[Leps-l] Deniers
Stan Gorodenski
stanlep at commspeed.net
Sun Feb 17 12:37:06 EST 2013
On 2/17/2013 9:29 AM, Strathy wrote:
> The continued use of the word 'deniers' on this list is so childish.
I changed the subject title to Deniers because duplicate messages were
being sent to the list (which has now been corrected. Thanks, Larry). I
felt my follow up message that took place about an hour or so later, the
one I renamed to Deniers, could have been confused as just another
duplicate of the one I had previously sent if I kept the same original
subject title (which was RE:[Leps-l] Potential loss of overwintering
monarch habitat in Mexico). I wanted to make sure everyone knew this was
a new message from me and so I changed the subject to Deniers (a quick
and easy change to make), not imagining in the least this would be an
objectionable term to some. No apologies, though.
Stan
> I've been reading and learning from the very highly esteemed people in
> this group (and in other groups) for years. You guys are WAY above
> resorting to referring to people who question your hypotheses with a
> term that is repugnant most people on this list. I love reading the
> various points of view, and I can see persuasive arguments on both
> sides, but the word denier just ruins any credibility you might have
> in my mind. All we need is the other side to start referring to their
> opponents as 'bed wetters' and then we can all pull each others hair
> at recess. Next thing you know we will have the collectors / watchers
> nonsense rear it's ugly head again. Rise above it peoples.
>
> That's my honest opinion from a very VERY amateur entomologist.
>
> Todd in Manitoba (formerly in Toronto)
>
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 10:12 AM, spruance spruance
> <spruance at beyondbb.com <mailto:spruance at beyondbb.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi all, First some local weather data:
>
> At lower elevation (4,500') on the east side of the continental
> divide in Alamogordo NM, our temps fluctuate daily, as is normal
> for the desert, and I see butterflies every day in my butterfly
> garden. And the normal "winter"geometrids gather nightly at my
> porch light in the crepuscular hours before the temps drop into
> the 20s. We have snow on the mountain behind my house, but the
> snow pack is well below "normal" (whatever that is now-a-days),
> and the moisture content of the snow is very low. The
> contribution of the snow to Spring run-offs will be negligable,
> compared to "normal." The leps survive as they have for millenia,
> but the species composition and relative abundance are undoubtedly
> changing. We desperately need longitudinal quantitative data on
> Lepidoptera (temp & precipitation changes are well documented
> with real data for New Mexico) else the climate change deniers
> will continue to cherry pick our weakness to support other
> scientific data that human caused change is real.
>
> Out comes the soap-box:
>
> Sadly nearly all Lepidopterists, collectors, observers, and
> photographers, cherry pick when they are in the field by pursuing
> the rare species, or the species needed to fill holes in a
> collection, or to get the best photo of the best specimen, or to
> report species sure to get the attention of other Lepidopterists.
> Species lists that appear in these discussion groups do not report
> absolute numbers, nor do they document detailed habitat
> associations of the reported species.
>
> I am not negative about this, I'm encouraged that there are so
> many interested people willing to share. I encourage us to do
> better. I hope someday our observations will be comparable to the
> long term data being collected by the Long-Term Monitoring of
> Butterflies project of The Ohio Lepidopterists.
> http://www.ohiolepidopterists.org/bflymonitoring/downloads/BMP%20Manual%202008%20-%20large%20pages.pdf
>
> Please keep the observations coming. Please add some scientific
> quality to the observations. Please, as I do, take photographs of
> each observation site, at different times of the year, over many
> years. With the digital age the photos are easy to incorporate
> into word processing documents for easy annotation and long term
> storage.
>
> The weather underground site http://www.wunderground.com/ is an
> excellent place to obtain actual data for the exact time and place
> you took the photo and made the observations.
>
> Time to put the soapbox away.
>
> Best wishes to all from sunny, unseasonably warm, and
> drought-stricken southern New Mexico.
>
> Eric
>
> Eric Metzler
> Alamogordo NM
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Stan Gorodenski
> <stanlep at commspeed.net <mailto:stanlep at commspeed.net>> wrote:
>
> Patrick,
> Regarding anthropomorphic climate change (ACC) deniers. I had some
> personal experience where someone approached me, in email,
> about a paper
> they wanted me to read. It was presented in such a way as to
> give the
> impression that it was just an interesting paper they wanted
> me to read
> and to get my reaction. However, I knew this person was a ACC
> denier and
> his ulterior motive was to give me a paper that to him showed
> how right
> he was and how wrong I was. I read it and discovered some
> serious flaws
> in the analysis and data. I presented this to him - and then heard
> nothing more about it. He still is a ACC denier, though. It
> appears that
> when something detracts from the beliefs of some individuals,
> it is
> ignored. If it supports their beliefs, it is remembered. This
> goes along
> with your idea that deniers do not question their own belief
> system and
> what motivates them.
> Stan
>
> On 2/16/2013 9:10 PM, Stan Gorodenski wrote:
> >
> > On 2/16/2013 8:16 PM, Foley, Patrick wrote:
> >
> >> Count me (and the great majority of atmospheric scientists)
> among the climate change alarmists.
> >>
> >> This is however not my area of expertise. Paul should go
> argue this out with NOAA scientists. Or any atmospheric
> scientists.
> >>
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeling_Curve
> >>
> >> Skepticism in science is a very useful tool. But one should
> be skeptical of ones own views also. Nietzsche said once " The
> courage of one's convictions -- a common error; real courage
> is questioning one's own convictions." Scientists (including
> climate change "alarmists") do this all the time. That is the
> essence of science. As far as I can see, most climate change
> deniers do not question their own belief systems or what
> motivates them.
> >>
> >>
> > Good point. This never occurred to me. I wonder if climate
> change
> > deniers even know themselves what motivates them. I can see
> all kinds of
> > influences, including the political and religious group one
> belongs to.
> > I also wonder if it is the culture of anti-science that is
> fostering
> > this. The deniers are intelligent. Because of the
> anti-science culture
> > they make their own interpretations of data in lieu of those
> of scientists.
> > Stan
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leps-l mailing list
> > Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu <mailto:Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu>
> > http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leps-l mailing list
> Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu <mailto:Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu>
> http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leps-l mailing list
> Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu <mailto:Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu>
> http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leps-l mailing list
> Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
> http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l
>
More information about the Leps-l
mailing list