Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Joshpantera

Searching for truth on the Coral Sea

Recommended Posts

@LogicalFallacy

 

This is one of my relatives from the Florida Keys. He took off to Aussie world years ago. Studying the reefs, discovering new species, etc., etc: 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/2/2020 at 6:03 PM, Joshpantera said:

@LogicalFallacy

 

This is one of my relatives from the Florida Keys. He took off to Aussie world years ago. Studying the reefs, discovering new species, etc., etc: 

 

 

 

The Coral Sea and its islands fall under the sovereignty of Australia. The Coral Sea covers one million square kilometers; roughly four times the size of Great Britain.

 

According to my readings the Coral Sea is unique among marine biology. Some marine biologists claim that coral reefs around the world are being destroyed many times faster than rain forests, and that coral reef marine life is disappearing at a rate of 90 percent in some areas. Although many have proposed such negative effects have been observed concerning the Coral Sea, according to Australia's chapter of the World Wildlife Federation and related studies, the Coral Sea has not fallen victim to pollution, invasive species,  marine traffic, or warmer ocean waters that is believed to be destroying coral reefs in other ocean areas.

 

Man's negative influences on the oceans in general have shown to be obvious in some areas, so any important unique part of marine biology such as the Coral Sea must be continuously monitored for such signs, especially concerning the possibility of local steps that might be taken to prevent, reduce, or possibly counteract such negative influences.

_____________________________________________________

 

In your seemingly unrelated comments below, you are discussing the theory of "Groupthink," the contents of which I've heard of, but not by its formal name Groupthink. IMO this theory is a fact that many would disagree with,  but one that has wasted countless billions of dollars and has set science back decades if not a century or more. Groupthink theory is:

 

" One of the most influential theories in the behavioral sciences in recent decades. Developed by the psychologist Irving Janis in the early 1970s, Groupthink theory describes how a tight-knit, smart and well-informed group can suppress dissent and make disastrous decisions because of the pressure to agree."

 

Also IMO the many faults of science related to the effects of Groupthink theory has kinship and similarity to religious pressures of conformity. These faults of theory are most obvious in modern physics, especially theory establishment of Special Relativity, General Relativity, Quantum mechanics, the Standard Model of Particle Physics, and Cosmology; all have been deeply entrenched in modern physics because of the faults of Groupthink. Although I think some of these theories in the future will likely show to have redeeming details, many or most of them will be greatly changed or replaced within a couple of decades by better theory IMO for reasons that will be obvious to many at that time.

 

Mathematics aside, one answer is the acknowledgement that all of these theories are filled with logical fallacies and/or non-nonsensical implications, therefore for all theories that lack logic, at least some research monies should be allocated toward more logical alternatives. The public hears little of alternative models but there are dozens, if not hundreds of them for most every mainstream theory in physics. My guess is that for such alternative theory research, funding is far less than .0001, one part in ten thousand. Many mainstream theories in the past were overturned by loan-wolf researchers that received little or no funding outside their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is this related to Science vs. Religion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2020 at 9:13 PM, Weezer said:

How is this related to Science vs. Religion?

 

If you are referring to postings and comments referring to "Searching for truth on the Coral Sea," the posting is simply a science posting, somewhat related to global warming. To listen to the original video link "Looking for Truth on the Coral Sea,"  click below in white.

 

If you were referring to comments regarding Groupthink theory, these were science comments in response to a link posted at the bottom of the opening post., unrelated to the Coral Sea link. Here is the link to that  https://evolutionnews.org/2011/08/when_a_consensus_-_on_science/ 

It now seems like the Coral Sea link has disappeared from  the opening post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/19/2020 at 12:13 AM, Weezer said:

How is this related to Science vs. Religion?

 

A lot of academic scientists are treating science more like religion and less like science, for one thing. My cousin is a marine biologist who's been very outspoken about it. Aside from that, this forum is where we post scientific articles of all variety. And carry on straight forward scientific discussion about climate, environmentalism and conservation, cosmology, physics, philosophy of science, etc., etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, pantheory said:

If you were referring to comments regarding Groupthink theory, these were science comments in response to a link posted at the bottom of the opening post., unrelated to the Coral Sea link. Here is the link to that  https://evolutionnews.org/2011/08/when_a_consensus_-_on_science/ 

It now seems like the Coral Sea link has disappeared from  the opening post.

 

The group think theory link is on my signature line. It's just an FYI type of link that I added to my signature for people to looking into if they choose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

The group think theory link is on my signature line. It's just an FYI type of link that I added to my signature for people to looking into if they choose. 

 

"A lot of academic scientists are treating science more like religion and less like science, for one thing."

 

Yeah, I agree. Unfortunately, like religion, if you are a scientist that disagrees with present beliefs in your science field, many will consider you an outsider. If employed they might tell you to work on another facet of that science. If self employed, it would be much more difficult for you to find grants and funding for your work. All relates to Groupthink theory.

 

Even the opinions expressed in your opening post would be considered wrong by many because it does not admonish humanity for pollution and global warming. 

 

RE: Groupthink link:  "It's just an FYI type of link that I added to my signature for people to looking into if they choose."

 

Great FYI link :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's disheartening to see attacks on science from intelligent, educated people. It helps to open the door to conspiracy theories (anti-vax, flat earth, global warming, safety of tobacco, etc.) by painting with such a broad brush. Of course there are pet scientific hypotheses and the need for funding. Ancel Keys was able to embed his flawed data on cholesterol into mainstream thinking and the sugar and grain industries were allowed to create the food pyramid that sparked an epidemic of obesity and diabetes. Not perfect, as with any human endeavor. Still, comparing science to religion is not only unfair but dangerous, IMO.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, florduh said:

It's disheartening to see attacks on science from intelligent, educated people. It helps to open the door to conspiracy theories (anti-vax, flat earth, global warming, safety of tobacco, etc.) by painting with such a broad brush. Of course there are pet scientific hypotheses and the need for funding. Ancel Keys was able to embed his flawed data on cholesterol into mainstream thinking and the sugar and grain industries were allowed to create the food pyramid that sparked an epidemic of obesity and diabetes. Not perfect, as with any human endeavor. Still, comparing science to religion is not only unfair but dangerous, IMO.

 

I don't know how this relates to Walter's video clip, if you're referring to the OP in the above.

 

He points out, as a marine biologist of over 50 years, how during the 70's they were concerned with research and discovery and scouring the worlds oceans according to an agenda-less, non-political adventure. But then as environmentalism overshadowed the science, a certain attitude of only concentrating on "problems" arose. The media took hold of it. And politicians followed suit. Grant money flowed in that direction and it wasn't a coordinated grand conspiracy, it's just how it all unfolded. And now, as he outlines, is that good news of come backs are often shunned and ignored in favor of perpetuating this negative mantra that arose based on a narrow focus of the "problems." 

 

Good examples are where bleached reefs have grown back strong, or fish that had vanished returned to a given area. An example closer to home would be how scientists at the Mote Aquarium accidentally stumbled into regenerating corals to grow up to three times faster than in the wild. With the ability to withstand warmer temps and acidic conditions. They're literally testing corals to see which strains can tolerate conditions projected 50 years forward and further. These are positive scientific issues which a lot of people are happy to ignore in favor of the "problems" and negativity mantra. 

 

That's the main focus here. There were some asides thrown in down the line. But I mean to discuss this issue of marine biology and environmentalist movements overshadowing the science. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2020 at 11:13 PM, Weezer said:

How is this related to Science vs. Religion?

 

My comment was just a spur of the moment thought in passing.  Just ignore it.  I was thinking concretely about the forum description, and questioned how the coral issue was versus religion. 

 

I agree that in today's world it is at times hard to tell what is really important, or true, and what is hype, or "false news."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

This part of the reef shows blanched corals which can mean they are older corals which are lacking rejuvenation processes. The oldest reefs around the world have always had a number of such areas in outlying areas having too little or too much water circulation. Blanching occurs more often in shallower, warmer, outskirts of reefs where there are less active and sometimes less salty waters near deltas having less natural electric currents within them.  Rebuilding and rejuvenation is an ongoing natural process which is part of reef maintenance and renewal processes.

 

In the link above they discuss man assisted coral rejuvenation:

 

“......last year (2019) included a world first IVF program during the annual coral spawn. “Operators assisted researchers from Southern Cross University and James Cook University to collect coral eggs and sperm so the coral larvae could be (germinated and grown offsite) fed and released on the Great Barrier Reef to grow new corals. "Numerous other projects involving the Cairns & Great Barrier Reef tourism industry include coral nurseries, coral resettling and using electricity to stimulate coral growth.”

 

Many believe the Coral Sea today is still in good health as a whole and has not declined since it was first monitored in 1986, but environmental alarmists point out that it will be less vital or even become endangered upon continued global warming, blanched corals being a prime example.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.