4 ms·

I actually find it rather interesting how many people here, in a forum I generally assume to be better informed than elsewhere, seem wholly unaware of the drama

I actually find it rather interesting how many people here, in a forum I generally assume to be better informed than elsewhere, seem wholly unaware of the dramatic decrease in insects over the last few decades.

aredox 4y ago
Strong "I am very smart" contrarian energy here. See also this tale: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2376002/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2376002/
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
Beltalowda 4y ago
People who think they know better are more likely to comment than those who will simply say "huh, interesting!" You will often get a somewhat biased set of comments.
stinos 4y ago
I also find it rather interesting to see talks about insect decline while it's only one part of the larger issue, rated by some as important as the climate crisis: the biodiversity crisis. Dramatic decreases are happening for way more species than just insects.
- a1445c8b 4y ago
  But is it “only one part” or more like a reliable indicator of the overall ecological health?
  - stinos 4y ago
    Both?
    - a1445c8b 4y ago
      > Both? I see. It just sounded like you were dismissive of that one metric based on this part of your original response: > I also find it rather interesting to see talks about insect decline while it's only one part of the larger issue. Which is why I asked.
fireflash38 4y ago
I mean, hop into any threat remotely related to COVID and you'll see people come out in swarms of common science denial. Just because people might be knowledgeable about certain technologies doesn't make them knowledgeable about anything else. In fact I'd argue that it heavily biases them to making more mistakes in other fields, especially considering that many tech problems are 'solved' by going to a search engine -- that's not a good way to do science.

4 ms·

I actually find it rather interesting how many people here, in a forum I generally assume to be better informed than elsewhere, seem wholly unaware of the drama

by another_story 4y ago

aredox 4y ago
Strong "I am very smart" contrarian energy here. See also this tale: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2376002/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2376002/
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
Beltalowda 4y ago
People who think they know better are more likely to comment than those who will simply say "huh, interesting!" You will often get a somewhat biased set of comments.
stinos 4y ago
I also find it rather interesting to see talks about insect decline while it's only one part of the larger issue, rated by some as important as the climate crisis: the biodiversity crisis. Dramatic decreases are happening for way more species than just insects.
- a1445c8b 4y ago
  But is it “only one part” or more like a reliable indicator of the overall ecological health?
  - stinos 4y ago
    Both?
    - a1445c8b 4y ago
      > Both? I see. It just sounded like you were dismissive of that one metric based on this part of your original response: > I also find it rather interesting to see talks about insect decline while it's only one part of the larger issue. Which is why I asked.
fireflash38 4y ago
I mean, hop into any threat remotely related to COVID and you'll see people come out in swarms of common science denial. Just because people might be knowledgeable about certain technologies doesn't make them knowledgeable about anything else. In fact I'd argue that it heavily biases them to making more mistakes in other fields, especially considering that many tech problems are 'solved' by going to a search engine -- that's not a good way to do science.