4 ms·

https://www.splendidtable.org/story/2018/07/26/why-we-should-be-eating-more-purple-sea-urchins https://www.splendidtable.org/story/2018/07/26/why-we-should... P

https://www.splendidtable.org/story/2018/07/26/why-we-should-be-eating-more-purple-sea-urchins https://www.splendidtable.org/story/2018/07/26/why-we-should... Perhaps yes, but I doubt that can undo the damage done without an overcorrection and more issues.

dylan604 6y ago
This is the sad state of humans trying to help or fix mother nature. In almost every instance, the fix results in one of those "oh, didn't think of that" kind of things. I don't know the lady swallowed the dog to chase the cat to catch the bird to eat the spider to catch the fly. It's a literal nursery rhyme we teach kids.
- shkkmo 6y ago
  While that is true of trying to introduce new species to predate over-populated species (or really any novel species introduction), there is a long history of humans successfully managing their own predation to help balance over/under populated species. Obviously we have had failure in this area too but it we do know it is possible for us to do it and improve things.
- kortilla 6y ago
  Survivorship bias, humans make corrective actions to local environments all of the time and there are no noticeable issues. When something goes wrong it’s news though.
  - ironmagma 6y ago
    We have minimal if any data about how many of the course corrections go well, precisely for that reason. However because we don’t know how many there are, it’s not accurate to claim to know it’s survivorship bias. It could be that, but it could not be. There’s not enough data to make a conclusion.
  - intended 6y ago
    Disagree - ecologists are specifically categorized as wicked problems (as opposed to ‘tame’ problems like say chess) because they are complex and you never know where the fallout is going to be. We know if the disasters because we see them go wrong more often than not. Survivorship bias applies more to things like CEO success stories, startup success stories and sports personalities. A tiny fraction make it big, and these get studied/reported on. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem

dylan604 6y ago

This is the sad state of humans trying to help or fix mother nature. In almost every instance, the fix results in one of those "oh, didn't think of that" kind of things. I don't know the lady swallowed the dog to chase the cat to catch the bird to eat the spider to catch the fly. It's a literal nursery rhyme we teach kids.

shkkmo 6y ago
While that is true of trying to introduce new species to predate over-populated species (or really any novel species introduction), there is a long history of humans successfully managing their own predation to help balance over/under populated species. Obviously we have had failure in this area too but it we do know it is possible for us to do it and improve things.
kortilla 6y ago
Survivorship bias, humans make corrective actions to local environments all of the time and there are no noticeable issues. When something goes wrong it’s news though.
- ironmagma 6y ago
  We have minimal if any data about how many of the course corrections go well, precisely for that reason. However because we don’t know how many there are, it’s not accurate to claim to know it’s survivorship bias. It could be that, but it could not be. There’s not enough data to make a conclusion.
- intended 6y ago
  Disagree - ecologists are specifically categorized as wicked problems (as opposed to ‘tame’ problems like say chess) because they are complex and you never know where the fallout is going to be. We know if the disasters because we see them go wrong more often than not. Survivorship bias applies more to things like CEO success stories, startup success stories and sports personalities. A tiny fraction make it big, and these get studied/reported on. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem