Another Blow to Reefkeeping

[SarahE]

Pretty much all scientists who study long-term weather patterns on the planet agree that one day Earth will be much warmer than it is now, just like someday it will have another ice age and be much colder. Those are the things science is most certain of. We'll never live to see either, but those who care ask the question "How can we make it easier for those who come after us to survive that?" And those of us who like fish ask "How can we make it easier for the life in oceans to survive that?"

Really, ocean life has survived this before, but I think, no matter what you believe, we all are just hoping to not make it unnaturally worse.

 

[SarahE]

It fascinates me that some of the sceptics who regard human influenced global warming as a myth have no problem with rolling around on the floors of backwoods cabins babbling in fake meaningless languages while holding venomous snakes and asking invisible beings to perform magic.

I'm totally lost as to what is being referenced here? Hoping it's not some attempt to put down a religious belief?

 

[doctorgori]

Originally Posted by ackee
It fascinates me that some of the sceptics who regard human influenced global warming as a myth have no problem with rolling around on the floors of backwoods cabins babbling in fake meaningless languages while holding venomous snakes and asking invisible beings to perform magic

.

I'm totally lost as to what is being referenced here? Hoping it's not some attempt to put down a religious belief?

...that was a jab at religion I think...

Anyway, I get the logic behind keeping the politics out and remaining focused on educating us consumers...
Still, a misplaced politician can do far more damage to the oceans than us consumers....
...and BTW, removing 1 pound of fish from the ocean whether its a orange roughy or morrish idol makes no difference to mother nature... the "intent" of the consumption is a human applied attribute....

...just saying: I get the "Educational aspects" of these discussions, I just question the scope of the impact in the bigger picture ...

 

[ackee]

A belief is a belief. It makes no difference, in my opinion, to what special categories beliefs are assigned. If people choose to believe in magic or the tooth fairy that's their decision and none of my business. My comment meant nothing more than the personal observation that many people seem willing to accept elaborate and complex constructs without any corroboration whatsoever while rejecting others that have a great deal of evidence. If my fascination with this phenomenon offends anyone, my sincere apologies. I regret having mentioned it.

 

[Wrench]

It's all BS. Every time I am at a reefing convention or my local club has a speaker I ask them the same question, "when you dive, what are the reefs like?". The ALL come back with the same answer which is something along the lines of when you get away from the 'tourist-y' areas, the reefs are actually thriving. The parts of the reef that are near the tourists see a lot of damage from boat traffic, irresponsible divers and tourists along with pollution from nearby resorts and heavy populations.

The marine biologists tell you that the reefs are dying for two reasons. One being that they are working on limited budgets and simply cant afford the logistics of taking an entire scientific expedition to the more remote areas. So they end up relegated to nearby the high traffic areas where the reefs don't tell the true story. The second reason is that if they tell us all that the reefs are healthy, they'll all be out of work. Writing papers about dying reefs, global warming, blah blah blah is homemade job security and guaranteed funding from the liberals. Just the type of reporting I expect from MSNBC.

 

[Luiz Rocha]

The marine biologists tell you that the reefs are dying for two reasons. One being that they are working on limited budgets and simply cant afford the logistics of taking an entire scientific expedition to the more remote areas. So they end up relegated to nearby the high traffic areas where the reefs don't tell the true story. The second reason is that if they tell us all that the reefs are healthy, they'll all be out of work. Writing papers about dying reefs, global warming, blah blah blah is homemade job security and guaranteed funding from the liberals. Just the type of reporting I expect from MSNBC.

Way to keep politics out...

IBTL

 

[doctorgori]

A belief is a belief. It makes no difference, in my opinion, to what special categories beliefs are assigned. If people choose to believe in magic or the tooth fairy that's their decision and none of my business. My comment meant nothing more than the personal observation that many people seem willing to accept elaborate and complex constructs without any corroboration whatsoever while rejecting others that have a great deal of evidence. If my fascination with this phenomenon offends anyone, my sincere apologies. I regret having mentioned it.

I get the jest of your comment, but it is VERY hard to transfer a concept such as yours and dance around the taboo topics of politics, religion and science all at once w/o violating forum rules or offending anyone...

if I can paraphrase:....you are asking yourself how can one believe in a more "conceptual" thing like religion and/or a diety yet argue against more "Tangible facts" like global warming even if it defies all logic

...people are immersed along those lines because we are saturated with political talk, talking heads, and media...I mean who thinks for themselves anymore? I hear so many people parotting the assorted political radio talk show host, religious leaders and "Activist" even our logic and thinking is influenced beyond all common sense anymore ...

....and this applies to whatever you current beliefs are

 

[billsreef]

It's all BS. Every time I am at a reefing convention or my local club has a speaker I ask them the same question, "when you dive, what are the reefs like?". The ALL come back with the same answer which is something along the lines of when you get away from the 'tourist-y' areas, the reefs are actually thriving. The parts of the reef that are near the tourists see a lot of damage from boat traffic, irresponsible divers and tourists along with pollution from nearby resorts and heavy populations.

The marine biologists tell you that the reefs are dying for two reasons. One being that they are working on limited budgets and simply cant afford the logistics of taking an entire scientific expedition to the more remote areas. So they end up relegated to nearby the high traffic areas where the reefs don't tell the true story. The second reason is that if they tell us all that the reefs are healthy, they'll all be out of work. Writing papers about dying reefs, global warming, blah blah blah is homemade job security and guaranteed funding from the liberals. Just the type of reporting I expect from MSNBC.

Your making several erroneous assumptions here.

 

[Wrench]

Way to keep politics out...

IBTL

Consider the source is all I'm saying.

Calfo, Fenner, Fellman and Tony Vargas as well as friends of mine that dive say the reefs are thriving. That's based on first hand experiences and no hidden agenda.

 

[Luiz Rocha]

Consider the source is all I'm saying.

Calfo, Fenner, Fellman and Tony Vargas as well as friends of mine that dive say the reefs are thriving. That's based on first hand experiences and no hidden agenda.

I am a scientist and do not work on global warming and thus do not directly depend on funding (or lack thereof) for global warming related research. I have been diving for over 20 years (~3,000 logged dives) and can see the deterioration with my own eyes. Reefs today are not what they were 10 years ago, even those in protected areas.

Contrarily to what you say, I often dive in inaccessible places, and I can tell you reefs are hammered everywhere. Are there some in better shape than others? Of course, but there is no such thing as a pristine reef anymore. People who say reefs are thriving are those that did not see them 20 years ago.

 

[doctorgori]

...to get back on topic I think the OP wanted to enlighten us as to the state of the worlds reefs...

to the mods and anyone else, I don't think the scope of this issue can be solved at the "consumer level" regardless of what our political/moral/scientific beliefs are...(almost)

unfortunatley many things have to have a dollar value attached to garner any protection or conservation whatsoever....

should gasoline hit 5-6 bucks/gal...

I'm not so sure a consumer based tropical fish demand or snorkeling or tourism will counterbalance other economic geo-political forces (like big oil, or carbon emmission) to have any impact on saving the reefs....

sure its a slight taboo mention of politics, but thats a reality ....
This could be a case that we are simply given the news (of a potential negative ecological change) but can't truly comment in any meaningful fashion w/o the discussion degrading into a political back-n-forth

 

[Luiz Rocha]

I agree with the above. The impact of the aquarium trade is orders of magnitude smaller than that of pollution, mining, oil exploration, global warming (man made and/or natural) and ocean acidification.

 

[NatureNerd]

The marine biologists tell you that the reefs are dying for two reasons. One being that they are working on limited budgets and simply cant afford the logistics of taking an entire scientific expedition to the more remote .... The second reason is that if they tell us all that the reefs are healthy, they'll all be out of work. Writing papers about dying reefs, global warming...

Actually, most have worked the more remote locations primarily. They do note the reefs closest to human populations are suffering but from a different cause. These areas are not used to study climate effects.

Another assumption you made is not quite true. It would be a very important paper that showed that the reefs are not being damaged. The researcher/author would see "fame" in the scientific community if they could make a strong case that is contrary to other's findings. That is one of the ways science works. Proving existing thought is not quite correct is a good way to get key publications and make tenure. They are motivated to find knowledge not jump on a bandwagon.

 

[RichConley]

I agree there is climate change, but I think attributing 100% of the current change to people is silly and in a way egotistic..

Could you please post one scientific piece of literature that attributes 100% of climate change to humans?



We need a strawman smilie.

 

[ackee]

Attributing 100% of any phenomenon to a single cause is seldom scientific. I know of no scientific theory or theorist that makes such claims in connection with global warming. It would be comparable to attributing 100% of obesity problems to overeating. Claiming that some scientists describe global warming as 100% caused by global warming is a classic case of creating a straw man as a means of ignoring what is actually being described and documented.

 

[Opcn]

attributing 100% of any phenomenon to a single cause is seldom scientific. I know of no scientific theory or theorist that makes such claims in connection with global warming. It would be comparable to attributing 100% of obesity problems to overeating. Claiming that some scientists describe global warming as 100% caused by global warming is a classic case of creating a straw man as a means of ignoring what is actually being described and documented.

+1

 

[Luiz Rocha]

Attributing 100% of any phenomenon to a single cause is seldom scientific. I know of no scientific theory or theorist that makes such claims in connection with global warming. It would be comparable to attributing 100% of obesity problems to overeating. Claiming that some scientists describe global warming as 100% caused by humans is a classic case of creating a straw man as a means of ignoring what is actually being described and documented.

+2 (edited for clarity)

 

[ackee]

Thank you Luiz. The heat around here is getting to me. Your edit reflects my intention.

 

[jamgar]

ummm...obesity IS 100% caused by overeating

 

[jamgar]

ummm...obesity IS 100% caused by overeating