posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 03:34 PM
So we are constantly being told how we are depleting our ocean resources.
Based on figures of fish populations.
Figures of fish populations are based on a method that doesn't actually capture any sort of representative slice of the population.
When people go around saying "see, the facts say it's true!" people really need to look where those facts come from.
There are less fish in the sea. Says who? A guy with a net? Why does he think his net will be able to capture a representative slice of the
Is it not possible fish are responding to netting, and learning to avoid nets, or avoid areas where netting takes place?
You may say people have been netting fish for thousands of years, but they have not been doing it on the scale of the modern day, nor out at sea
nearly as far.
If I go to the beach and put a 5-gallon bucket in the water and don't come up with any fish that's a piss poor method of deducing there are no fish in
the ocean. Their methods are just as shoddy, just on a larger scale.
Elephants are evolving to be born without tusks due to poachers. Animals respond to predation. You can't measure a population of animals in the same
manner before and after large scale interaction with its predator because it's behavior is going to change.
If you counted elephants by how many tusks you could find, you aren't getting an accurate representation of the elephant population. In the same way
counting how much fish there are based on how many we can catch seems ridiculous. They will respond to predation and their behavior will
edit on 9-2-2014 by James1982 because: (no reason given)