"One of our most brilliant, thoughtful, and persuasive, ecologists, Michael Rosenzweig..."
Take that on his word.
"...has looked at virtually every major facet of ecology over an illustrative career spanning more than four decades..."
Has he ever eaten or breathed??
"..focusing primarily on evolutionary, population and community ecology."
You are too dumb to comprehend, so just believe what follows.
"This tremendous range, from studying continent-wide species diversity patterns to understanding community ecology in the surrounding Sonoran (Arizona) desert, and finally, to interpreting major aspects of the fossil record from an ecological perspective, has led to..."
Drumroll, pleae!
".. the development of important, often novel, insights not only in ecology, but indeed, for much of evolutionary biology."
Gasp! I'd like a subscription to the Sunday New York Times, please!
"For example, in the early 1970s, independently of evolutionary biologist Leigh Van Vale"
I am sure he meant "independent" but both he and the editor were doing poppers in the West Village at the time.
"...(who would coin the term), Rosenzweig stumbled upon the Red Queen's Hypothesis."
Hmmm. Serious imagery there. Waiter! More poppers and a couple of pink Shermans.
"In his latest book, "Win-Win Ecology", Rosenzweig is a most infectious optimist..."
Backing my supposition about poppers in the West Village.
"...arguing persuasively for a new kind of conservation ecology, reconciliation ecology, that, by striving to strike a balance between humanity's demographic and economic pressures and the desire to save as much of Earth's biodiversity as possible, may become ultimately, the best - if not the sole - means of saving this biodiversity."
We have suffered enough of this nonsense. Why do these fops get credibility?
