[Coral-List] Reef scientists benefit from global change?

David M. Lawrence dave at fuzzo.com
Thu May 5 14:57:36 EDT 2016

Note the source of the article Gene forwarded -- the Institute on 
Religion and Public Life. According to its about page 

"The Institute was founded in 1990 by Richard John Neuhaus and his 
colleagues to confront the ideology of secularism, which insists that 
the public square must be 'naked,' and that faith has no place in 
shaping the public conversation or in shaping public policy. ..."

Seems to me the source has an axe to grind.



On 5/5/2016 2:38 AM, Douglas Fenner wrote:
>          Yes, Gene, coral reef researchers and managers benefit from climate
> change, global warming, and ocean acidification.  They also benefit from
> sediment runoff, nutrient runoff, overfishing, diseases, and a long list of
> other things that damage reefs.  Also, doctors benefit from diseases, as do
> public health workers.  Defense industries and the military benefit from
> war and the threat of war.  Police benefit from crime.  Firefighters
> benefit from fires.  Environmental Protection Agency workers benefit from
> toxic chemicals, as do the chemists who invent the chemicals and the
> companies that produce them.  Geologists benefit from oil, minerals, etc.,
> as do the companies that pump or mine them and sell them and cleanup
> workers benefit from oil spills, toxic mine wastes and the like.
>            If you believe what the article says about the unreliability of
> science, you'd better not trust your life to fly on an airplane or drive a
> car, better not go to a doctor when you get sick (better to go to a faith
> healer!), better not take any antibiotics or get any immunizations, better
> not eat any food grown with fertilizers or depend on a military that uses
> science, or anything else based on science.  Why are you using a computer?
> If you use the products of science like these and trust your life to them,
> does that indicate you really believe what the article claims about science?
>           If you really believed what the article says, why did you spend
> your life doing science?  Your findings can't be replicated?  Did you waste
> your life?  Is that what you're saying?  If so, I don't believe it, and I
> rather doubt you do either.
>          I notice that the author bases a lot of his arguments on scientific
> studies of rates of replication, scientific fraud, etc.  I note that these
> were all done by scientists, and appear to be part of an effort by some
> scientists to correct science, yet the author dismisses the ability of
> science to self-correct.  I wonder if many readers realize that if the
> author is correct, those studies have a high probability of being wrong??
> He seems to accept studies he likes yet say that all the other studies have
> a high probability of being wrong because of the studies he likes, and
> doesn't mention that the studies he likes could be wrong.  Seems a bit
> selective to me.
>          I'm sure all those who don't like particular findings of science
> will find this article comforting.  Like those who don't like
> immunizations, and those who like the long list of pseudosciences, those
> who love crystals, pyramid powers, creation science, various superstitions
> and urban myths and that humans causing climate change is a hoax, evolution
> is all wrong, the sun revolves around the earth, the earth is flat, and a
> myriad of other things.  Many other political websites are suddenly
> referring to this article, it seems to fills a need to confirm those
> beliefs.  I note that the web site that published this article is a
> religious web site.  Good place to get your science?  This article does
> raise real issues, but it appears to be an artful exercise in
> cherry-picking negative examples, and a good example of propaganda which
> will be lauded by those who don't like some of the findings of science.
>           Cheers,  Doug
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Eugene Shinn<eugeneshinn at mail.usf.edu>
> wrote:
>> Of Course reef scientists benefit from global change...as do many
>> others. The following website article explains a lot about science,
>> bandwagons, tenure, funding and paradigms. I could not find anything in
>> this article that I have not seen first hand within universities and
>> government agencies.  Reef scientists are likely little different from
>> all the other science tribes. Gene
>> http://www.firstthings.com/article/2016/05/scientific-regress
>> --
>> No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS)
>> ------------------------------------ -----------------------------------
>> E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor
>> University of South Florida
>> College of Marine Science Room 221A
>> 140 Seventh Avenue South
>> St. Petersburg, FL 33701
>> <eugeneshinn at mail.usf.edu>
>> Tel 727 553-1158
>> ---------------------------------- -----------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Coral-List mailing list
>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list

  David M. Lawrence        | Home:  (804) 559-9786
  6467 Hanna Drive         | Cell:  (804) 305-5234
  Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email:dave at fuzzo.com
  USA                      | http:http://fuzzo.com

"All drains lead to the ocean."  -- Gill, Finding Nemo

"We have met the enemy and he is us."  -- Pogo

"No trespassing
  4/17 of a haiku"  --  Richard Brautigan

More information about the Coral-List mailing list