Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill14564
If only science was that simple.
Facts: Large areas of coral reefs have died off;; large areas are now again covered by coral.
Nearly everything beyond that is just some conclusion drawn from two data points. No investigation into why the coral died. Not investigation into what changed that the coral can now recover. No data on whether the coral that has recovered is substantially the same as what was lost.
A lightning strike causes a fire that destroys hundreds of acres of old-growth forest. Twenty years later the area is covered with healthy pines. Since the area is again covered with trees does that prove that lightning doesn't destroy forests? Can we say there were trees before and there are trees now so nothing really happened, the trees just changed their clothes?
Science just isn't that simple.
|
Those forest fires are needed to maintain the healthy forests.
Once they get too big, those "old growth trees" begin to choke out the undergrowth (not enough sunlight gets thru) and it does, leaving behind excellent kinding for a forest fire.
Once a fire burns the old growth threes, their seed post release new seeds (they need the fire to release the seeds), and the cycle begins anew...
Coral reefs die. Later, they are replaced by healthy new reefs... The cycle of life continues...