Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Remote sensing reveals Antarctic green snow algae as important carbon sink

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–66 of 66 posts

Re: Remote sensing reveals Antarctic green snow algae as important carbon sink

#61

Post by pvaldes »

mrfusion wrote: post #54
pvaldes wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dude in BC they pretend a pod of orcas is a separate species because orcas aren’t endangered so they had to invent a species with 73 members so they could have something to complain about. Sometimes scientists do genetic analysis and find things, yep. We don't do this because we are drama queens, It just happens that murica has some unique cetacean species and they are experiencing a sharp decline by unclear reason…

So you’re claiming these orcas can’t reproduce with other pods of orcas? Isn’t that the definition of a species? Not that I’m against helping them but we only have so much energy and focus so other species may need the help more.

Biology is always a little more complex than expected.

For example, have you heard about Ring species?

https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Ring_species_seagull...

Until orcas learn how to teleport is not probable that they would mate with another whale that will never share the same space with them at the same time. Not speaking about the different size, "culture" and language that could be an obstacle if they would eventually meet. This planet is big enough to have more than one species of orca adapted to different habitats. If you lose one, don't expect the other taking its place in the same ecosystem necessarily.

Re: Remote sensing reveals Antarctic green snow algae as important carbon sink

#62

Post by _3u10 »

pvaldes wrote: post #48
_3u10 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude in BC they pretend a pod of orcas is a separate species because orcas aren’t endangered so they had to invent a species with 73 members so they could have something to complain about. Look up Southern Resident Orca

> Dude in BC they pretend a pod of orcas is a separate species because orcas aren’t endangered so they had to invent a species with 73 members so they could have something to complain about. Sometimes scientists do genetic analysis and find things, yep. We don't do this because we are drama queens, It just happens that murica has some unique cetacean species and they are experiencing a sharp decline by unclear reason…

They look different but look at homo sapiens, the variance is quite a bit less. They definitely look like the same species to me.

Also there’s a huge difference between a species doing poorly and the species changing its habits / dominant feeding areas, especially for species that are highly nomadic.

Re: Remote sensing reveals Antarctic green snow algae as important carbon sink

#63

Post by pvaldes »

_3u10 wrote: post #62
pvaldes wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dude in BC they pretend a pod of orcas is a separate species because orcas aren’t endangered so they had to invent a species with 73 members so they could have something to complain about. Sometimes scientists do genetic analysis and find things, yep. We don't do this because we are drama queens, It just happens that murica has some unique cetacean species and they are experiencing a sharp decline by unclear reason…

They look different but look at homo sapiens, the variance is quite a bit less. They definitely look like the same species to me. Also there’s a huge difference between a species doing poorly and the species changing its habits / dominant feeding areas, especially for species that are highly nomadic.

Lets see.

Genetically different microsatellite DNA and mitochondrial DNA.

Unique vocalisations than don't share with offshore, transient or northern resident orcas. Never had seen in company of the other resident orcas. And northern resident orcas don't go South of Oregon.

The 80% of its diet is chinook salmon, therefore they are clearly different in diet, hunt techniques and ecology than offshore or transient orcas. And very different also to the subantartic type (D).

This mean also that we aren't prey, and they tolerate [1] humans that behave and keep the distance (I wouldn't put my money on the bigger meat eater species being so tolerant to us.

> They are highly nomadic

Some orcas are nomadic, other not so much. Resident orcas are, hum... resident. Is in the name. They migrate North and South of the west coast following the salmons but will not end in the Mediterranean, for example.

[1] Of course if you attack any orca or try to approach a cub in the sea and they see it as harassment, the family will react and you will be in a serious trouble.

Re: Remote sensing reveals Antarctic green snow algae as important carbon sink

#64

Post by parksy »

labster wrote: post #35
parksy wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In which case I would have to take a step back and think about the world for a bit. Is there a possibility when it gets warmer / more carbon rich, the carbon-hungry microbes go to town, reducing temperatures (*eventually, maybe not over time periods important to humans?) If the world's microbiome is geared to maintaining (rather than merely existing in / responding to) temperatures and atmospheric gas ratios within a…

The thing is there are hundreds of negative and positive feedbacks, and they’re all modeled by people whose job is to think of these things. You are not going to think of something novel unless you are an expert in a related field. Your curiosity is not a bad thing. As a climatologist I’ve heard so many versions of “climate models don’t account for X” where X has been modeled since the 1980s that it just kind of trig…

I think I get what you're saying, and I think I agree - generally I defer to the advice of people who are experts in a field for that reason - it's your profession and what you do for a living. I'm a computer programmer / software architect with a side interest in chaos theory. While I understand models and algorithms so I get complex dynamical systems, my domain knowledge is decidedly NOT climate science - I spend more time pushing pixels at the end of the day.

Similar to the recent / ongoing pandemic, there's tons of variables and I've made a similar argument to people who decry in a mocking tone the "scientists" with their "agendas" etc... like dude these are people individually who devoted ten years of education and research MINIMUM learning about one specific thing.. BEFORE they were taken seriously enough to even get a job. Pushing pixels and shovelling dirt are both important and necessary, but when it comes to complex matters, listen to the person who made a lifetime commitment to studying that thing. I get it, and apologies if I somehow sounded like I was brushing that away. As you say, I'm just curious.

So anyway I'll take this all with a grain of salt. Seems interesting but as you imply it's a bit overhyped. It's just another small wheel within an intricate mechanism of gears and the overall swing of the machine is to hotter temperatures, more carbon dioxide, nothing changes, the overall trend is still clear. As I say, I was probably too drunk to hit reply, but I'm glad I did.

Thanks for the reply, it gave me a chance to pause and reflect.

Re: Remote sensing reveals Antarctic green snow algae as important carbon sink

#65

Post by labster »

parksy wrote: post #64
labster wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is there are hundreds of negative and positive feedbacks, and they’re all modeled by people whose job is to think of these things. You are not going to think of something novel unless you are an expert in a related field. Your curiosity is not a bad thing. As a climatologist I’ve heard so many versions of “climate models don’t account for X” where X has been modeled since the 1980s that it just kind of trig…

I think I get what you're saying, and I think I agree - generally I defer to the advice of people who are experts in a field for that reason - it's your profession and what you do for a living. I'm a computer programmer / software architect with a side interest in chaos theory. While I understand models and algorithms so I get complex dynamical systems, my domain knowledge is decidedly NOT climate science - I spend m…

Well, I used to do it for a living when I was a graduate student. Now I haul bits from the bit mines, like you. As I said before, it’s okay to be curious. It’s okay to be hopeful too. You have a pretty good attitude, which is why I bothered to reply. You learn to spot the closed minds.

But it is not okay to pin our hopes on the unknown — not in this case, when so much is already known. The hype is problematic; cherry-picking research that helps one’s argument is the political problem of climate science. There are plenty of negative feedbacks, and I knew professors who made their grant money by picking topics that made the climate crisis sound less crisisish. The research was good and so was the money, but their reputations suffered from being one-sided.

And that’s not to say scientific consensus can’t be profoundly wrong. The amyloid plaque hypothesis, for one. Geology accepted continental drift, essentially its central dogma, less than a hundred years ago, after much wringing of hands. But climate models have verified predictions. And climate is such a vast problem that “a related field” I mentioned earlier is essentially all of the Earth sciences, physical sciences, and biological sciences to some degree, because the Earth-atmosphere-hydrosphere system is vast. But that means we also have millions of eyes looking for bugs and corner cases.

Re: Remote sensing reveals Antarctic green snow algae as important carbon sink

#66

Post by detaro »

pvaldes wrote: post #63
_3u10 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They look different but look at homo sapiens, the variance is quite a bit less. They definitely look like the same species to me. Also there’s a huge difference between a species doing poorly and the species changing its habits / dominant feeding areas, especially for species that are highly nomadic.

Lets see. Genetically different microsatellite DNA and mitochondrial DNA. Unique vocalisations than don't share with offshore, transient or northern resident orcas. Never had seen in company of the other resident orcas. And northern resident orcas don't go South of Oregon. The 80% of its diet is chinook salmon, therefore they are clearly different in diet, hunt techniques and ecology than offshore or transient orcas.…

The entire "is it a different species" discussion is missing the point, because their protection status isn't based on them being a different biological species, so the initial claim of "pretending they are a different species" already doesn't make sense.
Post reply on HN