suggest it would be the aspect ratio rather than the blurryness at even 50 meters that would make tail movement undiscernable. I was trying to suggest that at a distance, it would be a better way to tell than looking for gills.
Yeah I was typing away, must have just missed yer last post.

I was trying to answer all the statements in the thread, not just directed at yours sorry if it looked that way, I didn't have the patience to pull out all the individual quotes.

[Hugh Jass]

I just had an odd thought, brought on by my rememberance of Dr Goodall...
does anybody else find it fun that the world's foremost expert on Chimps in the wild shares the same first name as Tarzan's mate?

Dr.???? OH.... Jane! heh, that is funny!

[LurchGS]

Yeah I was typing away, must have just missed yer last post.

I was trying to answer all the statements in the thread, not just directed at yours sorry if it looked that way, I didn't have the patience to pull out all the individual quotes.

I understand. Patience is a virtue - and I have no virtues. I substitute laziness :)

[Gillianren]

I can easily imagine people who are fascinated by nature and animal behavior but will little interest in astronomy or physics saying, "There's nothing to be learned from blowing yourself to bits in space other than 'don't blow yourself to bits in space,' with the possible exception of 'don't do anything as idiotic as climbing on top of a tin can with millions of pounds of explosives in it and then lighting it on fire.'"

If the reason to bear the risk of spaceflight is because failure provides a learning opportunity to reduce the risk of the next flight, I can offer an alternative: don't go at all. That brings the risk down enormously. Now, if there is some other reason to go...

Yes, but eventually all that learning will produce substantially safer space travel, which will produce actual benefits. Wild animals will remain wild animals and will remain unpredictable.

[Doodler]

Yes, but eventually all that learning will produce substantially safer space travel, which will produce actual benefits. Wild animals will remain wild animals and will remain unpredictable.

Yeah, and last time I checked, no manned spaceflight today has been done "for thrills". Even Shuttleworth and whatshisname went through deliberate training, and obeyed the damned rules when they were in orbit.

Lurch called it right, too stupid to live. You can imagine he might inspire copycats because "someone did it and lived". May not be more than a few, but there's going to be blood on his conscience because of this. Too many people out there utter the last words "Hey guys, watch this", they do NOT need more inspiration...

[Dave Mitsky]

How many people actually do work with wild animals without getting bitten, much less killed?

It's easy to point out the extremes. Every expert told that guy that he was making a big mistake.

I'm not really making any argument, just saying that it's easy pointing out to any example and saying, "well, look at him."

The point is that the behavior of large and potentially dangerous predators, even ones that have been "trained", is ultimately unpredictable. Anthropomorphizing them may make reckless or deluded individuals candidates for the Darwin Awards.

Dsave Mitsky

[teri tait]

Cheap Trick


Now there's a groupie!

[Nicolas]

About safety: a site promoting swimming with whale sharks says it is perfectly safe. Conidering they're plankton eaters, that's true.

But still, accidents can happen. I remember the footage of a free diver who got pulled more than 20m below the surface by a Sperm whale who wanted to be alone with his friends in the water. Luckily for the diver, the whale did seem to notice she got into serious problems there in front, and he pushed her back up.

Similar things can happen when swimming with whale sharks. And you can accidentally get into the uhm mouth? Or he kills you with his tail on the surface (by accident)...

I'm just saying that "perfectly safe" does not really exist close to large animals. Certainly not when they feature huge jaws and teeth like the Great White shark :). Let's hope that Hall type had GOOD clues the animal was "at it's safest" to swim by, otherwise he truly is insane.

[beskeptical]

Wait a minute... They thought it was a whale?

Uhh... Hello.... Gills?!And that should have been a clue they weren't shark behavior experts either. How can you tell a shark isn't acting aggressively unless you know something about their behavior?

The little guy had a smile on his face I suppose.