Humans destroying biosphere

[Valjean]

Yet another study painting humanity as a planetary infection:Humans creating sixth great extinction of animal species, say scientists | Environment | The Guardian

The modern world is experiencing a “sixth great extinction” of animal species even when the lowest estimates of extinction rates are considered, scientists have warned.
The rate of extinction for species in the 20th century was up to 100 times higher than it would have been without man’s impact, they said.

Discuss.

 

[Iti oj]

Yet another study painting humanity as a planetary infection:Humans creating sixth great extinction of animal species, say scientists | Environment | The Guardian



Discuss.

This is not only an extinction events, but much worse it is a, death of birth event...

 

[dust1n]

Yet another study painting humanity as a planetary infection:Humans creating sixth great extinction of animal species, say scientists | Environment | The Guardian

Discuss.

Yea, it is unfortunate that humanity's ability to deal with these issues seem to be getting harder and harder, especially as more people are coming about. I guess on the bright side, we got somewhere between 200-100000 years to ride this baby to the darkness.

 

[Paranoid Android]

Perhaps humans should cease to breathe the fresh air.

 

[BSM1]

Yet another study painting humanity as a planetary infection:Humans creating sixth great extinction of animal species, say scientists | Environment | The Guardian



Discuss.

Even if this were factual, so what?

 

[Paranoid Android]

Even if this were factual, so what?

The humans that do that should no longer.....

 

[Valjean]

Yea, it is unfortunate that humanity's ability to deal with these issues seem to be getting harder and harder, especially as more people are coming about. I guess on the bright side, we got somewhere between 200-100000 years to ride this baby to the darkness.

You think we have another 200 years? It was only a little more than 200 years ago the industrial revolution began, and our impact on the planet's accelerating rapidly.

Even if this were factual, so what?

You don't care if the Earth's reduced to a desert wasteland for the next ten or twenty million years?

 

[Kerr]

Even if this were factual, so what?

We are part of this world, are we not? So it might be in our long term interest to not destroy it. Or short term, depending on how you view the time scale .

 

[BSM1]

You think we have another 200 years? It was only a little more than 200 years ago the industrial revolution began, and our impact on the planet's accelerating rapidly.
You don't care if the Earth's reduced to a desert wasteland for the next ten or twenty million years?

Even if this were true (and you're going off the subject concerning specie extinctions) what do you think we can do about it now? Also, if every snail darter or white rhino were gone how would that affect your day-to-day life? Would you die? Would you even stop going to Walmart? Species have been coming and going since the dawn of time and we're still here.

 

[Iti oj]

Even if this were factual, so what?

Even if this were true (and you're going off the subject concerning specie extinctions) what do you think we can do about it now? Also, if every snail darter or white rhino were gone how would that affect your day-to-day life? Would you die? Would you even stop going to Walmart? Species have been coming and going since the dawn of time and we're still here.

when the bees die and the trees die and the ocean life dies, that does effect me. this is not about rhinos. educate your self.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Species have been coming and going since the dawn of time and we're still here.

We're a relatively recent species. The same things that are killing off others can surely do the same to us, not to mention affect our quality of life.

 

[BSM1]

when the bees die and the trees die and the ocean life dies, that does effect me. this is not about rhinos. educate your self.

So, again, what can you do about it even if it were happening? Do you give humans so little credit that you believe we would not find a way to survive? (Also, did you think we would live forever?)

 

[Kerr]

So, again, what can you do about it even if it were happening?

If we try and do something, but it turns out we can't, we have at least tried. And we have probably improved our chances of surviving whatever comes next. So I'm not sure what the downside is for trying. Maybe reducing our level of comfort. But I'm not sure that's a bad thing, lol.

Do you give humans so little credit that you believe we would not find a way to survive? (Also, did you think we would live forever?)

We could survive. Or not. But human survival isn't the only issue. It's also about how we survive. What happens in the world directly effects how we live our lives.

Besides, I like what we are destroying. It's pretty.

 

[BSM1]

If we try and do something, but it turns out we can't, we have at least tried. And we have probably improved our chances of surviving whatever comes next. So I'm not sure what the downside is for trying. Maybe reducing our level of comfort. But I'm not sure that's a bad thing, lol.


We could survive. Or not. But human survival isn't the only issue. It's also about how we survive. What happens in the world directly effects how we live our lives.

Besides, I like what we are destroying. It's pretty.

So what do we try?

 

[dust1n]

You think we have another 200 years? It was only a little more than 200 years ago the industrial revolution began, and our impact on the planet's accelerating rapidly.

Well societies as we know them? Maybe. Maybe less. Little bands of humans will be around Mad Max style for a bit, would be my guess.


It's hard to gauge. I suspect if our political system (and many around the world) weren't so viciously broken, the chances of people being able to offset this. I'm not entirely pessimistic about human potential-- but there are a lot of very difficult human issues going on.

 

[dust1n]

So, again, what can you do about it even if it were happening?

Ignore it is a great place to start, I suspect.

 

[Ouroboros]

Ignore it is a great place to start, I suspect.

Yup. If we pretend it's not happening and start voting for congress people and presidents that want to outlaw talking about global climate change, then we've fixed it. LOL!

It's like any kind of problem. The first step is to recognize that there is one. Today, a lot of people are fighting against even admitting that there's a problem. We can't fix it or find any solutions unless we first all agree there's something to fix.

I read last week that 5 meter increase of the ocean level can't be avoided now. We'll get it regardless of what we do. (5 meter, that's about 15 feet.) It'll take 20 years, or 100, but we'll get there. But we can still stop the risk of having 20 meters rise (that would essentially take out some very famous coastal cities).

 

[Valjean]

Even if this were true (and you're going off the subject concerning specie extinctions) what do you think we can do about it now? Also, if every snail darter or white rhino were gone how would that affect your day-to-day life? Would you die? Would you even stop going to Walmart? Species have been coming and going since the dawn of time and we're still here.

The article isn't talking about ordinary extinction. It's talking about the five or six catastrophic Mass Extinctions that occurred in past ages, where >90% of large, multicellular species died out and biosystems took millions of years to recover. The article is about us, a newly evolved species, initiating just such a mass extinction, only at a much faster rate than previous catastrophes.
So my response is exactly on subject.

Would I die if these species died out? Quite likely. You don't seem to recognise the interconnectedness of our natural life-support system, and the simpler the organism the more essential it is to the whole structure. You can lop off the top floors of a skyscraper -- big, charismatic species -- and still have a building, but remove the foundation -- bacteria, fungi, coral, bees -- and the whole edifice comes toppling down.

I read last week that 5 meter increase of the ocean level can't be avoided now. We'll get it regardless of what we do. (5 meter, that's about 15 feet.) It'll take 20 years, or 100, but we'll get there. But we can still stop the risk of having 20 meters rise (that would essentially take out some very famous coastal cities).

Good point.
Consider that most of the world's population lives in costal or riverine regions. Europe is already being inundated with refugees from Africa and the middle East. Americans are freaking out about undocumented Latin Americans and about a few thousand refugee children from Central America coming over our borders.
How would the world accommodate billions of climate refugees?

 

[BSM1]

The article isn't talking about ordinary extinction. It's talking about the five or six catastrophic Mass Extinctions that occurred in past ages, where >90% of large, multicellular species died out and biosystems took millions of years to recover. The article is about us, a newly evolved species, initiating just such a mass extinction, only at a much faster rate than previous catastrophes.
So my response is exactly on subject.

Would I die if these species died out? Quite likely. You don't seem to recognise the interconnectedness of our natural life-support system, and the simpler the organism the more essential it is to the whole structure. You can lop off the top floors of a skyscraper -- big, charismatic species -- and still have a building, but remove the foundation -- bacteria, fungi, coral, bees -- and the whole edifice comes toppling down.
Good point.
Consider that most of the world's population lives in costal or riverine regions. Europe is already being inundated with refugees from Africa and the middle East. Americans are freaking out about undocumented Latin Americans and about a few thousand refugee children from Central America coming over our borders.
How would the world accommodate billions of climate refugees?

For your sake I truly hope this doesn't keep you awake at night.

 

[dust1n]

Yup. If we pretend it's not happening and start voting for congress people and presidents that want to outlaw talking about global climate change, then we've fixed it. LOL!

It's like any kind of problem. The first step is to recognize that there is one. Today, a lot of people are fighting against even admitting that there's a problem. We can't fix it or find any solutions unless we first all agree there's something to fix.

I read last week that 5 meter increase of the ocean level can't be avoided now. We'll get it regardless of what we do. (5 meter, that's about 15 feet.) It'll take 20 years, or 100, but we'll get there. But we can still stop the risk of having 20 meters rise (that would essentially take out some very famous coastal cities).

Consider that the Head of the Congressional Committee on Science, Technology and Space is Lamar Smith, the douche from this general area who:

"Smith, the current chair of the committee, has publicly criticized scientists and journalists who are “determined to advance the idea of human-made global warming,” and he has backed up his rhetoric with a hard line voting record. During his 25-year tenure in Congress, Smith has voted to block the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases, opposed tax credits for renewable energy and raising fuel efficiency standards and rejected the Kyoto Protocol.

As ThinkProgress points out, Smith has a powerful incentive to deny the existence of climate change: throughout his career, Smith has received $500,000 from the oil and gas industry.

5 Anti-Science Congressmen On The House Science Comm.