http://scientistatwork.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/12/in-the-remote-pacific-glimpses-of-pristine-corals/?ref=science
A group of scientist from the Center for Marine Biodiversity and Conservation have traveled to the remote Line Islands in the extreme Central Pacific. There, they have been studying the interaction between the natives and their use and conservation of the reef. They team is spending a month there, trying to find out the proper balance of using a reef because the reef just off the coast of Fanning Island (part of the islands) is thriving.
This was written by Stuart Sandin, an assistant professor at the Center, for the New York Times while he is on location. It was written November 12, 2010.
The bias in this article could perhaps be that since the purpose of his expedition was too find the proper balance of a thriving reef, he has to say what great condition the reef is in. Also, Sandin could be an optimist and want to make the article have a very positive outlook. It is pro environmentalist because he is researching how to make a balance, to hopefully spread the knowledge.
I. C. Global Water Resources and Use- conservation
II. A. Ecosystem Structure- major aquatic biome
IV. A. 1. Agriculture- Feeding a growing population
This research will hopefully have a positive impact on our society and change how we treat our reefs. With degrading reefs all around us it would be detrimental if we didn't fix it.
ReplyDeleteThe information learned there could be beneficial for reefs all over the world. Their destruction can and will have negative results for the entire planet.
ReplyDeleteI doubt he could or would falsify the results. I believe the reason the places is thriving is because it is a small amount of people. It is no were near its carrying capacity like the Australian coast.
ReplyDeleteThe degradation of coral reefs is a major environmental problem. This reef could be thriving because it is near a remote island that lacks development and other harmful catalysts for coral reef degradation. I do not think that the scientist would falsify his results because I doubt he went on the expedition with the intention to only find good results.
ReplyDelete