I find it very interesting that the media has toned down the main point of this expedition. The first two only barely mention it in passing. The last wasn't as bad; "[Chris Jones] said he had been surprised by the lack of fish diversity in the sea mount areas. "We expected a wealth of diversity of fish," Dr Jones said. "But surprisingly, there were only two or three species. We kept catching the same fish."
All three articles focus on the great discovery of several new species... which is great, sure add em to the books, but the degree of diversity is low which makes you question what is was like before global warming. And what will it look like in a while from now?
and fwiw, the giant 2 foot aren't thaaat impressive imo. for example in local waters, the giant pink star gets to 25in. Pisaster ochraceus gets to 20in, rainbow star gets to 24in, etc... Im just not sure why they are making such a big deal out of it. Discovery of new species is good, but it isnt *the* point.
I dunno. I think I just didnt like the tone of the articles.
|