Lionfish/DM's don't care!

[amascuba]

Are you just one of those people that only wants to win an argument at any cost, including the truth?

Not at all. I simply made a statement that we do not how, when, or why the lion fish showed up in the Caribbean. Agreeably, they may have gotten loose from an aquarium during hurricane Andrews, or possibly somebody had them as pets and set them loose. At that same time, we do not know, for a fact, if either of those two possibilities are what introduced the lion fish to the Caribbean. You would be surprised what nature can accomplish sometimes, even the seemingly impossible.

 

[Rhone Man]

As far as I'm aware, there isn't anybody who can say with any certainty that "the lion fish were introduced into the Caribbean at this location, at this time, by this person.

DAN had a really good article on this recently. According to that article, the first Lionfish populations were found off Florida in the mid-1990s. There was speculation that they might be descended from Lionfish released from aquariums prior to Hurricane Andrew in 1992.

They were first sighted in North Carolina in 2000.

They were first sighted in the Caribbean in 2004.

By 2007 they were "all over" the Northern Caribbean.

 

[K_girl]

Not at all. I simply made a statement that we do not how, when, or why the lion fish showed up in the Caribbean. Agreeably, they may have gotten loose from an aquarium during hurricane Andrews, or possibly somebody had them as pets and set them loose. At that same time, we do not know, for a fact, if either of those two possibilities are what introduced the lion fish to the Caribbean. You would be surprised what nature can accomplish sometimes, even the seemingly impossible.

So we can agree that the occurrence of lionfish in the Atlantic/Carribean region did not occur naturally. It had to involve an act of man. I think it is really a moot point to argue exactly how.

So, under your theory that nature can overcome, I would like to see an example of evolution that is fast enough to handle a problem that is similar to this problem. We would need a predator that could say evolve in 5 to 10 years before all the reefs in this area are fully dessimated. As one reader pointed out in the link to the study I provided, the grouper isn't looking like the best hope at the moment. You have so much faith in nature to handle the problem, just how many examples in science are behind that statement? Please provide. I would like to have the blind faith that you seem to have, but I can't disregard the NOAA science studies on this situation and preach faith instead.

The idea of introducing another non-indenginous species to prey on the lionfish is a possibility, but that can continue to upset the natural balance of the local ecosystem. Man, of course, is the most successful predator on the planet. Lionfish, the other white meat - hummm..

 

[okiraku_diver]

You can now buy lionfish in some restaurants here. Said to taste something like chicken, though I've not tried it myself.

In Japan, fishermen offer lionfish for traveller.(I have not tried it)
flied lionfish
http://www.aquamuseum.net/content/cooking/recipe/mino/images/karaage.jpg
boiled lionfish with soy sauce
http://homepage2.nifty.com/RIPPLE-WORLD/starthp/img/isshinmaru/DSCN2554.jpg

 

[Zman96]

I wonder what the Lionfish lovers would say if somebody brought a Lion over from Africa and released it into the town they lived in. After it killed the first person, second, third...etc... when would they agree that their presence is not evolution, rather a man made phenomenon. I agree it is not the lionfish's fault that they are here and eat everything in sight, it is their nature, but it was the hand of man that put them here so I think it should be the hand of man to try to eradicate them.

 

[driftin' by]

I am a firm believer in evolution. It's all around us. We, as people, have evolved dramatically in the past century.

I'm a firm believer in evolution also but in no way has it increased so dramatically in the last century to make us smarter and life's better. Technology born of trial and error has been the most significant factor. Evolution has not made us born smarter but better practices written about form study after study makes us smarter at an earlier age especially with every thing we do, we don't have to reinvent the wheel.

Truth is, we don't know for a fact how they got there. Sure, there are some theories, and they may be valid theories, but to state "First, this isn't an act of nature, their presence here is an act of MAN" as a fact, just isn't truthful.

Not at all. I simply made a statement that we do not how, when, or why the lion fish showed up in the Caribbean. Agreeably, they may have gotten loose from an aquarium during hurricane Andrews, or possibly somebody had them as pets and set them loose. At that same time, we do not know, for a fact, if either of those two possibilities are what introduced the lion fish to the Caribbean. You would be surprised what nature can accomplish sometimes, even the seemingly impossible.

You speak of evolution and obviously know nothing about it. Ever heard of the Galapagos Islands? Where Darwin came up with the Theory of Evolution. Know why he did? Because he found species there not found anywhere else in the World. Except human, species evolve and adapt to their natural surroundings depending on the scale of their migratory patterns. Even though, it's very unlikely that the Lionfish found it's way half-way around the planet probably subjecting itself to very extreme conditions either around the tip of South America or Africa.

With that said, consider yourself ignored going forward along with pshchocabbage.

Have a good day!

 

[K_girl]

yes, amascuba is confusing. Says he believes in evolution, but does believe that the introduction of the lionfish could have happened "naturally." If he understood anything about the science of evolution, he would understand that this is a contradictory statement. Evolution is a slow process that happens over tens of thousands of years, not a decade. If he continues to think otherwise, he needs to show us the science. Otherwise, I remain unconvinced.

Also, I don't think he is going to be able to sit back and watch nature take its course, seeing how an ecosystem is developed over tens of thousands of years. However, he will be able to watch the destruction. First the small fish, shrimp and crustaceans will disappear, as what is documented to be happening now. Then the larger animals that feed on them will disappear - that is the next stage that will happen, and yes, he will probably witness that too. Corals will die-off. Yes, nature will eventually recover, but neither he, nor his children, nor their children or their children for next several thousand years will have the opportunity to sit back and watch it happen. So, what is the show that he will be around to witness? Well, I guess if you call total destruction a show, then grab the popcorn. That's the part you won't miss.

 

[geokr]

You got to wonder how the "let Nature do it's thing" people like amascuba have survived this long. They are like the Indians who died by the thousands when the white man invaded and brought smallpox. Bet that was fun for them to "sit back and watch". Rational people don't do that, victims do. Confronted with a problem like this, no matter if it's caused by Man or not, the right thing to do is figure out a way to solve it not wring your hands and moan about Mother Nature and her sovereign ways. Get a grip - Mother Nature's not always right for us. That's why we keep figuring out ways of controlling her when she's not good for us as humans. Confronted with Yellow Fever and Malaria we figured out how to control mosquitos and develop vaccines. Now we have a Panama Canal, too. Confronted with the sea lamprey invasion of the Great Lakes (big place) that wiped out all the lake trout and a lot of other species we did something about that, too. Now they're at least 90% contained and many of the lost species have been restored. Suppose we should have just left that run it's natural course? Black Plague was eliminated by controlling the "natural" processes (Mother Nature's animals and insects) that caused it, it just wiped out half of Europe first. There's a thousand other reasons too long to even begin to mention. There's a reason we're at the top of the food chain and survived this long and it's not because we did nothing when confronted with nature's maladies.

If you just want to enjoy sitting back and watching her, amascuba, show me your commitment. Stop getting your vaccines, stop going to the dentist and doctors, toss all your meds or refuse them, trash your insecticides, don't grade your property or drain your swamps or control wildlife or process your sewerage where you live and leave them west Texas rattlesnakes alone to do whatever they want. Just let Mother Nature have her natural ol' way with you. THAT I will sit back and watch.

 

[peterbj7]

Evolution is a slow process that happens over tens of thousands of years, not a decade

Although I agree with your conclusion, what you say here is now generally believed to be false. Evolution is now believed not to be a smooth continuous process but to be a series of disjointed quantum leaps, probably associated with genetic mutation.

 

[Hank49]

Although I agree with your conclusion, what you say here is now generally believed to be false. Evolution is now believed not to be a smooth continuous process but to be a series of disjointed quantum leaps, probably associated with genetic mutation.

Lionfish, Peter. This is about Lionfish....oh yeah, kill em' all.