Hum Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Are humans causing a mass extinction on the magnitude of the one that killed the dinosaurs? The answer is yes, according to a new analysis - but we still have some time to stop it. Mass extinctions include events in which 75 percent of the species on Earth disappear within a geologically short time period, usually on the order of a few hundred thousand to a couple million years. It's happened only five times before in the past 540 million years of multicellular life on Earth. (The last great extinction occurred 65 million years ago, when the dinosaurs were wiped out.) At current rates of extinction, the study found, Earth will enter its sixth mass extinction within the next 300 to 2,000 years. "It's bittersweet, because we're showing that we have this crisis," study co-author Elizabeth Ferrer, a graduate student in biology at the University of California, Berkeley, told LiveScience. "But we still have time to fix this." Others aren't so optimistic that humans will actually do anything to stop the looming disaster, saying that politics is successfully working against saving species and the planet. Species go extinct all the time, said Anthony Barnosky, the curator of the Museum of Paleontology at UC Berkeley and another co-author of the paper, which appears in today?s (March 2) issue of the journal Nature. But new species also evolve constantly, meaning that biodiversity usually stays constant. Mass extinctions happen when that balance goes out of whack. Suddenly, extinctions far outpace the genesis of new species, and the old rules for species survival go out the window. The culprits for the biodiversity loss include climate change, habitat loss, pollution and overfishing, the researchers wrote. "Most of the mechanisms that are occurring today, most of them are caused by us," Ferrer said. So can we fix it? Yes, there's time to cut dependence on fossil fuels, alleviate climate change and commit to conservation of habitat, the study scientists say. The more pressing question is, will we? full article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick H. Supervisor Posted March 3, 2011 Supervisor Share Posted March 3, 2011 So can we fix it? Yes, there's time to cut dependence on fossil fuels, alleviate climate change and commit to conservation of habitat, the study scientists say. Wow, is it that simple? Why didn't we do this earlier then? </sarcasm> There's nothing really new here. We've known for a while that if we continue on our present course there will be catastrophic consequences, but we don't change, whether it be due to technological restrictions or political/monetary issues. This is just one more result of our present course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrikedOut Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Im sure 'something' will be done, whether it will be enough is another question and of course it will mean more excuses to TAX the life out of the average person. :angry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Well since the average person is the root cause, I don't see how that would be unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teebor Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Hold on.... This looks alot like he Global Warming fanatics are taking on a new tack I see what you did there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhangm Supervisor Posted March 3, 2011 Supervisor Share Posted March 3, 2011 Even if every world leader decided today to switch to an environmentally friendly tack, it would still take years for anything to change. I've had a small taste of the bureaucratic parasites cluster****ing a relatively small institution, and I couldn't quite imagine the scale that it exists at within entire nations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted March 3, 2011 Veteran Share Posted March 3, 2011 Hold on.... This looks alot like he Global Warming fanatics are taking on a new tack I see what you did there It's not a new tact. The 4th IPCC report from a few years ago suggested a 30% reduction in speciation. This article is suggesting a 75% which may be on the high side but the IPCC report is known to be conservative. Here's a quote from back in 2006: Climate change alone is expected to force a further 15%- 37% of species to the brink of extinction within the next 50 years. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2006/jul/20/biodiversity.conservationandendangeredspecies It's always been a core talking point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Pay more taxes or apocalyptic anthropogenic global warming.... oops, I meant "climate change" (when has climate NOT changed?)... How can more taxes fix anything like this (presuming it's real)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MS Bob 11 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 O earth, please let me see Windows 8 before you make everyone extinct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanVP Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 O earth, please let me see Windows 8 before you make everyone extinct. Or Windows 9... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted March 3, 2011 Veteran Share Posted March 3, 2011 Pay more taxes or apocalyptic anthropogenic global warming.... oops, I meant climate change... How can more taxes fix anything like this (presuming it's real)? Some people still think there is time to reduce the damaging being done. There would still be mass extinctions but there would be less extinctions. Polar climates would be the most affected and they already suffer from a relative lack of biological diversity. Personally, I think the time to get something done with respect to prevention has long passed (after all, Kyoto was 1997). Now we'll end up spending gobs more money on adaptation and stick it to the developing world (yet again). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaffney Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Wait, how is climate change going to effect us as a species at all ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted March 3, 2011 Veteran Share Posted March 3, 2011 O earth, please let me see Windows 8 before you make everyone extinct. Wait, how is climate change going to effect us as a species at all ? The article is about a mass extinction of animals and thus a reduction in the planet's biodiversity. There will still be more and more humans. There will be 9 billion people by 2050 as humans adapt to change fairly well. Mind you, the developing world will have it pretty tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neoadorable Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 if the so-called developing world will have it tough, so will the so-called developed world. mass migration, anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted March 3, 2011 Veteran Share Posted March 3, 2011 The developed world is the best prepared for change. If it gets too hot/wet/dry for oranges in Florida then we'll start to see oranges grown in Georgia and South Carolina. If it gets too hot/wet/dry for peaches in Georgia then we'll see peaches being grown in North Carolina*. Polar climates like Canada, Russia and Scandinavia could benefit from newly viable crops if the new precipitation patterns are favourable. The tropical areas of the world, which never boasted the ideal conditions to begin with may very well get worse. The vast majority of the world's human population resides in temperate zones: Sub-tropical and tropical areas just can't grow the same crops. They have other crop choices but it doesn't tend to be the food that we value highly. *Just an example. For all I know peaches may already grow in NC. Pick some more northern state then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Frett Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Good grief, don't stop it. We are long overdue to be extinct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaffney Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 The article is about a mass extinction of animals and thus a reduction in the planet's biodiversity. There will still be more and more humans. There will be 9 billion people by 2050 as humans adapt to change fairly well. Mind you, the developing world will have it pretty tough. Overpopulation is likely to lead to a sharp downfall in population but that's not global warming's fault it's overpopulation. As for biodiversity, not many species are suffering in the grand scheme of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farstrider Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Overpopulation is likely to lead to a sharp downfall in population but that's not global warming's fault it's overpopulation. As for biodiversity, not many species are suffering in the grand scheme of things. Have you read what you wrote?? In fact do you even know what it is you were trying to say? Your brain went into scrambled egg mode and out it burtled! I sure as hell don't! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firey Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 *shrug* me, my kids, and my kids kids, will all be long gone, so let people in 200 years worry about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted March 3, 2011 Veteran Share Posted March 3, 2011 Overpopulation is likely to lead to a sharp downfall in population but that's not global warming's fault it's overpopulation. As for biodiversity, not many species are suffering in the grand scheme of things. You don't think that 15%- 37% of the planet's biodiversity is much in the grand scheme of things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Growled Member Posted March 3, 2011 Member Share Posted March 3, 2011 Just another gloom and doom forecast, it seems. They aren't happy unless something or someone is dying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etempest Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I believe this is possible, however when there's estimates along the lines of "300 to 2,000 years" they really are doing an educated guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APH-Alex Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 I can see this, as efficiency and renew-ability are enemies of profit, so we have to rely on scarcity which is horrible for our environment. The reason for this is our raping of our mother Earth. Within ten years the US. will be bankrupt too, anything else you wanna tell us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted March 3, 2011 Veteran Share Posted March 3, 2011 I believe this is possible, however when there's estimates along the lines of "300 to 2,000 years" they really are doing an educated guess. Yeah, I agree this is a bit of a doom and gloom report. Hopefully we won't need to be as reliant on fossil fuels by 2050. The IPCC report talked about a 30% loss in species by 2050 though. That's a more significant prediction based on the reasonable time line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo003 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 If there's still life on earth, I would hardly call it "extingtion" especially after 6 freaking time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts