Duncan Craig Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> bernard Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Looking at the conclusion, Diamond is
> criticized
> > for not being scientific. Perhaps, the paper
> was
> > submitted before the publication of this:
> >
> > Easter Island Deforestation
> > B. Rolett & Jared Diamond.2004.
> “Environmental
> > predictors of pre-European deforestation on
> > Pacific Islands,” Nature 431: 443-446
> (September
> > 28)
> >
> > Abstract
> >
> > Some Pacific island societies, such as those
> of
> > Easter Island and Mangareva, inadvertently
> > contributed to their own collapse by causing
> > massive deforestation. Others retained
> forest
> > cover and survived. How can those fateful
> > differences be explained? Although the
> answers
> > undoubtedly involve both different cultural
> > responses of peoples and different
> > susceptibilities of environments, how can
> one
> > determine which environmental factors
> predispose
> > towards deforestation and which towards
> > replacement of native trees with useful
> introduced
> > tree species? Here we code European-contact
> > conditions and nine environmental variables
> for 81
> > sites on 69 Pacific islands from Yap in the
> west
> > to Easter in the east, and from Hawaii in
> the
> > north to New Zealand in the south. We hereby
> > detect statistical decreases in
> deforestation
> > and/or forest replacement with island
> rainfall,
> > elevation, area, volcanic ash fallout, Asian
> dust
> > transport and makatea terrain (uplifted
> reef), and
> > increases with latitude, age and isolation.
> > Comparative analyses of deforestation
> therefore
> > lend themselves to much more detailed
> > interpretations than previously possible.
> These
> > results might be relevant to similar
> > deforestation-associated collapses (for
> example,
> > Fertile Crescent, Maya and Anasazi) or the
> lack
> > thereof (Japan and highland New Guinea)
> elsewhere
> > in the world.
> >
> > p. 445. “ We can now reconsider why Easter
> Island
> > suffered almost the most extreme
> deforestation and
> > consequent social and population collapse of
> any
> > pacific island even though the Polynesians
> who
> > colonized Easter colonized hundreds of other
> > islands without wreaking such extreme
> impacts. Our
> > study suggests part of the answer to be
> Easter’s
> > extreme environmental fragility predisposing
> > toward deforestation: of our 69 islands, it
> has
> > the lowest tephra and dust fallout, the
> second
> > greatest isolation and third highest latitude
> and
> > no makatea, and is relatively low, small and
> dry.
> > On the basis of those independent variables,
> our
> > multiple regression and tree models predict
> > correctly that Easter should have the third
> > highest deforestation score, exceeded only
> by
> > Necker and Nihoa, which also ended up
> completely
> > deforested. That is, Easter’s collapse was
> not
> > because its people were especially
> improvident but
> > because they faced one of the Pacific’s most
> > fragile environments.”
> >
> > Bernard
> >
> Hi Bernard,
>
> I found Piesners valid for the most part. The
> 'Collapses' are complex and I get the impression
> Diamond is serving up some moral fable. I don't
> know that having an agenda (however noble) lends
> itself to impartial scientific inquiry. Although I
> have trouble with the accusation that Diamond
> isn't scientific; both of Diamonds works (Collapse
> and Guns, Germs Steel) are for a broad audience.
> I'm sure that Peisner did read the Bolett paper
> you cited, because Peisner lists it as a source
> for his 'Collapse' critique. Theres some irony
> there.
> Duncan
>
Hi Duncan,

I don't know about the moral fable in this case. The last sentence of the abstract:
Easter’s collapse was
> not
> > because its people were especially
> improvident but
> > because they faced one of the Pacific’s most
> > fragile environments.” Is certainly not a judgment on the character of the Easter Islanders.

I just skimmed both Piesner's and Diamond's chapter. I think that Piesner canbe charged with the opposite bias-- "the horrible genocidal European." In my opinion Piesner tries to taint Diamond by associating him with the racist nut Thor Heyerdahl. I've written a number of posts showing his racist and poorly researched claims about the New World. However, Diamond continually states that Heyerdahl is wrong on point after point. Second, A crucial part of Piesner's case is to ridicule the 1722 report on the deforestation of Easter Island, but somehow the extensive citations by Diamond of scientific studies of middens, palynology and radiocarbon dating of faunal and biological remains is not considered. Diamond does clearly state that there had been a precipitous drop in population due to imported epidemics and slave raiding. It was not ignored or glossed over.
The problem for me is that in order to really make a judgment between these two claims I would have to read all the original citations used. I just don't care that much or have that amount of free time.

Bernard


>