World's Plant Life Far Less Diverse Than Thought 338
Meshach writes "A report out of FOX News (I know, I know) says that there are far fewer unique species of plants than previously thought. The report states that only about a third of named species are actually unique. The rest have been 'discovered' multiple times, often by separate scientists."
Even if true, the conclusion is not justified. (Score:5, Insightful)
Whats the big deal? (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as i can tell as a non-american is that Fox News is a pretty lowly news outlet.
However that doesnt automaticly mean the story cant be true.
Just start assuming the opposite. "There are no duplicates within the millions of plants discovered." In a database of that size, with manually made entries for well over a 100 years, highly unlikely.
So, without further knowledge, one can only speculate about the percentage of duplicate entries.
Re:ah faux news (Score:3, Insightful)
Which one of those others fought a lawsuit to preserve their right to lie?
I have no problems with any news of any political leaning, but outright lying seems a bit much if you want to call it news.
Re:ah faux news (Score:5, Insightful)
Considering how they ignore science when it's inconvenient to their agenda, like the recent memos on global warming, for example, they've shown they can intentionally distort science as much as they distort politics.
Department of the obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
And for that matter, with molecular biology our notion of "species" is changing as well. Now a species is defined more along the lines of a unique genome (or at least uniquely organized genome) than simply on where and how it grows. Now we realize that - especially in the plant kingdom - there are many pairings of different species of plants that can hybridize and produce viable offspring.
So indeed, the number was due to be corrected at some point. This happens in other sciences, too; a while ago a few species of dinosaurs were recently re-classified as likely being juvenile specimens of other species.
Re:Even if true, the conclusion is not justified. (Score:5, Insightful)
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/scienceshow/stories/2010/3095035.htm#transcript [abc.net.au]
The podcast is at: http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2010/12/ssw_20101218_1213.mp3 [abc.net.au]
Undiscovered Species (Score:2, Insightful)
Consider logging, a practice which harms the spotted owl. Now consider how many undiscovered species (it's in the thousands, just fyi) face an equal threat from logging. And consider how many of those undiscovered species are actually harmed by logging, not just in the minds of alarmists like me, but *really harmed*, as in dying! We have all fallen from grace, and must return to the Eden where humans and animals alike soaked in the love of Gaia, the Earth Mother. If we all partake in the Eucharist of Sustainability, we will attain Salvation.
Fox News does not have a monopoly on stupidity. On the environment, it enjoys a duopoly with career environmentalists.
Re:ah faux news (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll make you a deal. I'll support a ban on submissions from Fox News as long as we never have to see another submission from MSNBC, Mother Jones, Rolling Stone, or anything similar.
I'll second that if we can add Huffington Post and Daily Kos to the list.
Re:ah faux news (Score:5, Insightful)
No, a news organization can't have a view point and still be a news organization.
So, you are saying that there are no news organizations, and never have been any.
Re:Meh (Score:4, Insightful)
'discovered' multiple times, often by separate scientists."
One would certainly HOPE it was from separate scientists, now wouldn't one.....
Having the same guy name the same snail again and again and nobody catching it wouldn't say much about the rest of the guy's peers.
Re:ah faux news (Score:1, Insightful)
So NBC, CBS, ABC,CNN, MSNBC, NYT, etc, are pure as the driven snow? And their tendency to spew every nonsensical DNC talking point is just good journalism? Got it.
Brett
Re:ah faux news (Score:3, Insightful)
I can't see why this would be a political issue.
It isn't. But we have a moderation system where the average dumbshit can add the word 'Insightful' to any post he finds interesting. Since nobody considers the consequences of modding up comments that you happen to agree with, we end up with a thread like this where there's an interesting story about the problems with data collection but everybody's babbling about the source it came from.
Re:ah faux news (Score:2, Insightful)
Politics can best be mapped to a conical pyramid with the center being on it's flat face. The further away from the center you get in ANY direction the closer you come to meeting at the end point in "Batshit Insane Land".
Fox's target audience doesn't have political beliefs, they have a Faith.
Re:ah faux news (Score:4, Insightful)
No, a news organization can't have a view point and still be a news organization.
So, you are saying that there are no news organizations, and never have been any.
Original quote in context: No, a news organization can't have a view point and still be a news organization. Well, not quite, a news organization can't set out to have one and still be a news organization.
I see FOXNEWS has taught you well, young Dimedici.
Re:ah faux news (Score:4, Insightful)
I know it may come as a shock to some but most people in the US aren't liberals.
"Liberal" is just the word the extreme right has made up to describe anyone they disagree with. It's a label, almost a pejorative they've created so they can just say, "He's a liberal," instead of dealing with something a person has said that has any validity. It's a way to call names instead of dealing with the facts.
It's been so distorted by people that think there is their way and the wrong way that it really doesn't have any meaning any longer.
Re:ah faux news (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:ah faux news (Score:4, Insightful)
Look, let's just ban timothy and kdawson, and call it a day.