> Of course it ["biodiversity"] can be defined,
> but everyone defines it differently.
> That's my point. There is no real definition of biodiversity.
Just because specialists in different fields use the same term differently
does not invalidate the entire concept, nor do different applications of the
same term do not imply that it "can't be defined, they can't be measured,
they are subjects of faith and belief."
I know a bit about this issue, as I actually attended a conference and
listened to the primary author of the paper cited, Morar speak about this
specific subject at Penn State in 2014. It is important to note that he and
his co-author Toadvine are PHILOSOPHERS - not scientists, not biologists.
The extremely navel-gazing and introspective question he posed arose from
the finding that massive disruptions due to deforestation in the Amazon
caused _MICROBIAL_ diversity to increase dramatically over the short term.
To give a beekeeping parallel, a weak and dying colony starts to see "more
species" living within what was a 100% Apis environment. Wax moth, small
hive beetle, ants of all sizes, and other "beekeeping pests" start to gain a
foothold, and they do at least control any possible foulbrood, as they tend
to consume the brood, the stores, and the wax comb, thus preventing the
dying colony from infecting others, or leaving bobby-trapped comb in the
nest cavity for a swarm to occupy and infect itself. So, the "number of
species" went up for a short period, but the net effect over the long term
will be an empty, completely lifeless tree cavity.
The only point he made is, in my view, a facetious one - He said that if the
pure "number of species" is all that we care about, we should be bulldozing
the Amazon's rain forests to cattle-grazing and farmland as fast as we can.
(Yes, he actually said that!) He called the Amazon microbe species counts a
"false positive". Sure it is, if one is blindly counting number of species,
regardless of what they are and what their lifecycle might be.
The co-author Bogannan is a respected specialist in microbial biodiversity,
so if "biodiversity" does not exist, he's gonna have to give back a whole
lot of funding dollars that he has already spent to run his lab and pay his
staff of 12. (Links to each author at end)
This is clearly a very short term metric, as over the longer term the number
of species, microbial and otherwise, will go way, way down when there are no
more dead things to opportunistically feed off, and this consume and "clean
up". The number went up due to all the dead organic matter decomposing,
just as in the common example of the Dead Skunk in the Middle of the Road,
citing Loudon Wainwright III's seminal 1972 work in the field.
Does anyone need a "philosophy" of any aspect of science? Speaking as a
strict experimentalist, certain aspects of cosmology seem so untestable that
they may be undifferentiatable from philosophy. But the philosophers
presume to try and "study" or "critique" science and scientists as if they
were a tribe of baboons, and presume to "explain" science as being a "social
construct" rather than a testable explanation of how everything actually
works. I suspect that this is because the philosophers don't get invited to
the parties thrown whenever a big breakthrough is made in physics, medicine,
chemistry, or other hard sciences, so they stay home and pen smug little
critiques instead.
I am, of course, obligated to note that the Amazon itself is not the
untouched virginal "forest primeval" that most people think it is - it was
managed, fertilized, irrigated and farmed on a massive scale as long ago as
800 AD. Here's a good summary from WaPo:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/03/AR2010090302
302.html
http://tinyurl.com/235lojc
The Authors:
Nicolae Morar , Assistant Professor - Department of "Philosophy &
Environmental Studies", U Oregon
http://pages.uoregon.edu/nmorar/Nicolae_Morar/About_Me.html
http://tinyurl.com/neub64y
Ted Toadvine " Professor of Philosophy and Environmental Studies" and the
"Comparative Literature Department"
http://philosophy.uoregon.edu/profile/toadvine/
http://tinyurl.com/ocjd4hw
Brendan J. M. Bohannan
Professor of Environmental Studies and Biology, University of Oregon
http://pages.uoregon.edu/bohannanlab/
Bohannan CV Is Impressive:
http://pages.uoregon.edu/bohannanlab/BohannanWebCV.doc
http://tinyurl.com/nbegzbs
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
