Recent comments in /f/science

Bucky_Ohare t1_j8kc20a wrote

Reply to comment by hotdogbo in New study shows Acceleration of global sea level rise imminent past 1.8℃ planetary warming by 9273629397759992

So, fun fact, there are places where sea level is remaining neutral or even gently receding.

The part that goes along with this, however the deniers wanna gloss over it, is that there is also significant crust uplift going along with it. Since we measure from our shore markings this looks like it’s going ‘down’ in some places despite overall sea level continuing upwards.

24

HenryGreatSageJunkie t1_j8ka8kv wrote

Reply to comment by Aardark235 in New study shows Acceleration of global sea level rise imminent past 1.8℃ planetary warming by 9273629397759992

Evil corporations are why we haven't moved to a nuclear grid 50 years ago. I need to heat my house, there's snow outside and the method of generating that heat is decided by the people who own the resource extraction process and the refining. They also own the politicians who make legislation. You're suggesting we "simply" redefine society from the ground up while holding no power to do so.

18

Propeller3 OP t1_j8k9wta wrote

Reply to For those interested in communal/common mycorrhizal networks (e.g., Finding the Mother Tree) - Positive citation bias and overinterpreted results lead to misinformation on common mycorrhizal networks in forests Nature Ecology & Evolution by Propeller3

Their Conclusions are especially compelling:

>We conclude that popular claims of singular positive effects of CMNs in forests are disconnected from evidence. We also show bias in citing positive effects within the research community. The functional role of CMNs in plant communities and ecosystems has been controversial for decades, and we are not the first to highlight unknowns, confounding effects and gaps in knowledge(21,22,26,27,82,106,107,108,109). What is new is the wave of popular science that has overlooked uncertainty about CMN structure and function to espouse a singular narrative—that trees benefit from being connected by CMNs. As mycorrhiza researchers who have investigated the function of CMNs, we are thrilled that the public has become as excited as we are about the many roles that fungi play in forests. Nonetheless, it is important for the public and scientific community to understand the nature and extent of the evidence for the roles played by CMNs in forests. The inaccurate framing of CMNs in forests in the popular media, and bias in citing original studies, necessitates improvements in communication and citation practices (Supplementary Note 4). In line with previous calls(110), we believe that the anthropomorphism currently present in some science communication on CMN function in forests(1,2) should be reconsidered. We also agree with previous statements(111) that more evidence is needed before forests are managed to protect CMNs per se.
>
>While many excellent studies, for their time, have been conducted on the role of CMNs in forests, we suggest that the most concerning issue is the rigour with which the results of these studies have been transmitted and interpreted. Moving forward, we offer some approaches to future CMN field studies that will address alternative explanations and ease interpretations of results (Box 3). We lack strong evidence that CMNs are widespread and persist long enough to be functional in forests; hence, more CMN maps that include fine-scale temporal and spatial surveys are needed from diverse forests worldwide. We can design experiments that rank CMN effects on interplant resource transfer and seedling performance against a range of ecological factors. For example, studies such as refs.( 65,75,81) went beyond testing for a CMN effect on seedling survival to ranking CMN effects among ecological factors such as seedling genetics, stand type and regional climates; this approach is crucial for understanding how ecological interactions function in forests. For experiments using natural or physical barriers, we need to carefully acknowledge, or better yet, eliminate confounding effects (Fig. 2 and Box 3). Finally, by incorporating the myco-perspective into field experiments, we can ask what role fungi play in forest CMNs. All of our suggested approaches involve existing methods; thus, we do not believe they are beyond reach.
>
>Let us devise new experiments, demand better evidence, think critically about alternative explanations for results and become more selective with the claims we disseminate. If not, we risk turning the wood-wide web into a fantasy beneath our feet.

10

AutoModerator t1_j8k898s wrote

Reply to For those interested in communal/common mycorrhizal networks (e.g., Finding the Mother Tree) - Positive citation bias and overinterpreted results lead to misinformation on common mycorrhizal networks in forests Nature Ecology & Evolution by Propeller3

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1