Polar bears not endangered, US confirms
- Thread starter EnglishLady
- Start date
EnglishLady
Veteran Expediter
WOW
I would like to be around in 50-100 years time to see if you are right .......
Anyone got the secret to the fountain of Youth yet?
I still believe that we ARE encroaching on nature as I stated and that cost will prove too high, 'cos sooner or later she will bite us in the ....proverbial
EnglishLady
Veteran Expediter
I'll have more to say once I've done some research and gathered my thoughts on the subject.
Well while you are gathering your thoughts and raiding the fridge ..... here are my thoughts ......
".... Georgina Mace, director of the Centre for Population Biology at Imperial College London, said that since 1950, human intervention has caused more changes in the ecosystem than during any other period in history. Animal populations have declined 20% worldwide and the rate of species extinction has accelerated, among numerous other problems"
From the Guardian newspaper March 2010
"For the first time since the dinosaurs disappeared, humans are driving animals and plants to extinction faster than new species can evolve, one of the world's experts on biodiversity has warned.
Conservation experts have already signalled that the world is in the grip of the "sixth great extinction" of species, driven by the destruction of natural habitats, hunting, the spread of alien predators and disease, and climate change...."
It seems no matter where you search there is agreement that species extinction is more rapid now than it has ever been.
From the LA Times October 2010[/B]
"Fifty species move closer to extinction every year, report says"
John Miller, MAE & F. David Peat, PhD2010 Regents of the University of Minnesota and Life Science Foundation.
"The most critical observation from this admittedly extremely cursory analysis may be the fact that instability, brought on by decreased diversity, destruction and fragmentation of habitat, and invasive species (and in recent years exacerbated by the exigencies of global climate change), is the main threat to this ecosystem. At one time, environmental efforts focused primarily on pollution, which is certainly dangerous and destructive. Pollution is still a factor and, where it is very high, it causes environmental destruction by killing organisms (e.g.creating "dead zones" in bodies of water). This brings the system to the extreme of rigidity and stasis (much as a dead body ceases to function systemically).
But instability is the other extreme, moving the system from dynamic stability towards turbulence. This makes it less resilient and more vulnerable. Like the local system described here, the planet as a whole is now threatened by the turbulence and instability caused by global warming"
Pollution, Global warming/Climate change/Destruction, destruction of habitats, introduction of non-native species, etc, etc
All man-made
Lady, we ARE nature!I still believe that we ARE encroaching on nature...
EnglishLady
Veteran Expediter
You seem to have not included all of my quote there Moot LOL
"Is "man" interfering with "nature" for his own gain? In this case oil, another case elsewhere could be logging and so on and soforth ....."
Putting aside the fact that the above quotes are from people who largely make their living off human-induced Climate Change, we have one person saying that "since 1950, human intervention has caused more changes in the ecosystem than during any other period in history," completely ignoring major and mini ice ages which had pretty major impacts on the ecosystem, not to mention the asteroid which caused the extinction of the dinosaurs, which also had somewhat of an ecosystem impact, and another saying, "For the first time since the dinosaurs disappeared, humans are driving animals and plants to extinction faster than new species can evolve," even though animals and plants have been going extinct at a rate faster than new species can evolve ever since not too long after the Cambrian Explosion, which happened long before the dinosaurs arrived.
Then we have this: "Conservation experts have already signalled that the world is in the grip of the "sixth great extinction" of species, driven by the destruction of natural habitats, hunting, the spread of alien predators and disease, and climate change...."
What caused the other five?
Who is to say that this "sixth great extinction" wouldn't have happened if humans were never here?
There are more extinct species in the fossil record than there are species alive on the planet today, and man had very little to do with those species who are now fossilized. I wonder how many extinct species there are who became extinct through no efforts of man, but have not yet had time to be fossilized?
Man's presence in some cases has the effect of keeping certain species more isolated, and therefore less susceptible to cross-species diseases, and when a disease does break out, their isolation keeps it from spreading wildly to other populations.
It's all a part of nature, whether it's man or something else.
There's a species of snake in the desert southwest that preys on a certain species of salamander. The snakes ate all the salamanders, which caused them to become extinct, and with the extinct salamanders, the snakes rapidly followed. Man had nothing to do with it. The snakes and the salamanders lived only in a remote 20 square mile area of northern Arizona where man had zero impact on their habitat. That's just one example of many where nature takes its course, whether it uses man to get there, or not.
"It seems no matter where you search there is agreement that species extinction is more rapid now than it has ever been."
Not quite true, as it matters a great deal where you search. If you limit your search to OMG types, you'll find that kind of stuff all day long, but the fact is, other than the fossil records, we really don't know the extent of extinctions or the speed of which they happened beyond about 50 years ago. And other than some very specific examples where mankind might have delayed or possibly deflected an extinction here and there, there's no real evidence to support that most of the extinctions of the past 50 years would not have occurred regardless.
"Pollution, Global warming/Climate change/Destruction, destruction of habitats, introduction of non-native species, etc, etc
All man-made"
Sorry, no. Even one moderate volcanic eruption dwarfs the entire output of all of mankind's pollution. Global Warming and Climate Change is the status quo for the planet, and has been going on long before humans got here and will be going on long after we've gone. Destruction, be it from volcanic eruptions, mudslides, floods, hurricanes, fires, wind and rain, is also the norm for the planet. Mt St Helens destroyed the habitat of no less than 6 unique species, and barfed more CO2, oxygen choking ash and greenhouse gases into the atmosphere in 15 minutes than man has ever put into the air. They're still trying to figure out how man caused that one, too.
In 1883 the island of Krakatoa exploded in one of the most violent volcanic eruptions in recorded history, yielding more 13,000 times the power and energy than the Hiroshima bomb. It ejected more than 5 cubic miles of rock, ash and pumice 50 miles into the atmosphere. Like Mt St Helens, it too ejected more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than all of mankind ever has. Despite the massive amounts of greenhouse gases ejected into the air, the eruption caused the global temperature to drop 1.2 Celsius in the year after the explosion, and weather patterns were in havoc until the finally began to return to more normal patterns five years later, with the normal global weather patterns stabilizing about 9 or 10 years later. The combined effects of pyroclastic flows, volcanic ashes, and tsunamis had disastrous results in the region. Entire islands were utterly destroyed, some were split in two, and some where merely covered up under a mile of ash. Groups of human skeletons floated across the Indian Ocean on rafts of volcanic pumice and washed up on the east coast of Africa up to a year after the eruption. The cricket-billed jungle rat and the spotted gerbil warbler fish population didn't fare any better.
Certainly man has destroyed some habitats, but there have been many habitats over the millennia that have been destroyed without man's help.
While man has certainlyintroduced non-native species, it's not like man is the only way non-native species have moved from place to place. Every single occupant of the Galapagos Islands are non-native, and man didn't place a single one of them there.
Yes, man encroaches on the Animal Kingdom, largely because man is an integral part of the Animal Kingdom, and whatever the Animal Kingdom does, including man, is nature doing its thing.Man can have an impact on nature, so to speak, but in the end it's nature that will win out, no matter what man tries to do.
Incidentally, Yellowstone National Park sits atop a super volcano that makes St Helens, Krakatoa and Pinatubo an afterthought in the world of destructive volcanoes. When that thing next goes, not only will countless species become extinct through no fault of man, but so will a rather large chunk of North America, pretty much all of it east of the Rockies and west of the Appalachians.
Yet somebody somewhere will blame mankind for it. After all, they blamed the recent earthquakes in China on man-made Global Warming.
Personally, I blame mankind for the breakup of Pangea.
Last edited:
EnglishLady
Veteran Expediter
That would be : End Cretaceous, End Triassic, End Permian, Late Devonian, and End Ordovician
That would be NASA Scientists .... "Correlations between rising CO2 levels and global surface temperatures suggest that our planet is on a one-way warming trend triggered by human activity"
I tried to keep my searches objective, even on reports that might support you there was still a mention that man "probably" had some connection
Ah yes the Hiroshima Bomb and all the other nuclear testing explosions - man made
Not on the scale of what "Man" does today we denude their environment.
Agreed (you will like this example.... maybe LOL)
In England the English Red squirrel is all but gone because the American Grey squirrel was introduced at the turn of the 19th to 20th Century. The grey squirrel managed to displace the Red Squirrel apparently due to its larger size, therefore giving it a greater advantage for food & staying healthier gives it the better breeding chances. Also the disease Parapoxvirus is fatal to the Red Squirrel, whilst the Grey Squirrel remains unaffected but is believed to be the carrier of the disease It is now classed as a pest in the UK and controls are in place to reduce the Grey Squirrel numbers allowing the Red squirrel to make a come back - Man introducing "alien" species
Too funny LOL
That's just what they're called. The names weren't the cause of the extinctions.
Well that's not tooooo taken out of context, now is it? LOL
Here's the context:
Full article here, courtesy of the English Lass herself (thank you for that), and it's a very interesting article (and not only because it makes many of the same points I've made in this thread
, but because it's a reasoned, honest assessment of the facts at hand, and more importantly, the facts which we do not yet know. )I don't doubt that man "probably" has some connection. What I doubt is that, "Man flat out caused it, end of discussion."
Ever seen the pictures of the aftermath of Mt St Helens, or the celestial Tungusta Event? That's some pretty denuded environment right there. The Tunguska Event happened in a flash. Mt St Helens took a few seconds more than that. It would take decades for man to duplicate that scale of denuding.
Yup, one example of many where man has introduced an alien species. Talk to an Aussie about rabbits. Or Layout about Zebra Mussels or Asian Carp. But is it really Man who introduced the alien species, or was it really nature doing it, by using Man as the tool to do it?
Ah, hah! There ya go.
EnglishLady
Veteran Expediter
Well that's not tooooo taken out of context, now is it? LOL
No not really LOL so i will highlight the other bit I was not going to put in last time.....
"After that, the best models require a human-induced greenhouse effect."
Here's the context: Full article here, courtesy of the English Lass herself (thank you for that),
You're welcome
I don't doubt that man "probably" has some connection. What I doubt is that, "Man flat out caused it, end of discussion."
I totally agree .... does this mean you are coming round to my way of thinking at last
Ever seen the pictures of the aftermath of Mt St Helens, or the celestial Tungusta Event? That's some pretty denuded environment right there. The Tunguska Event happened in a flash. Mt St Helens took a few seconds more than that. It would take decades for man to duplicate that scale of denuding.
Hmmmm you never talked about the nuclear testing now did you, I think that would denude a forest or three for decades
Yup, one example of many where man has introduced an alien species. Talk to an Aussie about rabbits. Or Layout about Zebra Mussels or Asian Carp. But is it really Man who introduced the alien species, or was it really nature doing it, by using Man as the tool to do it?
LOL somehow I don't see Dr Doolittle anywhere in this, so the squirrel didn't ask for a lift to the next continent - what did he do stowaway in his pocket?
Ah, hah! There ya go.
Ah hah back at ya
"Hmmmm you never talked about the nuclear testing now did you, I think that would denude a forest or three for decades "
Fair point, but I'm not aware of any nuclear testing having been performed in the forests. Most have been underground, or in the remote desert. No large areas of flora habitat has been destroyed by nuclear testing, as far as I know. The North American Gray Squirrels that were on vacation in Hiroshima were pretty ticked, tho.
"I totally agree .... does this mean you are coming round to my way of thinking at last "
Not even. You're willing to give man far more credit that I am.
"LOL somehow I don't see Dr Doolittle anywhere in this, so the squirrel didn't ask for a lift to the next continent - what did he do stowaway in his pocket?"
No, man took him there, without question, even if he was a stowaway. A squirrel finds an awesome place to store his nuts, an empty wooden barrel on the edge of a dock under his favorite tree in North Carolina. He makes many trips to and fro to store his nuts. One day he decided to take a nap with his nuts, and he wakes up in Liverpool. Yikes! Then he spots a hot redhead. "Nuts? What nuts? Yo mama, come to Rocky!"
A bird eats a beakfull of sunflower seeds in Nebraska. He then flies to Oklahoma where sunflowers do not naturally occur. He craps sunflower seeds, which work their way into the ground, get rained on and germinate, viola! another alien species takes root. Before you know it, sunflowers are indigenous to Oklahoma.
Mississippi needs ground cover. Something that will keep erosion down. The U.S. government discovers Kudzu in Japan, and brings it to the United States in 1876. It works great, is a very good erosion inhibitor, is used to make soaps, lotions, jellies and compost. They even pay farmers to plant kudzu for erosion control, herbs and cattle feed. Whoa. Hey, wait a minute! Come back here. Kudzu spreads at a rate of 150,000 acres per year. Holy crap on a cracker! It's the Vine that Ate the South! Whoops. OK, you can stop planting kudzu now.
The difference is the first one was done by man, unknowingly, the second was done by man, intentionally albeit stupidly, and the third one was done by "nature", yet in reality, since man is a part of nature, nature did 'em all.
The only difference is, man has the ability to think about it afterwards, which is a talent that comes, dare I say, naturally.
Incidentally, during World War II, kudzu was introduced to Vanuatu and Fiji by United States armed forces to serve as camouflage for equipment. It worked so well that today no one can even find Vanuatu or Fiji.
"Fair point, but I'm not aware of any nuclear testing having been performed in the forests. Most have been underground, or in the remote desert. No large areas of flora habitat has been destroyed by nuclear testing, as far as I know. The North American Gray Squirrels that were on vacation in Hiroshima were pretty ticked, tho.
"I totally agree .... does this mean you are coming round to my way of thinking at last "
Not even. You're willing to give man far more credit that I am.
"LOL somehow I don't see Dr Doolittle anywhere in this, so the squirrel didn't ask for a lift to the next continent - what did he do stowaway in his pocket?"
No, man took him there, without question, even if he was a stowaway. A squirrel finds an awesome place to store his nuts, an empty wooden barrel on the edge of a dock under his favorite tree in North Carolina. He makes many trips to and fro to store his nuts. One day he decided to take a nap with his nuts, and he wakes up in Liverpool. Yikes! Then he spots a hot redhead. "Nuts? What nuts? Yo mama, come to Rocky!"
A bird eats a beakfull of sunflower seeds in Nebraska. He then flies to Oklahoma where sunflowers do not naturally occur. He craps sunflower seeds, which work their way into the ground, get rained on and germinate, viola! another alien species takes root. Before you know it, sunflowers are indigenous to Oklahoma.
Mississippi needs ground cover. Something that will keep erosion down. The U.S. government discovers Kudzu in Japan, and brings it to the United States in 1876. It works great, is a very good erosion inhibitor, is used to make soaps, lotions, jellies and compost. They even pay farmers to plant kudzu for erosion control, herbs and cattle feed. Whoa. Hey, wait a minute! Come back here. Kudzu spreads at a rate of 150,000 acres per year. Holy crap on a cracker! It's the Vine that Ate the South! Whoops. OK, you can stop planting kudzu now.
The difference is the first one was done by man, unknowingly, the second was done by man, intentionally albeit stupidly, and the third one was done by "nature", yet in reality, since man is a part of nature, nature did 'em all.
The only difference is, man has the ability to think about it afterwards, which is a talent that comes, dare I say, naturally.
Incidentally, during World War II, kudzu was introduced to Vanuatu and Fiji by United States armed forces to serve as camouflage for equipment. It worked so well that today no one can even find Vanuatu or Fiji.
Last edited:
Proof that global warming exists can be found every time I look out upon my back yard. 10,000 years ago my back yard was covered by a 5 mile thick sheet of ice. Today it is merely buried under 5 feet of snow. Proof positive that global warming is real and Al Gore is my hero.
EnglishLady
Veteran Expediter
I think Moots got you there Turtle - proof positive ROFL
Loved the bit about the NC Squirrel and the Vine that ate the South