coral reefs

Things climate change may ruin: from allergies to wine

pgleick — Tue, 16 Jul 2013 08:43:45 +0000

Things climate change may ruin: from allergies to wine

The evidence from real-world observations, sophisticated computer models, and research in hundreds of different fields continues to pile up: human-caused climate change is already occurring and will continue to get worse and worse as greenhouse-gas concentrations continue to rise.

Because the climate is connected to every major geophysical, chemical, and biological system on the planet, it should not be surprising that we are learning more and more about the potential implications of these changes for a remarkably wide range of things. And while it is certainly possible – even likely – that climate changes may positively affect some things (like modestly reducing heating bills in colder regions), the planet’s ecosystems and human-built systems have evolved and been built around yesterday’s climatic conditions, not tomorrow’s. Overall, the evidence suggests the bad consequences will greatly – perhaps massively – outweigh the good.

Here is just a bit of what we've learned in recent years, about some of the things that the science community thinks climate change is going to negatively affect, or even ruin. Many of these impacts are now unavoidable. [OK, not all of these come from the science community, like the consequences for Santa Claus of destroying the Arctic, but you get the idea.] This catalog of impacts is incomplete, and growing, and doesn't include some of the most important and dire consequences, such as the acidification of the ocean, the risk of massive population dislocations, threats to national security, and changes to the very hydrologic cycle of the planet. Instead, I've focused on some of the tangible consequences for things in our day-to-day lives.

Read ‘em and weep (or scratch, sneeze, itch, and moan).

Allergies: Some allergies are going to be made significantly worse as climate changes cause pollen counts to increase. There is also evidence that climate change will worsen other factors related to respiratory allergies and asthma, such as summertime ozone concentrations and the growth of indoor fungi and molds. Some references to these risks are here and here and here.

Deadly Fungus Aspergillus: One of the most dangerous fungal pathogens threatening agriculture is a carcinogenic mold called aspergillus (Aspergillus flavus). It poisons cattle, infects grain crops, especially corn, and can be fatal when ingested. It is also strengthened by warmer temperatures and drought. In 2012, it rendered a significant portion of the corn crop of several states unfit for consumption. As climate warms and weather patterns become more erratic, some researchers suggest that aflatoxin contamination may further restrict the area over which crops may be economically grown (see here).

Beaches and Island Vacations: Ok, this one should be self-evident, since a significant amount of sea-level rise is well understood to be an unavoidable consequence of a warming planet. In addition to the serious and massive threats to lives and property, your beach vacations are also at risk. South Pacific Islands, the Caribbean, Florida, Hawaii – all will suffer beach destruction as seas continue to rise.

Chocolate: A detailed study concluded that the areas suitable for growing cocoa in the prime growing areas of Ghana and Cote d’Ivoire will substantially decrease by 2050 as warming expands. Other research also suggests risks to cocoa production from temperature and precipitation changes. (Some references here, here –a .pdf, and here )

Coffee: Coffee is one of the world's most important and valued commodities, worth tens of billions of dollars annually and employing over 25 million people worldwide. There is now evidence that the spread of a deadly coffee fungus is linked to rising global temperatures and research shows that “nearly 100 percent of the world's Arabica coffee growing regions could become unsuitable for the plant by 2080.” Starbucks is already having to spend money to study and test climate change-resistant coffee varieties.

Coral Reefs: Climate changes in the form of sea-level rise, ocean acidification, and warming temperatures pose a massive global threat to coral reefs. As temperature and ocean acidity rise, mass bleaching, infectious disease outbreaks, and reef destruction from de-calcification/acidification are already becoming more frequent. Why should people, beyond snorkelers care? Coral reefs are among the richest and most diverse ecosystems on the planet. They provide habitat for breeding and survival to uncounted species of marine life. They provide natural protection to coasts. They bring in revenue to local communities through tourism, fishing, and discoveries of new biochemicals and drugs. (See here and here and here.)

Fireworks: 2012 was the worst year for July 4^th fireworks in three decades, with widespread cancellations due to droughts and wildfire risks from Colorado to Tennessee. In 2013, ironically, a combination of both extreme drought and extreme torrential downpours also led to extensive cancellations. As climate changes force temperatures higher and higher, fireworks shows may become more and more dangerous to produce.

Fly Fishing: A 2011 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science “forecast a mean 47% decline in total suitable habitat for all trout” in the interior western United States by 2080 due to warming rivers and changes in river flows. Another peer-reviewed study concluded that “despite the best intentions, we will not be able to preserve all populations of native trout in the Rocky Mountains this century.”

Maple Syrup: Climate changes will affect sugar maples in several ways, including increased tree mortality from soil frost and a reduction in sap yield from warmer temperatures. There will be winners and losers. Among the likely changes are losses of production at the southern edge of the zone where maple syrup is produced and increases near the northern edges, but production losses are likely to occur faster than new trees can grow in the north.

New England Lobsters: The American lobster is both a symbol and an economic mainstay of New England. Lobsters are cold-blooded and temperature is a key factor in where they live and how they thrive. As oceans continue to warm lobsters are likely to move north, and there is already evidence that southernmost lobster habitats are suffering decreases in populations and that rising seawater temperatures are linked “to the spread of lobster shell disease.”

Peanut Butter: Peanut crops require several months of fairly consistent warmth and substantial rain. But too much rain near harvest or too little rain early can cause serious problems, and excessive heat and drought lead to aflatoxin contamination and toxic mold. The 2009 report on Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States stated “even moderate increases in temperature will decrease yields of corn, wheat, sorghum, bean, rice, cotton, and peanut crops.” A study at the University of Florida looked at the combined effect of enhanced carbon dioxide concentrations and higher temperatures. They concluded more CO₂ can help, a little, but these benefits were dwarfed by the risks of higher temperatures. If daytime high temperatures go to 111 degrees F and nighttime low temperature don’t fall below 93, peanut seed production drops to nothing.

Poison Oak/Poison Ivy: Studies (here and here) show that higher levels of carbon dioxide create “bigger, stronger poison ivy plants that produce more urushiol, the oil that causes the allergic reaction and miserable poison ivy rash.” This sucks. Need I say anything more?

Polar Bears: Plenty of real science has been written about this (here and here and here and many more), but polar bears aren’t just a cute symbol, they are a key biological component in a complex ecology that is under severe threat from climate change.

Santa Claus and Superman’s Fortress of Solitude: Ok, this is really about the destruction of the Arctic, and the disappearance of our northern polar ice cap. That will affect global weather patterns, access to minerals, national security dynamics, and much more, but in terms of day-to-day concerns, what will you say when your grandchild eventually asks, “how can Santa and the elves be at the North Pole if the ice is gone?” And Superman’s fortress is thought by some to be in the Arctic, but I guess he can fend for himself.

Skiing and Surfing: Really? Climate change may worsen both? Scientists have known for a long time that climate change, especially the increases in temperature, will badly affect skiing over time, as snowlines rise, snow turns to rain, or it melts faster and earlier. Indeed, the ski industry and the media are already clearly aware of these risks. But surfing? Yes, surfing is threatened by climate change. As noted by Motherboard: “In the future, surfing is going to suck for a quarter of the world. New research from Australia's national science agency [CSIRO] reveals that thanks to warming waters, the height of ocean waves is poised to shrink, on average, across about 25 percent of the ocean. From January-March each year, the figure jumps to 38.5%.”

Texas Football: Drought and high temperatures already affect sports. But now there is worry that climate change “could ruin Texas football” -- indeed all southern U.S. football. A 2011 piece by Matthew Van Dusen notes “climate change will have a terrible effect on communities throughout the cradle of football in the Southern and plains states.” In the later decades of the 21st century, climate models project that southern states such as Florida, Texas, Louisiana, and Alabama could experience 150-180 days a year or more (nearly six months a year) with peak temperatures over 90 degrees Fahrenheit. This level of heat could have devastating effects on the economies and ecosystems of these regions and (worse in the minds of some) “make watching and playing football outdoors almost unbearable.”

Water: I've written extensively about water, climate, and the need for better water management (see here, here, and here). In short, the hydrological cycle is an intricate and key part of our climate system. As climate changes we'll see changes in water availability, quality, and demand, including changes in extreme events, complicating the effective management of our water infrastructure.

Wine: Climate changes can bring both positive and negative impacts for vineyards, so long as they are modest changes. But there is growing evidence that the long-term impacts of expected climate changes for the wine industry could be severe, negative, and widespread (see here and here and here and here). Winegrowers are already seeing changes, such as increased sugar content, decreases in acidity, earlier harvest times, and more. But as temperature continue to rise, some researchers have found that climate changes could mean, among other things, "50% less land suitable for cultivating premium wine grapes in high-value areas of Northern California." Another study suggests there will be “major global geographic shifts in” areas suitable for viticulture with the risk of “substantial economic and conservation consequences.”

As our understanding of the complex and broad impacts of climate changes improves, I’ll try to supplement this list over time, but it’s going to get long and sadder.

Peter Gleick

pgleick Tue, 07/16/2013 - 04:43

The Last Time Atmospheric CO2 was at 400 parts per million Humans Didn't Exist

pgleick — Fri, 10 May 2013 10:29:10 +0000

The Last Time Atmospheric CO2 was at 400 parts per million Humans Didn't Exist

The planet has passed a disturbing landmark, a marker on a continuing highway to climate disruption. On May 9th, the NOAA and the Mauna Loa observatory reported that atmospheric CO₂ levels touched 400 parts per million. Before humans started burning fossil fuels, they were around 280 parts per million.

Mauna Loa measurements of carbon dioxide. From http://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/

The last time atmospheric CO₂ was at 400 parts per million was during the ancient Pliocene Era, three to five million years ago, and humans didn’t exist.

Global average temperatures were 3 to 4 degrees C warmer than today (5.4 to 7.2 degrees F).
Polar temperatures were as much as 10 degrees C warmer than today (18 degrees F).
The Arctic was ice free.
Sea level was between five and 40 meters higher (16 to 130 feet) than today.
Coral reefs suffered mass die-offs.

And much more: As Robert Monroe notes: “The extreme speed at which carbon dioxide concentrations are increasing is unprecedented. An increase of 10 parts per million might have needed 1,000 years or more to come to pass during ancient climate change events. Now the planet is poised to reach the 1,000 ppm level in only 100 years if emissions trajectories remain at their present level.”

Here are some scientific links for those wanting to know more:

Trends in atmospheric carbon dioxide: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/mlo.html
Details on the Mauna Loa Observatory, and the "Keeling Curve:" http://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/
Robert Monroe discusses what the Pliocene Earth looked like, here: http://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/what-does-400-ppm-look-like/
Haywood et al. also review what we know about the Pliocene: Haywood et al. 2009. “Introduction. Pliocene climate, processes and problems. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A. Vol. 367, No. 1886, pp. 3-17. 13 January 2009 doi:10.1098/rsta.2008.0205 http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/367/1886/3.full.
B. Schneider and R. Schneider. 2010. Palaeoclimate: Global warmth with little extra CO₂. Nature Geoscience Vol. 3, pp. 6-7. 20 December 2009. doi:10.1038/ngeo736. http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v3/n1/pdf/ngeo736.pdf
In fact, here’s an entire set of papers discussing the Pliocene, current and past CO₂ levels and conditions, and more: http://www.nature.com/search/executeSearch?sp-q-1=&sp-q=High+Earth-system+climate+sensitivity+determined+from+Pliocene+carbon+dioxide+concentrations&sp-p=all&sp-c=25&sp-m=0&sp-s=&sp-a=sp1001702d&sp-sfvl-field=subject%7Cujournal&sp-x-1=ujournal&sp-p-1=phra

pgleick Fri, 05/10/2013 - 06:29

Tags

Gorgeous thing of the day: Sky's-eye view of the Maldives & other islands

ddobbs — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 05:57:45 +0000

Gorgeous thing of the day: Sky's-eye view of the Maldives & other islands

Posted via web from David Dobbs's Somatic Marker

The Maldives, featured in a Wired gallery of islands shot from space. A place crucial to the story I told in Reef Madness: Charles Darwin, Alexander Agassiz, and the Meaning of Coral. It was in this unique archipelago that Alexander Agassiz found the evidence he felt proved beyond doubt that Darwin's theory of coral reef formation was wrong, dead wrong. It's also a singularly beautiful place, and particularly threatened by global warming.

ddobbs Fri, 11/06/2009 - 00:57

Tags

culture of science

Environment/nature

History/philosophy of science

Dear David,

I just read your orchid children Atlantic article. A professional colleague, a child psychiatrist actually, had forwarded it to me. You have managed to put truth and hope together in a most readable way. I'll share it with my psychotherapy clients, not to mention anyone in my family who's willing to deepen their understanding of themselves and their relatives!

I look forward to more of your excellent work!

Ellen Swallow MFT

Creationists v empiricists! Reefs! Family drama! My bloggingheads talk with Greg Laden

ddobbs — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 07:50:31 +0000

Creationists v empiricists! Reefs! Family drama! My bloggingheads talk with Greg Laden

Bloggingheads.tv just posted a conversation Greg Laden and I had about the second-biggest scientific controversy of Darwin's time, and of Darwin's life: the argument over how coral reefs form. The coral reef argument was fascinating in its own right, both scientifically and dramatically -- for here a very capable andn conscientious scientist, Alexander Agassiz, struggled to reconcile both two views of science and the legacies of the two scientific giants of the age, one of whom was his father.

His story -- and the tumultuous 19th-century struggle to define science and empiricism -- is the subject of my book Reef Madness: Charles Darwin, Alexander Agassiz, and the Meaning of Coral. Greg and I here cover some of the same ground the book covers.

You might also check out the long review of Reef Madness that Greg posted a couple days ago.

On the multimedia side, though, you can view the whole talk (or selected sections) at Bloggingheads, or, for starters, sample some short clips I've created below:

Here's one on what the incredible overlap between the reef and species arguments:

Another clip I built, about a minute long, describes what makes Alexander Agassiz's particular story so important and intriguing.

Don't let the photo on me in the freeze frame scare you. They managed to freeze a frame where I look like I'm angry, but was probably just getting ready to sneeze. It was a quite amiable conversation. And if you watch it, or read the book, you'll know of the biggest, weirdest, longest, and most confounding scientific controversy of the 19th-century, or of Darwin's life and career, for that matter. And isnt' that something you should know?

Many thanks to Greg Laden for proposing this conversation.

ddobbs Mon, 09/07/2009 - 03:50

Bloggingheads with Sblings David Dobbs and Greg Laden

gregladen — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 19:20:09 +0000

Bloggingheads with Sblings David Dobbs and Greg Laden

The Bloggingheads with David Dobbs and Moi is now up at Blogginheads, and embedded here:

I had just posted a review of Dobb's book, Reef Madness, which I enjoyed a great deal, and here we discuss the book in more detail. I left out a lot of detail, especially the exciting multi-part ending, in my review. You'll hear more about what happened to the competing reef theories and to Alexander Agassiz in this hour long bla-bla-blawginghead's interview.

David Dobbs' main web site is here.

Added: Note something funny (as in funny strange) happening at about 23 or 24 minutes.

gregladen Sun, 09/06/2009 - 15:20

Tags

There's a hiccup at the beginning of the diavlog that jumps right to the end. You need to manually push the marker up to the 1 or 2 minute mark and start playing.

I also felt that the sped up dialog is annoying and distracting and made me leave after several minutes.

Those are two glitches that I think are not really there for everyone. This technology seems to act differently in different contexts. What do you mean by sped up dialog?

Added: Note something funny (as in funny strange) happening at about 23 or 24 minutes.

It can only be the hand of gÃd! You should apply for the Templeton prize. :-P

Very interesting, I've never heard of this historical debate before and it really does seem like a classic question of "how do we do science?"

Your article is very interesting, I have introduced a lot of friends look at this article, the content of the articles there will be a lot of attractive people to appreciate, I have to thank you such an article.

I was ready to give up on Bloggingheads after the creationism controversy and the waste of this week's Science Saturday on Wright's excuse-making, until I clicked on it one last time and saw that the REAL Science Saturday had been moved to "Percontations," and there was Laden.

This was a GREAT conversation. Fascinating topic. I was impressed by the way the two of you stretched the story out and made the conversation suspenseful. Now I have yet another book I have to read, dammit.

What with Plait leaving Bloggingheads too, you're going to be lonely if you keep on doing these.

Thanks.

All we did was to go in order of the book, pretty much. It's a great story with an excellent flow.

What I get is a greyed out screen and three buttons, two grey and one green. The grey ones say respectively, "Continue this video on Bloggingheads TV" and "Repeat this clip". The green button says, "link/embed".

At Bloggingheads you get the same clip, and a link below the screen that says, "click to play video". Click that and you get the clip again. Apparently in order to see the full video you have to click one of the three download links, and as I type the MP4 file is still downloading.

Update: So I've said screw it, and I'm going to download the audio (mp3) because I've gotten the feeling there's something screwy with the video download.

So now the audio is playing, and my first impression is, Greg is not a polished public speaker. :)

In any case, download the audio file and give it a listen. You'll get the gist of what Greg and Dave are talking about.

Alan #9: Have you ever seen Laden publicly speak? His audiences are usually left enthralled, except for the ones he kills:) I go to a lot of academic type public talks, and I've seen Laden twice. There are not many as good as him.

Most people will not have to download the audio. Just click on the little "go" arrow that is on most videos and it will play. If not, fix your computer.

I enjoyed it. It really is better than the average blogginghead.

Well, Alan, I don't like it much either, to be frank, but this is not public speaking. Or, if you think this is public speaking you need to get out more.

Thank you Liz. Next time, introduce yourself to me, I'll give you that twenty.

Sped up dialog for me watching was the appearance that both of you were either talking so fast that you never paused for a breath or to contemplate what you were going to say.

It seemed like every pause, no matter how small was edited out. The words were jammed together, the sentences were done as if there was no end of one and start to the next.

I have seen some BH dialogs like this and others at regular speed.

It was a strain to concentrate on what you two were saying.

Bob: Interesting. I'll have to look into that. I can tell you that the video I sent in was something like 59 minutes 38 seconds long, and we had a technical glitch that took out a minute or two during the process. So if this was speeded up, that should be numerically obvious. (Also, I can compare what i sent with what was posted)

Aha. I timed it.

For every 60 seconds on my watch the timer of the video ticked off 85 seconds!

New Enlgand Bob, are you using the "speed up the video button"? If yo dn't like the speedup, don't hit the "Sppedup the video button."

Reef sightings

ddobbs — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 04:37:04 +0000

Reef sightings

I was pleased to see my book Reef Madness: Charles Darwin, Alexander Agassiz, and the Meaning of Coral written up in a couple of venues recently. Over at The Primate Diaries, Eric Michael Johnson, who does on history and philosophy of science, looks at the "terrific argument" that the book follows -- an argument simultaneously about how coral reefs form, how to do science, and (a third layer out), creationism versus empiricism. A nice write-up -- you can't go wrong starting a piece about the creationism-empiricism debate (among other things) with an atomic blast.

The book is also mentioned in a more wide-ranging interview of myself at The Reef Tank, a site that covers all things coral, and often runs interviews with scientists, writers, and others interested in reefs. We talked about Reef Madness as well as The Great Gulf, my book on the collapse of the New England fishery (and how to count fish). Among other treasures: This photo of me with a goosefish, taken while I was collecting survey data on a research cruise aboard NOAA's R/V Albatross IV, a decade ago this November.

ddobbs Wed, 09/02/2009 - 00:37

Tags

Loved the interview and just placed The Great Gulf to the top of my reading list.

Enjoying Oahu: Turtle Beach and Shark's Cove

cwilcox — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 01:00:00 +0000

Enjoying Oahu: Turtle Beach and Shark's Cove

As a marine biologist by training, I naturally love the ocean and just about everything in it. So it is such a treat for me to be able to just go out and enjoy what I love. Right now, I'm in between my last job as a simple graduate and being a full time graduate student, so I've got a little free time to explore. And, being on an island in the middle of the Pacific which is only something around 38 miles across, exploration naturally tends to include the ocean.

As a blogger, of course, I feel the need to share such excursions with you. So, it's quite happily that I have decided to extend my "Enjoying Florida" to my new home. Here is my first segment of "Enjoying Oahu."

Today, we initially set out to snorkel at Haunauma Bay, a beautiful cove with tons of fantastic fish. But as we drove by, the parking lot said "lot full" and it was clear that the tourists had beaten us to the punch, so we decided to take the scenic, albeit long, drive around the eastern tip of the island and up to the North Shore to hit Shark's Cove instead.

The drive itself is stunning. Windy, curvy roads meander stuck between mountains and the sea, through picturesque little towns selling shrimp out of trucks, and past some of the most beautiful stretches of beach I have ever seen. It takes awhile to go all the way from Hawaii Kai to Waimea traveling around the island instead of through the middle of it, but the views are worth it. Staggering cliffs, rocky shores, sandy beaches and tropical jungle all await you as you wind your way around the coast.

The real treat, however, awaits you at your destination: The North Shore of Oahu. Known worldwide for its immense surf in the winter months, its actually quite calm during the summer, and has some of the best snorkeling in the islands. Specifically, I'm talking about Shark's Cove.

But before we went there, we decided to hit a small and almost unnoticeable beach first, which is called Turtle Beach. Unlike Shark's Cove (whose title was to attract divers, or so I've heard), Turtle Beach lives up to its name. There is almost always turtles in the waters just off shore or taking a break on the beach itself, and this day was no exception. Upon arrival a crowd of tourists alerted us to a huge turtle who was sunning itself on the sand.

They have volunteers at the beach who protect the sea turtles from harassment by onlookers, and force people to stay a good ten feet from the turtle itself while its sunning and enjoying the beach. But 10 feet is plenty close enough for me to get all nerdily excited. I love sea turtles. I did an internship at Mote Marine Lab working in their nesting research program and absolutely loved every minute of it. To me, seeing a sea turtle is always exciting, and doubly so to see them in the wild.

Just as we were about to leave, another turtle decided it was time to haul itself up on the sand for some sun. This one, however, was different. It had a satellite tag on its back. To me, it was even cooler than the first. To see the interaction of nature and science in such a simple way just made my nerd circuits fry with joy. Somewhere, right then, a satellite was recording that turtle climbing up onto that beach, and sending that data to some scientist who is using it to better understand how sea turtles migrate and move and how we can better protect them. After all, all 7 species of sea turtle are endangered, and if we cannot find ways to live with them and protect them they will simply disappear.

Anyhow, all these sea turtles got me really excited about snorkeling at Shark's Cove, just a few blocks down the road, and known as a favorite hang out of the turtles. Last time I went, I got to see two of them swimming around - I was hoping this time, now armed with an underwater camera, that I'd at least get to see something.

Shark's cove is a beautiful, lava-rocky inlet that can get a bit too wavy to snorkel at times (and is downright dangerous in the winter during surf season). Luckily, today, it was high tide and the shallower, more protected lagoon was fully flooded, allowing for nice, calm snorkeling. Before we could get in the water, we had to climb over the lava rock fields which create and protect the sensational snorkeling spot. On them, Barry noticed, were lots of "dead crabs." If fact, these weren't dead crabs at all, but crab molts, perfectly preserved above the waves.

Even before we got in, there was one species that stuck out right away - the sea urchins. They were EVERYWHERE! Last time, I don't think I recall seeing one. But as we climbed over the rocks and when we did finally reach the lagoon, they were all over.

In fact, at first, there seemed to be few fish at all. A couple little guys nibbling on the live rock, but mostly, it was the echinoderms that seemed to be out in full force:

We were starting to worry what happened to all the fish. But as we gradually explored deeper areas, we got our answer. They were simply waiting for us in the deeper water! We saw all kinds of fish - wrasses, parrot fish, and even the state fish of Hawaii, the humuÂhumuÂnukuÂnukuÂÄpuaÊ»a, which are one of my favorites (sadly, not pictured - he was a speedy little bugger who didn't want to pose for a photo).

While the fish were pretty and the inverts were spectacular, I had still yet to see my beloved Honu. We had been snorkeling for hours, and although many seemed to be pulling themselves out on shore just a few minutes away, none were swimming in the nice, peaceful lagoon that we were exploring.

I had just about given up hope of seeing a turtle when Barry grabbed my shoulder and started pointing furiously. Sure enough, in the murky, deeper waters just ahead of us, was a small sea turtle.

Lucky for me, he (or she) didn't stay out there long. Soon enough the turtle was practically underneath us, and I got to get some great shots of it swimming along and diving down for a bite or two of delicious algae.

He even swam right past me in the shallows, as if saying hello, before returning to the deep.

At last, my hopes for the day more than fulfilled, we climbed out of the water over the lava rocks and headed home via the center-island roads. Much faster route, by the way, and brought us past the Dole Plantation, where we grabbed some delicious pineapple frozen yogurt.

All and all a fantastic day of exploring Oahu. I'm sure, though, living here, that there will be many more to come!

cwilcox Thu, 07/09/2009 - 21:00

Tags

A talk on Darwin's coral reef theory -- his first and final test

ddobbs — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 07:47:12 +0000

A talk on Darwin's coral reef theory -- his first and final test

A coral atoll, from Darwin's The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs, 1842.

For those teeming millions near Hanover, N.H., here's notice that I'll be giving a talk at Dartmouth at 4pm today -- Thu, Feb 5 -- about Darwin's first, favorite, and (to me) most interesting theory, which was his theory about how coral reefs formed.

This is the subject of my book Reef Madness: Charles Darwin, Alexander Agassiz, and the Meaning of Coral, and I'll be posting more about it next week, during the Blog for Darwin festival. But the short version -- and the topic of my talk -- is this:

Darwin's coral reef theory, published immediately after his return from the Beagle voyage, was a sort of test-run for his theory of natural selection. It anticipated the species theory in both method and concept:, for it was bold, imaginative, and it explained a variety and distribution of forms as the products of incremental change in response to dynamic forces. It was also deductive as hell, and so flew in the face of the inductive principles that supposed ruled science then. Yet it won him a place in British science on his return to England. Charles Lyell, the leading figure in geology at the time, was so delighted with the theory that when Darwin told him about it, Lyell danced around the room shouting and laughing.

It's a beautiful theory, and none, he said in late life, ever gave him more pleasure. Yet it spurred a controversy that inverted weirdly the controversy over his evolution theory. While he didn't publish his evolution theory until he had collected massive evidence, he published his coral reef theory after seeing only a handful of reefs. This made it vulnerable, and while it won quick acceptance as the textbook explanation, it came under increasing fire during the century as new evidence seemed to undermine it. By the 1870s, when Alexander Agassiz -- the son of Darwin's old creationist foe Louis Agassiz, but a Darwinist himself -- challenged the reef theory in earnest, it was quite vulnerable. Darwin found himself again facing an Agassiz -- only this time it was an Agassiz who held the stronger evidentiary hand. The challenge would test, in ways both illuminating and torturous, both Darwin's coral reef theory and for the brand of creative empiricism that Darwin had helped establish with his theory of natural selection.

Why haven't you heard of this before? Beats me. The book, though warmly received by the scientific and lay readers it found, was not strongly promoted when it was published in 2005. In this year of Darwin I'm hoping to reach more people with this overlooked but crucial episode, and will be giving this talk at several venues. If you're interested in hosting a talk at your university, library, scientific society, or Darwin festival, drop me a line at dave[at]daviddobbs.net.

Or come to snowy Hanover today! The talk is at the Rockfeller Center on the Dartmouth green at 4 pm. Free and open to the public.

PS You can read the introduction to Reef Madness here.

ddobbs Thu, 02/05/2009 - 02:47

Tags

Books

culture of science

History/philosophy of science

I'm really sorry to say that I have not read your book, but clearly I should. I've been fascinated by the role of this question (the reefs) in Darwin's development as a scholar, but I have not really explored the post monograph history of the idea in any detail.

I've been playing with my new Kindle. Should I kindle it?

coral reefs

Things climate change may ruin: from allergies to wine

The Last Time Atmospheric CO2 was at 400 parts per million Humans Didn't Exist

Top Five Posts at Neuron Culture in November

Gorgeous thing of the day: Sky's-eye view of the Maldives & other islands

Creationists v empiricists! Reefs! Family drama! My bloggingheads talk with Greg Laden

Bloggingheads with Sblings David Dobbs and Greg Laden

Reef sightings

Enjoying Oahu: Turtle Beach and Shark's Cove

A talk on Darwin's coral reef theory -- his first and final test