>>The idea that microbial communities are generally beneficial to organisms
>> has been over-sold. Just as often, microbes cause disease and degradation.
>The above is logical (and practical) nonsense.
I think you failed to prove that and I am not sure you actually read
and understood Pete's point before going off on a tangent in attempted rebuttal.
Pete could have said it better, IMO, but it seems fairly clear and hard to debate.
It is an opinion, though, so must be addressed as an opinion and taken for
what it is worth.
I checked the reference you provided in attempting a rebuttal, BTW:
>http://www.helium.com/items/1254604-the-importance-of-microorganisms-in-the-earths-ecosystems
and thought it useful to follow the author link (the one that worked) to:
http://www.helium.com/users/411799 . I'll just quote a few lines...
--- begin snip ---
"About me
"Keith is a, currently, unemployed computer support manager with over
20 years of experience in computer sales, service and support. He
has been active in libertarian politics for over 20 years, serving as state
chair of the party and having run for public office four times.
"Keith tries to be reasonably self sufficient taking care of his own
auto and home repairs. You will find articles from him on these topics,
and many more.
--- end snip ---
With all due respect, I wonder how this fellow finds time in his busy
schedule to be a microbiologist worthy of being quoted on BEE-L?
I'm guessing he has not spent much of his life with bees and bee
science as Pete has, not that this would diminish the writer's value if he is
in fact a microbiologist.
I'm betting that he is a writer who reads other articles and regurgitates
them somewhat indiscriminately as his own. The articles are his, but
the ideas are the same ideas that are circulating in pop-science spaces.
The 'net is very incestuous and cannibalistic. Everyone is seeking
unique content in search of ad revenues and writers are engaged
in a race to the bottom and grind out articles for pennies to fill the
space between ads.
Back to the issue: People don't seem to understand subtle points
like the one that Peter was trying to make.
I think he could have said it better, but his meaning seems quite clear.
Nobody is claiming that some microorganisms are not beneficial to us
some of the time. That is another topic entirely.
The point is that a naturally evolving community of microorganisms
can easily be hostile to our purposes -- or the purposes of other
members of their community. That fact has been known and pondered
ever since microorganisms were discovered.
Let's take another look at the original premise:
>>The idea that microbial communities are generally beneficial to organisms
>> has been over-sold. Just as often, microbes cause disease and degradation.
That does not seem like "logical (and practical) nonsense" to me.
The only question, really, is whether too much emphasis has been placed
on the beneficial side of microorganisms (lately) and that we therefore forget
in encouraging these 'friendly' microorganisms that there are bad guys that
can easily destroy or poison our food and kill us and our livestock and bees
to boot if we give them a chance.
Generally speaking, I don't know, but in some quarters, I think it is very true.
***********************************************
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
Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm
|
