[Coral-List] Coral-List Digest, Vol 14, Issue 24; RE: Lionfish has arrived on Curacao, Netherlands Antilles
Lauren Saulino
l.saulino at gmail.com
Thu Oct 29 20:36:05 EDT 2009
Lionfish have now also arrived in Bonaire, NA. This past week Marine Park
manager Ramon de Leon responded to two sitings of juvenile lionfish at the
dive sites Nukove and Something Special. While at least one of these
reported fish was successfully located and removed from the protected waters
of Bonaire's marine park it is disconcerting to know that these fish have
managed to swim against the currents (literally) and reach this
southern Caribbean island.
~Lauren Saulino
CIEE (Council for International Educational Exchange) - Bonaire
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 2:20 PM, <coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>wrote:
> Send Coral-List mailing list submissions to
> coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Coral-List digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Lionfish has arrived on Curacao, Netherlands Antilles
> (Mark J A Vermeij)
> 2. Public perceptions about climate change (Eugene Shinn)
> 3. Re: Public perceptions about climate change (John Bruno)
> 4. Re: Public perceptions about climate change (Curtis Kruer)
> 5. Re: Public perceptions about climate change (John Bruno)
> 6. THE FROG AND GRANDMA'S FRYING PAN RE: Public perceptions
> about climate change (Sarah Frias-Torres)
> 7. Re: Public perceptions about climate change (Michael Risk)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:51:22 +0100
> From: Mark J A Vermeij <vermeij at hawaii.edu>
> Subject: [Coral-List] Lionfish has arrived on Curacao, Netherlands
> Antilles
> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> Message-ID: <fc32e19835f76.4ae892aa at hawaii.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Dear All
>
> Divers at Ocean Encounters West, a diveschool at the western tip of
> Curacao, found a lionfish at Watamula a nearby divesite. The animal was
> captured later that day. Another one was supposedly observed at East Point
> (which the complete opposite side of the island) 2 weeks ago but there
> wasn't (in contrast to the aforementioned one) a photo or any other official
> documentation of that individual.
>
> Best regards
>
> Mark
>
> __________________________________
> Dr. M.J.A. Vermeij
> Science Director
> Carmabi Foundation
> Piscaderabaai z/n
> Cura?ao, Netherlands Antilles
> Phone: +5999-5103067 NEW NUMBER
> Email: m.vermeij at carmabi.org
> Skype: markvermeij
> Web:http://www.researchstationcarmabi.org/
>
> Department of Botany
> University of Hawaii at Manoa
> email: vermeij at hawaii.edu
> http://www.botany.hawaii.edu/
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:45:02 -0400
> From: Eugene Shinn <eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
> Subject: [Coral-List] Public perceptions about climate change
> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> Message-ID: <a06230908c70e21f8e2b4@[131.247.137.127]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>
> John ,That is a great post! Thanks for making me (and listers) aware
> of the Co2science website. I was especially impressed with
> http://www.co2science.org/articles/V12/N21/EDIT.php. Amazing example
> of how the published results of our well respected coral scientists
> can support an alternative interpretation of the effects of co2 on
> corals. Keith and Idso wrote a very scholarly piece and came up with
> a very different perception. Gene
> --
>
>
> No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS)
> ------------------------------------ -----------------------------------
> E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor
> University of South Florida
> Marine Science Center (room 204)
> 140 Seventh Avenue South
> St. Petersburg, FL 33701
> <eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
> Tel 727 553-1158----------------------------------
> -----------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 10:14:06 -0400
> From: John Bruno <jbruno at unc.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Public perceptions about climate change
> To: Melanie McField <mcfield at healthyreefs.org>
> Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> Message-ID: <6F9A6A01-34F7-4487-A47C-B4EEB388B957 at unc.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed;
> delsp=yes
>
> Mel, I dont think your post went through.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Dear John (and coral listers)
> >
> > I agree that we as reef scientists need to do more to raise
> > awareness of the GCC impacts on reefs and possibly need to consider
> > some more flamboyant approaches ('just the facts" seems to putting
> > everyone to sleep).
> >
> > Maybe as a small start, we could all agree to have one coordinated
> > day for a "Reef Speaks" synoptic bombardment of the airwaves and
> > print media by reef scientists speaking out on behalf of the reefs
> > they have studied for decades. It would certainly raise eyebrows for
> > the media to see scientists acting in such harmony. We could arrange
> > the date to give maximum impact for the COP15 in Copenhagen.
> >
> > Regarding your question about ISRS and Copenhagen - the Society
> > doesn't have funds to send representatives. I am attending as part
> > of the Belize delegation and offered to try to coordinate reef-
> > focused efforts. All ideas are welcome - lack of time and manpower
> > to implement the ideas are the main constraints at this point.
> >
> > Regarding the ISRS website, three of the position papers (coral
> > bleaching, ocean acidification and coral disease) directly relate to
> > climate change and have been shared actively with journalists. Also.
> > the number one item on our "Call to Action" resulting from the ICRS
> > in Ft Lauderdale is to reduce CO2 emissions (see below).
> >
> > We have a real - but rapidly narrowing - window of opportunity in
> > which to take decisive action. We must immediately
> >
> > Cut CO2 emissions by lowering our carbon footprint and ask our
> > policymakers to commit to low carbon economic growth.
> > ISRS is a professional society and not an advocacy organization and
> > there is value to maintaining this niche (since there are actually
> > fewer such societies of scientists than conservation / advocacy
> > groups). However, we do want to be active participants in this
> > global climate change discussion and make sure the threats to reefs
> > are widely disseminated and understood. ISRS has taken a number of
> > recent steps in this regard, including Rich's signing of the Royal
> > Society Statement on the Coral Reef Crisis on the society's behalf.
> > I'm sure Rich will have further thoughts on these important points.
> >
> > As one who lives 'on the fence' between science and advocacy, I can
> > say it is a precarious position, but one we as a society (ISRS) are
> > trying to carefully navigate. I look forward to your continued input
> > - and maybe your assistance in organizing the "Reef Speaks" day if
> > others think it's worthwhile and feasible. <332.gif>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Melanie
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 4:31 PM, John Bruno <jbruno at unc.edu> wrote:
> > As Steve Mussman posted about a few days ago, nearly 20% fewer
> > Americans belive in AGW than just three years ago. I think there are
> > complex social issues than underlie this trend, but I also think this
> > is happening because people are being misinformed by the media, even
> > by otherwise reliable outlets like the New York Times and the
> > Washington Post.
> >
> > Not to suggest that this will be the last word on this, but the AP
> > released an article today for which they hired four independent
> > statisticians to analyze (blindly) the 130 instrument temperature
> > record and the 30 year satellite record. The statisticians were asked
> > to look for trends over time. Did they find any recent cooling? No.
> > They found, like NOAA, NASA and the MET, that the earth has continued
> > to warm over the last decade. No cooling. No plateau.
> >
> > You can read the AP story here: http://www.climateshifts.org/?p=3350
> >
> > But there are already many recent newspaper stories, published peer-
> > review papers and easily accessible online articles debunking the
> > recent "global cooling" and "warming pause" myths, e.g.:
> >
> > http://www.climateshifts.org/?p=3261
> >
> >
> http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/10/a-warming-pause/#more-1265
> >
> > http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2009/08/warmest-by-fair-margin/
> >
> > So why are we loosing the public? They clearly are not being convinced
> > by evidence. There isn't any in support of the cooling/pause
> > arguments. I suspect that it is (in part) because the media is
> > saturated with skepticism about AGW. Fox News commentators and New
> > York Times science writers are spreading the myths there is a recent
> > cooling or a plateau in warming. George Will, who is read by tens of
> > millions of Americans, wrote yet another op-ed in the Washington Post
> > a few weeks ago arguing the earth wasn't warming. I responded with an
> > op-ed in the local Raleigh News and Observer (which you can read
> > here:
> http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/columnists_blogs/story/134115.html
> > ) but I doubt I changed many minds. And the editor cut the most
> > direct criticism of the complacency of the media in this in general
> > and of newspaper editors in particular:
> >
> > "Given the clarity and relative certainty of the science and the scale
> > of the potential social and economic impacts, why do newspapers
> > publish articles denying climate change is happening? Social
> > commentators like George Will certainly have freedom of speech and a
> > general license to express their opinions on the editorial page. But
> > would newspaper editors publish essays denying other major threats to
> > humanity? Imagine an editorial arguing that cancer, poverty, HIV-AIDS
> > or genocide don?t exist and are merely the product of a well-
> > orchestrated scientific hoax"
> >
> > I don't know what the solution is. Grassroots education is important,
> > but I sense we are getting drowned out by skeptics and even
> > misinformed science writers with much large megaphones than any of
> > us. I have written every journalist I have seen publish an inaccurate
> > piece about climate change and many of their editors and not one has
> > responded. Perhaps we need to employ the weight of our major society,
> > the ISRS. The word "climate" does not even appear on the ISRS
> > website (http://research2.fit.edu/isrs/). I know we have position
> > papers on various threats to reefs posted, but perhaps we could be
> > more proactive and begin writing journalists and columnists (and
> > their editors) when they get it wrong. The Ecological Society of
> > America has been very active in such correspondence (
> http://www.esa.org/pao/policy_positions.php#letters
> > ) as has the AGU and many other major environmental sciences
> > societies. And back in February, when George Will wrote another silly
> > article about global cooling, a number of NGO heads co-wrote a letter
> > to the publisher and editor of the WaPost. Note I don't in anyway
> > mean this as a criticism of ISRS or of any of its officers. I am just
> > throwing out a few ideas. I don't think we have done this sort of
> > thing with the society in the past and we likely lack the resources to
> > do it on a large scale. BTW, is the ISRS sending representatives to
> > Copenhagen?
> >
> > JB
> >
> >
> > John F. Bruno, Ph.D.
> > Associate Professor
> > Department of Marine Science
> > The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
> > Chapel Hill, NC 27599-330
> > jbruno at unc.edu
> > www.brunolab.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coral-List mailing list
> > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Melanie McField
> > Coordinator, Healthy Reefs for Healthy People Initiative
> > Smithsonian Institution
> > 1061 Queen Helmut St, Belize City, Belize, Central America
> > tel 501-223-7680 fax 501-223-7681
> > email: mcfield at healthyreefs.org or mcfieldm at si.edu
> > www.healthyreefs.org
> > www.mnh.si.edu
> >
> > Join the International Society for Reef Studies
> > www.fit.edu/isrs/
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 08:36:17 -0600
> From: "Curtis Kruer" <kruer at 3rivers.net>
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Public perceptions about climate change
> To: "'John Bruno'" <jbruno at unc.edu>, <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>,
> "'Melanie McField'" <mcfield at healthyreefs.org>
> Cc: "'Richard B. Aronson'" <raronson at fit.edu>
> Message-ID: <00cc01ca57dc$02602f00$07208d00$@net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> John - Seems it's going to be a long hard fall from that big high pedestal
> that scientists, researchers, and academic types have placed themselves on
> in recent years. Instead of embracing advocates and conservationists,
> sharing funding, and working together to solve resource problems of mutual
> concern, the disdain from "above" has been obvious and a huge roadblock to
> reacting quickly to major issues. And this disdain will now be a roadblock
> to pushing government to implement new and aggressive site-specific
> management initiatives to take up the slack during this critical period
> when
> new stressors and impacts are overwhelming natural systems.
>
> Good luck.
>
> Curtis?Kruer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of John Bruno
> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 5:18 AM
> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; Melanie McField
> Cc: Richard B. Aronson
> Subject: [Coral-List] Public perceptions about climate change
>
> Thank you Mel. I really like your ideas about communicating threats
> to reefs.
>
> But I think the ISRS may in fact be precisely an advocacy
> organization. The first objective of the ISRS constitution is:
> "Promoting the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge
> and understanding of coral reefs", i.e., the purpose of the society is
> to advocate for (as in disseminate) our science. There is no
> professional, ethical or practical reason to be shy about
> communicating our science, what we know about coral reefs, to the
> public. And I think this includes direct communications to
> individuals and other organizations that get the facts about coral
> reefs and climate change wrong.
>
> We cannot rely on environmental advocacy NGOs to communicate the
> science of coral reefs, particularly at high administrative levels and
> in the international media because in most cases they lack the
> scientific credibility and expertise.
>
> ---
>
> "As one who lives 'on the fence' between science and advocacy, I can
> say it is a precarious position, but one we as a society (ISRS) are
> trying to carefully navigate."
>
> What environmental scientist doesn't live "on the fence" between
> science and advocacy? Or maybe more accurately; does such a fence or
> delineation even exist? Communicating what we know about our subject
> is part of the job of any scientist, not an optional side-project.
> Communicating the results of ones findings is a fundamental component
> of science (or as my friend Sal Genovese likes to say, "if you don't
> publish it, it isn't science"). Personally, I don't find explaining
> science, i.e., educating people, at all precarious. Even as an
> academic scientists this, i.e., advocacy, is literally part of my job
> description.
>
> Don Strong, the renowned ecologist and editor of Ecology, recently
> published an essay on the role of scientists and scientific societies
> in environmental advocacy or "environmentalism" (Strong 2008-email me
> if you want a PDF of this):
>
> "Whereas ecology is science and environmentalism sometimes is and
> sometimes isn't, the latter is necessary for the former. We ecologists
> have the same relationship to the subject of our studies as do art
> historians and archeologists to theirs. There is no opprobrium upon
> artists and archeologists advocating for the preservation of art and
> antiquities. Protection of the environment ? environmentalism ? is
> advocacy of what we study. Why should we not advocate for protection
> of the environment in our professional capacity?...The negative
> branding of environmentalism comes from groups that are part and
> parcel of the notorious war on science. They are dedicated to denying
> the environmental degradation that ecologists are documenting every
> day. Some of the most prominent of these groups are discussed by
> Jaques et al. in a review entitled, The organization of denial:
> conservative think tanks and environmental skepticism (Environ Pol
> 2008; 17: 349?85). The authors document the concerted anti-
> environmentalism and complete disregard of these groups for anything
> connected with the environment. Jaques et al. describe the substantial
> financial backing, broad reach, and scores of authors that have been
> encouraged to spread disinformation regarding scientific findings ?
> particularly about global warming ? by conservative think tanks. The
> authors argue that these powerful entities seek to interfere with the
> scientific communication that is the basis of society's understanding
> of environmental issues."
>
> Donald R Strong (2008) Ecologists and environmentalism. Frontiers in
> Ecology and the Environment: Vol. 6, No. 7, pp. 347-347.
> doi: 10.1890/1540-9295(2008)6[347:EAE]2.0.CO <http://2.0.co/>;2
>
> In regard to our media outreach concurrent with the 2008 ICRS, I
> agree; with the help of SeaWed and others the society did a splendid
> job. But that was nearly 18 months ago. This debate is moving too
> fast for us to only jump in every four years.
>
> I guess what I am thinking about is a more focused effort on the major
> sources of disinformation; print media, cable news, talk radio, etc.
> relating specifically to climate change. The weakness of some of the
> outreach efforts during the last international Year Of The Reef and
> the last ICRS was that far too many problems were being communicated
> simultaneously. I realize there are countless threats to reefs. But
> most of these are not being contested in a coordinated way. We are
> not hearing widespread denial about overfishing, coastal development,
> nutrient pollution, etc in the media in the way that the public is
> being misinformed about climate change when they are told it isn't
> happening. In fact, some big oil-funded think tanks such as
> CO2Science are making the case that reef loss and even bleaching are
> caused solely by runoff/water quality
> (http://www.co2science.org/subject/c/bleachinggeneral.php
> ), disease (http://www.co2science.org/subject/c/bleachingdisease.php),
> etc and not by temperature per se
> (http://www.co2science.org/subject/c/bleachingtemp.php
> ). And see their screeds against the science of coral reefs and
> climate change here:
> http://www.co2science.org/subject/c/calcification.php
>
>
> Again, to be clear, I am not criticizing the ISRS or its officers-I
> think both are wonderful! Nor am I suggesting we/it aren't doing
> anything. So there isn't cause for anyone to get defense about this.
> I am only suggesting some additional actions we, or more precisely the
> Society or at least it's elected officials, might take on our behalf.
>
> Sincerely, John
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:07:22 -0400
> From: John Bruno <jbruno at unc.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Public perceptions about climate change
> To: Curtis Kruer <kruer at 3rivers.net>
> Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> Message-ID: <5C1471E9-AC72-4A83-8D2B-543D854C47AA at unc.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed;
> delsp=yes
>
> Curtis, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. You
> clearly have some pent up distain for scientists.
>
> I frequently see and hear such general loathing of science and
> scientists from skeptics and the public in general. More evidence of
> the success of the well-documeted "Republican war on science".
>
> I don't see any pedestals from where I am sitting (in a grungy coffee
> shop). Cross-collaboration, fund-sharing and mutual respect and
> bidirectional information flow are the norm in coral reef science, at
> least in my experience. Perhaps you didn't attend the last ICRS, but
> all that and much more was beyond obvious. I, just for example, just
> co-wrote a proposal to do very applied reef fisheries ecology with Mel
> (and we are collaborating on a variety of MPA-related projects in
> Belize), co-authored a paper with two colleagues from TNC, another
> with colleagues at NOAA and AIMS, and just submitted another proposal
> spearheaded by WCS. I can barely keep tract of all my NGO, federal
> agency and academic collaborators around the world. Maybe this isn't
> the way things always were in the field, but now, we are in large
> part, working in a pretty coordinated way.
>
> Even if you were right, I don't see how the recently documented shift
> in public opinion about AGW could be attributable to a failure to
> "share funding" (as if there is so much sloshing around...), work
> together, etc.
>
> JB
>
> > John - Seems it's going to be a long hard fall from that big high
> > pedestal
> > that scientists, researchers, and academic types have placed
> > themselves on
> > in recent years. Instead of embracing advocates and conservationists,
> > sharing funding, and working together to solve resource problems of
> > mutual
> > concern, the disdain from "above" has been obvious and a huge
> > roadblock to
> > reacting quickly to major issues. And this disdain will now be a
> > roadblock
> > to pushing government to implement new and aggressive site-specific
> > management initiatives to take up the slack during this critical
> > period when
> > new stressors and impacts are overwhelming natural systems.
> >
> > Good luck.
> >
> > Curtis Kruer
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of John
> > Bruno
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 5:18 AM
> > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; Melanie McField
> > Cc: Richard B. Aronson
> > Subject: [Coral-List] Public perceptions about climate change
> >
> > Thank you Mel. I really like your ideas about communicating threats
> > to reefs.
> >
> > But I think the ISRS may in fact be precisely an advocacy
> > organization. The first objective of the ISRS constitution is:
> > "Promoting the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge
> > and understanding of coral reefs", i.e., the purpose of the society is
> > to advocate for (as in disseminate) our science. There is no
> > professional, ethical or practical reason to be shy about
> > communicating our science, what we know about coral reefs, to the
> > public. And I think this includes direct communications to
> > individuals and other organizations that get the facts about coral
> > reefs and climate change wrong.
> >
> > We cannot rely on environmental advocacy NGOs to communicate the
> > science of coral reefs, particularly at high administrative levels and
> > in the international media because in most cases they lack the
> > scientific credibility and expertise.
> >
> > ---
> >
> > "As one who lives 'on the fence' between science and advocacy, I can
> > say it is a precarious position, but one we as a society (ISRS) are
> > trying to carefully navigate."
> >
> > What environmental scientist doesn't live "on the fence" between
> > science and advocacy? Or maybe more accurately; does such a fence or
> > delineation even exist? Communicating what we know about our subject
> > is part of the job of any scientist, not an optional side-project.
> > Communicating the results of ones findings is a fundamental component
> > of science (or as my friend Sal Genovese likes to say, "if you don't
> > publish it, it isn't science"). Personally, I don't find explaining
> > science, i.e., educating people, at all precarious. Even as an
> > academic scientists this, i.e., advocacy, is literally part of my job
> > description.
> >
> > Don Strong, the renowned ecologist and editor of Ecology, recently
> > published an essay on the role of scientists and scientific societies
> > in environmental advocacy or "environmentalism" (Strong 2008-email me
> > if you want a PDF of this):
> >
> > "Whereas ecology is science and environmentalism sometimes is and
> > sometimes isn't, the latter is necessary for the former. We ecologists
> > have the same relationship to the subject of our studies as do art
> > historians and archeologists to theirs. There is no opprobrium upon
> > artists and archeologists advocating for the preservation of art and
> > antiquities. Protection of the environment ? environmentalism ? is
> > advocacy of what we study. Why should we not advocate for protection
> > of the environment in our professional capacity?...The negative
> > branding of environmentalism comes from groups that are part and
> > parcel of the notorious war on science. They are dedicated to denying
> > the environmental degradation that ecologists are documenting every
> > day. Some of the most prominent of these groups are discussed by
> > Jaques et al. in a review entitled, The organization of denial:
> > conservative think tanks and environmental skepticism (Environ Pol
> > 2008; 17: 349?85). The authors document the concerted anti-
> > environmentalism and complete disregard of these groups for anything
> > connected with the environment. Jaques et al. describe the substantial
> > financial backing, broad reach, and scores of authors that have been
> > encouraged to spread disinformation regarding scientific findings ?
> > particularly about global warming ? by conservative think tanks. The
> > authors argue that these powerful entities seek to interfere with the
> > scientific communication that is the basis of society's understanding
> > of environmental issues."
> >
> > Donald R Strong (2008) Ecologists and environmentalism. Frontiers in
> > Ecology and the Environment: Vol. 6, No. 7, pp. 347-347.
> > doi: 10.1890/1540-9295(2008)6[347:EAE]2.0.CO <http://2.0.co/>;2
> >
> > In regard to our media outreach concurrent with the 2008 ICRS, I
> > agree; with the help of SeaWed and others the society did a splendid
> > job. But that was nearly 18 months ago. This debate is moving too
> > fast for us to only jump in every four years.
> >
> > I guess what I am thinking about is a more focused effort on the major
> > sources of disinformation; print media, cable news, talk radio, etc.
> > relating specifically to climate change. The weakness of some of the
> > outreach efforts during the last international Year Of The Reef and
> > the last ICRS was that far too many problems were being communicated
> > simultaneously. I realize there are countless threats to reefs. But
> > most of these are not being contested in a coordinated way. We are
> > not hearing widespread denial about overfishing, coastal development,
> > nutrient pollution, etc in the media in the way that the public is
> > being misinformed about climate change when they are told it isn't
> > happening. In fact, some big oil-funded think tanks such as
> > CO2Science are making the case that reef loss and even bleaching are
> > caused solely by runoff/water quality
> > (http://www.co2science.org/subject/c/bleachinggeneral.php
> > ), disease (http://www.co2science.org/subject/c/bleachingdisease.php),
> > etc and not by temperature per se
> > (http://www.co2science.org/subject/c/bleachingtemp.php
> > ). And see their screeds against the science of coral reefs and
> > climate change here:
> http://www.co2science.org/subject/c/calcification.php
> >
> >
> > Again, to be clear, I am not criticizing the ISRS or its officers-I
> > think both are wonderful! Nor am I suggesting we/it aren't doing
> > anything. So there isn't cause for anyone to get defense about this.
> > I am only suggesting some additional actions we, or more precisely the
> > Society or at least it's elected officials, might take on our behalf.
> >
> > Sincerely, John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coral-List mailing list
> > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:31:45 -0400
> From: Sarah Frias-Torres <sfrias_torres at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [Coral-List] THE FROG AND GRANDMA'S FRYING PAN RE: Public
> perceptions about climate change
> To: Alina Szmant <szmanta at uncw.edu>, coral list
> <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
> Message-ID: <BAY143-W24072228F66BA72E8FE38D81B80 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> Dear Coral-Listers,there are more scientists alive today doing research,
> than the sum of all scientists that have ever lived in this planet.
> Imagine the power we could have if each and everyone of us speaks, as
> scientists, about global climate change. And we talk to EVERY PERSON we meet
> in our daily lives, regardless of what college degrees they have.
> What a formidable force!
> Yet, in the most life-changing event of the combined history of our
> species, we, the scientists, fail.
> It is obvious that we are not doing enough. That the ivory tower does not
> work. I have commented on this issue in past Coral-list posting, and will
> not insist again at this point.
> And now that I have ruffled some feathers, here is a little story I posted
> in Ecolog-List, I would like to share with you.
> >From my post in Ecolog-L
> Our species is ill-prepared for radical environmental change, and we prefer
> to believe that nothing will ever change in our lives: we will always remain
> young, our partner will love us forever, and of course, there will be no
> global climate change. Even when evidence is strong (wrinkles, cheating, and
> yes... the ice is melting), we want to believe otherwise.Compounding to
> these facts of life, we face the virulent disease of shortening headlines in
> the media. So, in an effort to dumb-down the suspected complexities of
> science, words are cut, and simplifications are made. We arrive to
> aberrations such as "man descent from monkeys", when in fact the correct but
> word hungry statement is "humans and apes share common ancestry".
> Anthropogenic (=human-caused) global climate change manifests in (mostly)
> non linear, diverse processes. Meaning, we are slow to see the changes, the
> changes are many and apparently not connected, and once the change occurs,
> it is massive and catastrophic. Heating up the oceans takes time....To
> illustrate, I like to use the fable of the frog in grandma's frying pan.
> This fable is common in Hispanic culture, and I'm sure it comes from
> somewhere else. It was well illustrated in Al Gore's 'An Inconvenient Truth"
> documentary. And I re-visit the fable here, with a slight
> modification.Consider a frog, inside grandma's frying pan. The pan is full
> of cold water and the frog is rather happy. Grandma has a PhD in
> Oceanography, and she decided to conduct an experiment to evaluate the
> effect of water's specific heat capacity in biological systems. To secure
> funding for her experiments, she wisely chose a rather simple title for her
> (now awarded) grant proposal: "How to boil a frog". In h
> er hypothesis section, she explains that due to the heat capacity of
> water, frog boiling can be accomplished with minimal stress (for the frog
> that is), by immersing the frog in cold water, and slowly reaching the
> target of 100 C. As the experiment develops, the frog thinks it's getting
> warmer, but keeps thinking it can never get too warm, because maximum
> warming to the point of life-threatening status has never occurred in all
> her frog-years. Unlike Al Gore's film, no helpful hand rescues the frog. To
> her horror, and just before the water breaks into a boil, the unfortunate
> amphibian discovers only too late, how fast things change in a non-linear
> system.We are all frogs in a warming pan. Will someone please listen and put
> down the fire?Sarah Frias-Torres, Ph.D.
> http://independent.academia.edu/SarahFriasTorres
>
>
> > From: szmanta at uncw.edu
> > To: jbruno at unc.edu; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 07:48:16 -0400
> > CC: raronson at fit.edu
> > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Public perceptions about climate change
> >
> > One more comment: if our newspapers, TV and people in general spent 1/2
> the space and/or time on science articles and study as they do on sports, we
> would be a different society...
> >
> >
> >
> > **********************************************
> > Dr. Alina M. Szmant
> > Professor of Marine Biology
> > Coral Reef Research Program, Center for Marine Science
> > University of North Carolina Wilmington
> > 5600 Marvin K. Moss Lane
> > Wilmington NC 28409
> > Tel: (910)962-2362; fax: (910)962-2410; cell: (910)200-3913
> > http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
> > **********************************************
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 10:23:34 -0400
> From: "Michael Risk" <riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca>
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Public perceptions about climate change
> To: "Szmant, Alina" <szmanta at uncw.edu>, John Bruno <jbruno at unc.edu>,
> "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <
> coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
> Cc: "Richard B. Aronson" <raronson at fit.edu>
> Message-ID: <web-275303537 at cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Good morning, all.
>
> Alina is probably right, there is no hope. If the most technologically
> advanced nation in the world cannot preserve its own coral reefs, what
> hope is there for those Third World nations that house most of the
> remainder? May I suggest Richard Wright's "What is America" for an
> overview that will reinforce Alina's depressing prediction.
>
> In Walt Jaap's immortal words, coral reefs are the canaries of the
> sea-but we must always bear in mind that the canary's greatest value to
> the human race came upon its death.
>
> We have room for some of you in Saskatchewan, but you would have to
> behave.
>
> Mike
>
> On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 07:48:16 -0400
> "Szmant, Alina" <szmanta at uncw.edu> wrote:
> > One more comment: if our newspapers, TV and people in general spent
> > 1/2 the space and/or time on science articles and study as they do on
> > sports, we would be a different society...
> >
> >
> >
> > **********************************************
> > Dr. Alina M. Szmant
> > Professor of Marine Biology
> > Coral Reef Research Program, Center for Marine Science
> > University of North Carolina Wilmington
> > 5600 Marvin K. Moss Lane
> > Wilmington NC 28409
> > Tel: (910)962-2362; fax: (910)962-2410; cell: (910)200-3913
> > http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
> > **********************************************
> > ________________________________________
> > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > [coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml..noaa.gov] On Behalf Of John Bruno
> > [jbruno at unc.edu]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 6:31 PM
> > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > Cc: Richard B. Aronson
> > Subject: [Coral-List] Public perceptions about climate change
> >
> > As Steve Mussman posted about a few days ago, nearly 20% fewer
> > Americans belive in AGW than just three years ago. I think there are
> > complex social issues than underlie this trend, but I also think this
> > is happening because people are being misinformed by the media, even
> > by otherwise reliable outlets like the New York Times and the
> > Washington Post.
> >
> > Not to suggest that this will be the last word on this, but the AP
> > released an article today for which they hired four independent
> > statisticians to analyze (blindly) the 130 instrument temperature
> > record and the 30 year satellite record. The statisticians were
> > asked
> > to look for trends over time. Did they find any recent cooling? No.
> > They found, like NOAA, NASA and the MET, that the earth has continued
> > to warm over the last decade. No cooling. No plateau.
> >
> > You can read the AP story here: http://www.climateshifts.org/?p=3350
> >
> > But there are already many recent newspaper stories, published peer-
> > review papers and easily accessible online articles debunking the
> > recent "global cooling" and "warming pause" myths, e.g.:
> >
> > http://www.climateshifts.org/?p=3261
> >
> >
>
> http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/10/a-warming-pause/#more-1265
> >
> > http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2009/08/warmest-by-fair-margin/
> >
> > So why are we loosing the public? They clearly are not being
> > convinced
> > by evidence. There isn't any in support of the cooling/pause
> > arguments. I suspect that it is (in part) because the media is
> > saturated with skepticism about AGW. Fox News commentators and New
> > York Times science writers are spreading the myths there is a recent
> > cooling or a plateau in warming. George Will, who is read by tens of
> > millions of Americans, wrote yet another op-ed in the Washington Post
> > a few weeks ago arguing the earth wasn't warming. I responded with
> > an
> > op-ed in the local Raleigh News and Observer (which you can read
> > here:
> >
> http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/columnists_blogs/story/134115.html
> > ) but I doubt I changed many minds. And the editor cut the most
> > direct criticism of the complacency of the media in this in general
> > and of newspaper editors in particular:
> >
> > "Given the clarity and relative certainty of the science and the
> > scale
> > of the potential social and economic impacts, why do newspapers
> > publish articles denying climate change is happening? Social
> > commentators like George Will certainly have freedom of speech and a
> > general license to express their opinions on the editorial page. But
> > would newspaper editors publish essays denying other major threats to
> > humanity? Imagine an editorial arguing that cancer, poverty, HIV-AIDS
> > or genocide don?t exist and are merely the product of a well-
> > orchestrated scientific hoax"
> >
> > I don't know what the solution is. Grassroots education is
> > important,
> > but I sense we are getting drowned out by skeptics and even
> > misinformed science writers with much large megaphones than any of
> > us. I have written every journalist I have seen publish an
> > inaccurate
> > piece about climate change and many of their editors and not one has
> > responded. Perhaps we need to employ the weight of our major
> > society,
> > the ISRS. The word "climate" does not even appear on the ISRS
> > website (http://research2.fit.edu/isrs/). I know we have position
> > papers on various threats to reefs posted, but perhaps we could be
> > more proactive and begin writing journalists and columnists (and
> > their editors) when they get it wrong. The Ecological Society of
> > America has been very active in such correspondence
> > (http://www.esa.org/pao/policy_positions.php#letters
> > ) as has the AGU and many other major environmental sciences
> > societies. And back in February, when George Will wrote another
> > silly
> > article about global cooling, a number of NGO heads co-wrote a letter
> > to the publisher and editor of the WaPost. Note I don't in anyway
> > mean this as a criticism of ISRS or of any of its officers. I am
> > just
> > throwing out a few ideas. I don't think we have done this sort of
> > thing with the society in the past and we likely lack the resources
> > to
> > do it on a large scale. BTW, is the ISRS sending representatives to
> > Copenhagen?
> >
> > JB
> >
> >
> > John F. Bruno, Ph.D.
> > Associate Professor
> > Department of Marine Science
> > The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
> > Chapel Hill, NC 27599-330
> > jbruno at unc.edu
> > www.brunolab.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coral-List mailing list
> > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coral-List mailing list
> > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
> Mike Risk
> Marine Ecologist
> PO Box 1195
> Durham Ontario
> N0G 1R0
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
> End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 14, Issue 24
> ******************************************
>
More information about the Coral-List
mailing list