Mass Extinction - Do you believe it?
4,432 Views |
55 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by FLBear5630
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Keith Richards will be the only survivor.
I thought this was going to be a covid vaccine thread
And George Soros.He Hate Me said:
Keith Richards will be the only survivor.
"Stand with anyone when he is right; Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong." - Abraham Lincoln
That article - is not how mass extinctions work. Think ice ages, asteroids, volcanoes, or that fat kid's fart in 3rd grade.
99% of all species that ever dared to live here are extinct. Man is but a blimp on the screen.
99% of all species that ever dared to live here are extinct. Man is but a blimp on the screen.
Or a screen on a blimp.GrowlTowel said:
That article - is not how mass extinctions work. Think ice ages, asteroids, volcanoes, or that fat kid's fart in 3rd grade.
99% of all species that ever dared to live here are extinct. Man is but a blimp on the screen.
A global flood will do that sort of thing.GrowlTowel said:
99% of all species that ever dared to live here are extinct. Man is but a blimp on the screen.
True, but all the animals were two by two.He Hate Me said:A global flood will do that sort of thing.GrowlTowel said:
99% of all species that ever dared to live here are extinct. Man is but a blimp on the screen.
Two by two of unclean by their kind (not species) andGrowlTowel said:True, but all the animals were two by two.He Hate Me said:A global flood will do that sort of thing.GrowlTowel said:
99% of all species that ever dared to live here are extinct. Man is but a blimp on the screen.
Seven of clean animals by their kind (not species).
https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
But, as rainforest ecologist Nigel Stork, then at the University of Melbourne, pointed out in a groundbreaking paper in 2009, if the formula worked as predicted, up to half the planet's species would have disappeared in the past 40 years. And they haven't. "There are almost no empirical data to support estimates of current extinctions of 100, or even one, species a day," he concluded.
He is not alone. In 2011, ecologist Stephen Hubbell of UC Los Angeles concluded, from a study of forest plots around the world run by the Smithsonian Institution, that as forests were lost, "more species always remained than were expected from the species-area relationship." Nature is proving more adaptable than previously supposed, he said. It seems that most species don't simply die out if their usual habitats disappear. Instead they hunker down in their diminished refuges, or move to new habitats.
Claude Martin, former director of the environment group WWF International an organization that in his time often promoted many of the high scenarios of future extinctions now agrees that the "pessimistic projections" are not playing out. In his new book, On The Edge, he points out that El Salvador has lost 90 percent of its forests but only three of its 508 forest bird species. Meanwhile, the island of Puerto Rico has lost 99 percent of its forests but just seven native bird species, or 12 percent.
He is not alone. In 2011, ecologist Stephen Hubbell of UC Los Angeles concluded, from a study of forest plots around the world run by the Smithsonian Institution, that as forests were lost, "more species always remained than were expected from the species-area relationship." Nature is proving more adaptable than previously supposed, he said. It seems that most species don't simply die out if their usual habitats disappear. Instead they hunker down in their diminished refuges, or move to new habitats.
Claude Martin, former director of the environment group WWF International an organization that in his time often promoted many of the high scenarios of future extinctions now agrees that the "pessimistic projections" are not playing out. In his new book, On The Edge, he points out that El Salvador has lost 90 percent of its forests but only three of its 508 forest bird species. Meanwhile, the island of Puerto Rico has lost 99 percent of its forests but just seven native bird species, or 12 percent.
Canada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
I agree, but maybe human population life style
Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
There are very few places on the entire planet where human development has not dramatically impacted animal habitats.
Computer models are not required….just eyes .
Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Last I checked, real Science did not depend on popularity or consensus.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
Ehrluch was wrong. Therefore no one thereafter is correct?
Osodecentx said:Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
Ehrluch was wrong. Therefore no one thereafter is correct?
When has anyone of Erlich's ilk ever been right??
John SnowJohnny Bear said:Osodecentx said:Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
Ehrluch was wrong. Therefore no one thereafter is correct?
When has anyone of Erlich's ilk ever been right??
Correct.Osodecentx said:Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
Ehrluch was wrong. Therefore no one thereafter is correct?
Harrison Bergeron said:Correct.Osodecentx said:Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
Ehrluch was wrong. Therefore no one thereafter is correct?
Huhwhat?
Harrison Bergeron said:Correct.Osodecentx said:Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
Ehrluch was wrong. Therefore no one thereafter is correct?
That question includes you. Therefore you aren't correct either
Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
If you can find even 1 scientist that claimed that I'd be surprised. Every single one I ever read talked about slowing the spread, not eradicating the virus with plexiglass and masks.
I'm sure you won't read this, but I haven't found anyone who disputes it with facts.Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History is a 2014 non-fiction book written by Elizabeth Kolbert and published by Henry Holt and Company. The book argues that the Earth is in the midst of a modern, man-made, sixth extinction. In the book, Kolbert chronicles previous mass extinction events, and compares them to the accelerated, widespread extinctions during our present time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sixth_Extinction:_An_Unnatural_History
doesn't "prevent" and "slow the spread" mean about the same thing, neither being eradicate?Porteroso said:Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
If you can find even 1 scientist that claimed that I'd be surprised. Every single one I ever read talked about slowing the spread, not eradicating the virus with plexiglass and masks.
LIB,MR BEARS said:doesn't "prevent" and "slow the spread" mean about the same thing, neither being eradicate?Porteroso said:Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
If you can find even 1 scientist that claimed that I'd be surprised. Every single one I ever read talked about slowing the spread, not eradicating the virus with plexiglass and masks.
Not at all. Prevention is the absence of. Not necessarily the eradication of, but slow the spread is you might get it later, but fewer will get it now.
I've understood it that way, in the context of trying to prevent hospitals from being overrun.
adding to my reading list.. dont disappoint me with your recommendation!Osodecentx said:I'm sure you won't read this, but I haven't found anyone who disputes it with facts.Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History is a 2014 non-fiction book written by Elizabeth Kolbert and published by Henry Holt and Company. The book argues that the Earth is in the midst of a modern, man-made, sixth extinction. In the book, Kolbert chronicles previous mass extinction events, and compares them to the accelerated, widespread extinctions during our present time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sixth_Extinction:_An_Unnatural_History
I wish my dentist understood thisPorteroso said:LIB,MR BEARS said:doesn't "prevent" and "slow the spread" mean about the same thing, neither being eradicate?Porteroso said:Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
If you can find even 1 scientist that claimed that I'd be surprised. Every single one I ever read talked about slowing the spread, not eradicating the virus with plexiglass and masks.
Not at all. Prevention is the absence of. Not necessarily the eradication of, but slow the spread is you might get it later, but fewer will get it now.
I've understood it that way, in the context of trying to prevent hospitals from being overrun.
How about crime prevention?
How do condoms prevent pregnancies and STDs?
It seems to me how the word is commonly used vs the written definition are two different, but related, things.
Everyone but you seems to understand that the real world application of "prevention" does not equal elimination.
4th and Inches said:adding to my reading list.. dont disappoint me with your recommendation!Osodecentx said:I'm sure you won't read this, but I haven't found anyone who disputes it with facts.Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History is a 2014 non-fiction book written by Elizabeth Kolbert and published by Henry Holt and Company. The book argues that the Earth is in the midst of a modern, man-made, sixth extinction. In the book, Kolbert chronicles previous mass extinction events, and compares them to the accelerated, widespread extinctions during our present time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sixth_Extinction:_An_Unnatural_History
It is dense reading. I was skeptical, but she'll bury you in facts. I don't know how to remedy it
LIB,MR BEARS said:I wish my dentist understood thisPorteroso said:LIB,MR BEARS said:doesn't "prevent" and "slow the spread" mean about the same thing, neither being eradicate?Porteroso said:Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
If you can find even 1 scientist that claimed that I'd be surprised. Every single one I ever read talked about slowing the spread, not eradicating the virus with plexiglass and masks.
Not at all. Prevention is the absence of. Not necessarily the eradication of, but slow the spread is you might get it later, but fewer will get it now.
I've understood it that way, in the context of trying to prevent hospitals from being overrun.
How about crime prevention?
How do condoms prevent pregnancies and STDs?
It seems to me how the word is commonly used vs the written definition are two different, but related, things.
Everyone but you seems to understand that the real world application of "prevention" does not equal elimination.
So when Smoky tells you only you can prevent forest fires, you're thinking to yourself it's only a matter of time before you're an arsonist?
I think you should read my entire post before pretending you did.
Does the Prevent defense always prevent the offense from scoring a TD?Porteroso said:LIB,MR BEARS said:I wish my dentist understood thisPorteroso said:LIB,MR BEARS said:doesn't "prevent" and "slow the spread" mean about the same thing, neither being eradicate?Porteroso said:Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
If you can find even 1 scientist that claimed that I'd be surprised. Every single one I ever read talked about slowing the spread, not eradicating the virus with plexiglass and masks.
Not at all. Prevention is the absence of. Not necessarily the eradication of, but slow the spread is you might get it later, but fewer will get it now.
I've understood it that way, in the context of trying to prevent hospitals from being overrun.
How about crime prevention?
How do condoms prevent pregnancies and STDs?
It seems to me how the word is commonly used vs the written definition are two different, but related, things.
Everyone but you seems to understand that the real world application of "prevention" does not equal elimination.
So when Smoky tells you only you can prevent forest fires, you're thinking to yourself it's only a matter of time before you're an arsonist?
I think you should read my entire post before pretending you did.
Seeing as Smokey is a fictional character and fire prevention is a real business that doesn't eliminate all fires, even at places they have serviced, I'm beginning to understand your fictional logic.Porteroso said:LIB,MR BEARS said:I wish my dentist understood thisPorteroso said:LIB,MR BEARS said:doesn't "prevent" and "slow the spread" mean about the same thing, neither being eradicate?Porteroso said:Harrison Bergeron said:Most scientists agreed masks and hanging plexiglass would prevent covid-19.Osodecentx said:Tempus Edax Rerum said:https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildlyCanada2017 said:
Of course .
The human population explosion is destroying animal habitats throughout the world .
Interesting read. It would appear most scientist are not sure but simply rely on computer models. According to this article extinction rates seen in the real world are far lower.
Most scientists agree we are early into the 6th mass extinction
Paul Ehrlich says hi.
If you can find even 1 scientist that claimed that I'd be surprised. Every single one I ever read talked about slowing the spread, not eradicating the virus with plexiglass and masks.
Not at all. Prevention is the absence of. Not necessarily the eradication of, but slow the spread is you might get it later, but fewer will get it now.
I've understood it that way, in the context of trying to prevent hospitals from being overrun.
How about crime prevention?
How do condoms prevent pregnancies and STDs?
It seems to me how the word is commonly used vs the written definition are two different, but related, things.
Everyone but you seems to understand that the real world application of "prevention" does not equal elimination.
So when Smoky tells you only you can prevent forest fires, you're thinking to yourself it's only a matter of time before you're an arsonist?
I think you should read my entire post before pretending you did.
Smokey sez: "Only you can prevent forest fires."
Smokey does not sez: "Only you can completely eradicate all forest fires."
Smokey does not sez: "Only you can completely eradicate all forest fires."