Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 2:11 pm
This is a great thread and I'm learning quite a bit about the yellow legged frog. But, I do want to stand up for Caddis's entry because I had a similar opinion of the original post.
It appears we are all data driven people who form opinions based on our intepretation of facts and data. Great. I'm all for data and making statements that can be backed up by data. But, as I was reading the article in the original post, I was fine until the last few paragraphs. In particular, the quote: "I suspect that climate change is involved in general in these enigmatic declines" left me thinking Pounds was guessing. He didn't say "empirical data has shown" or "the consensus of the scientific community is"... he said "I suspect". To me, that's the equivalent of "I'm guessing that..." or "I really can't prove it, but I think...".
In the very next quote, he goes on to link the burning of fossil fuels to global warming and the emergence of the fungus, thus making a big leap in conclusions based on "suspect" logic. The article was about how fungus is impacting frogs, not an editorial on a personal opinion saying we are killing frogs all over the world as we drive our cars home tonight. In my opinion, Pounds's last few quotes cheapened the article and distracted the reader from the topic at hand. The article was about how frogs are disappearing from the Sierras, not a debate on fossil fuels. I can see why Caddis reached the opinion he did.
BTW, I found several well writen papers on the web that do a good job of disputing Pounds's assumption that the chytrid fungus is due to global warming. Bottom line... I'm not a scientist, so I'll let them fight it out and then I'll make up my mind.
I do love the Sierra's, and am all for restoring them to their natural state. I'm an avid fisherman, but have no problem supporting the frog restoration efforts, and now that I'm more aware of the problem (thank you everyone for the informative posts), I'll be watching for ways to help. I promise to catch as many fish as I can and eat them :>.
It appears we are all data driven people who form opinions based on our intepretation of facts and data. Great. I'm all for data and making statements that can be backed up by data. But, as I was reading the article in the original post, I was fine until the last few paragraphs. In particular, the quote: "I suspect that climate change is involved in general in these enigmatic declines" left me thinking Pounds was guessing. He didn't say "empirical data has shown" or "the consensus of the scientific community is"... he said "I suspect". To me, that's the equivalent of "I'm guessing that..." or "I really can't prove it, but I think...".
In the very next quote, he goes on to link the burning of fossil fuels to global warming and the emergence of the fungus, thus making a big leap in conclusions based on "suspect" logic. The article was about how fungus is impacting frogs, not an editorial on a personal opinion saying we are killing frogs all over the world as we drive our cars home tonight. In my opinion, Pounds's last few quotes cheapened the article and distracted the reader from the topic at hand. The article was about how frogs are disappearing from the Sierras, not a debate on fossil fuels. I can see why Caddis reached the opinion he did.
BTW, I found several well writen papers on the web that do a good job of disputing Pounds's assumption that the chytrid fungus is due to global warming. Bottom line... I'm not a scientist, so I'll let them fight it out and then I'll make up my mind.
I do love the Sierra's, and am all for restoring them to their natural state. I'm an avid fisherman, but have no problem supporting the frog restoration efforts, and now that I'm more aware of the problem (thank you everyone for the informative posts), I'll be watching for ways to help. I promise to catch as many fish as I can and eat them :>.