The Political Science of Acid Rain -- Why I don't have much Faith in Climate Scientists

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by Woody1, Jun 12, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Woody1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    178
    He managed Mt. Mitchell State Park, and he was right: The problem was caused by the Balsam Woolly adelgrid (link). What part of this statement do you not understand:

    "Balsam woolly adelgids have destroyed about 95% of the Fraser firs in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, creating "ghost forests". "

    This is not from acid rain:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It's caused by an insect (link).
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,689
    If you have a point to make in this thread, get around to it.

    No, really, what is this fallacious thread leading toward?
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,225
    You are missing the forest for the tree... if that little bug killed the fir trees, why is the rest of the plant life dying as well? What is preventing the nutrient uptake needed by the groundcover foliage? Oh, right, acidic rain.

    He is attempting to use the fact that scientists got something wrong as evidence as to why we should ignore all science... as you said, it is fallacious to the extreme.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,106
    You didn't bother reading your own links, did you?

    One concern is that acid rain and the deterioration of the ozone, among other pollutants are contributing to a weak immune system for the Fraser firs and making them more susceptible to the balsam woolly adelgids. The Spruce-fir moss spider, which lives on moss mats below the forest canopy, is considered endangered due to the decline of the Fraser fir.[1]

    That was in the link for the Balsam Woolly Adelgid which you provided.

    In other words, the acid rain and pollution have made the trees more susceptible to the little insects, increasing the damage. No acid rain, the trees would have been healthy, and not susceptible to said insects.

    It isn't just "acid rain" destroying the trees and weakening them, leaving them prone to insect attacks. It is general pollution in the air and ground water, that is seeping into these trees, stunting their grown and basically damaging them, which then leaves them prone to things like insect attacks.

    Unless of course you are going to claim that you do not believe in pollution damaging plant and wildlife as well as denying climate change?

    I am curious though, how is it that you took the leap from pollution damage on forests to denying climate change? Is it because the "ranger" you spoke to, who we do not know is a ranger or not, said it was the insects and not "acid rain", while ignoring the fact that the pollution had weakened the trees, leaving them prone to attacks from insects in the first place? I mean, that was even in the link you provided..
     
  8. Woody1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    178
    I once believed the same as yourself. Actually I was quite angry about those tree-killers polluting our forests, and I felt helpless about acid rain, and I was blaming the wrong person.
    Why not make a real difference and plant chestnut trees (link)? I plant native american trees myself.

    By the way, did I tell you this is not caused by acid rain:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It's caused by an insect (link).
     
  9. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,336
    I was thinking about climate change, not acid rain.
     
  10. Woody1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    178
    When you take out the backbone of a forest, it changes everything.

    Political science is not real science.

    This is not caused by acid rain as much as you insist that it is:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It is caused by an insect (link).
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2017
  11. Woody1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    178
    The climate is always changing and so is science. I trust that science has a good understanding when it can accurately predict something.
     
  12. Woody1 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    178
    What if the doctors screened you for cancer, and they found acid rain instead? Then you died.
     
  13. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,106
    Are these chestnut trees native to that specific area?

    Seeing that there are none in that forest, I am going to hazard a guess and say the answer to that is no. Which begs the question, why would you deliberately throw out the ecology of the area by introducing another completely different species of trees? It's bad enough that the pollution damage has nuked the trees and the undergrowth to such an extent that it has opened the trees up to infestations from invasive insects, and nuked the undergrowth, which has resulted in other species reliant on those trees becoming endangered.. You think introducing a different species of trees altogether is going to make "a read difference"? Well yes, it would, you would completely destroy the ecology of that area and the balance that exists.. And that is not a positive thing, but is instead, a very very bad thing with bigger repercussions overall..

    It would help if you actually read the links you provided, which say that pollution damage made those trees vulnerable to attacks by invasive insects and it would certainly help if you stopped repeating the same thing over and over again, because that just becomes trolling..
     
  14. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,689
    Mod Hat — Closure & redirect

    This thread is closed for insistent fallacy, namely non sequitur derived in a context of proof by example.

    (1) It does not follow that "climate scientists" are somehow wrong because a park ranger says insects instead of acid rain any more than "doctors" are somehow wrong because a death certificate says "lung cancer" instead of "cigarette smoking".

    (2) Even overlooking what has been pointed out regarding the role of acid rain in weakening botanical immune systems, the extension of a perceived error in the outcome does not undermine "climate scientists"; this is an inappropriate generalization.​

    We might also cite general false pretense:


    After all, trying to "get the politics out of science" by insisting on fallacy instead of science is the sort of self-defeating behavior that is, in fact, also self-evident.

    Thread closed and transferred to the Cesspool.
     
    origin and exchemist like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page