Slashdot Mirror


Earth Approaching Tipping Point Say Scientists

Hugh Pickens writes "The UC Berkeley News Center reports that a prestigious group of 22 internationally known scientists from around the world is warning that population growth, widespread destruction of natural ecosystems, and climate change may be driving Earth toward an irreversible change in the biosphere, a planet-wide tipping point that would have destructive consequences absent adequate preparation and mitigation. 'It really will be a new world, biologically, at that point,' warns lead author Anthony Barnosky. 'The data suggests that there will be a reduction in biodiversity and severe impacts on much of what we depend on to sustain our quality of life, including, for example, fisheries, agriculture, forest products and clean water. This could happen within just a few generations.' The authors note that studies of small-scale ecosystems show that once 50-90 percent of an area has been altered, the entire ecosystem tips irreversibly into a state far different from the original, in terms of the mix of plant and animal species and their interactions. Humans have already converted about 43 percent of the ice-free land surface of the planet to uses like raising crops and livestock and building cities. This situation typically is accompanied by species extinctions and a loss of biodiversity. 'My view is that humanity is at a crossroads now, where we have to make an active choice,' says Barnosky. 'One choice is to acknowledge these issues and potential consequences and try to guide the future (in a way we want to). The other choice is just to throw up our hands and say, 'Let's just go on as usual and see what happens.'"

24 of 759 comments (clear)

  1. This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just coincidence? I think not...

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
    1. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You do realize the universe doesn't give a flying fuck about liberal vs conservative, your way of life or the price of tea in China. This idiotic obsession with trying to turn any science you don't like into some ideological position is bizarre. Not everyone in this world is motivated by simplistic dogmatic positions.

      And how is declaring "engineering solutions will be found" not just simply passing the buck to the future?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Given my downmods, no. :-)

      But /. is a game with elaborate scoring - and Karma is not the sole scale for measuring this.

      An interesting game -- the only winning move is not to register.

    3. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by Phil06 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Whatever happens, it will become history, and you can't change history.

      --
      "...and yet, I blame society" Duke - Repo Man
    4. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Earth's load limit is 5 billion and we're over 7 billion already. There aren't enough resources to go around no matter how you divide it.

      What kind of "science" gave you that conclusion?

      Recent estimates indicate that there are enough raw materials in the earth's crust to last another 10,000 years of advancing civilization. Just because we have historically only mined the top ½ mile of the earth's crust does not mean that we will not develop new ways to reach natural resources. The beauty of the future is that it does not have to be restricted based on our current technological inabilities. It is organic, adaptable as situations change. In 1950, nobody thought we would be able to sustain a planet with four billion people. By 1980, not only had we surpassed that number, but we also improved world average life expectancy and were agriculturally productive in places that had been barren wasteland before. Do not limit the potential for our children based on the archaic limitations that we face today.

    5. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The reason to state it is to point out the stupidity of trying to insist science you don't like is just some opposing political/ideological claim. If the science is right or wrong it is because of the data, not because one is conservative or liberal.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    6. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by WillDraven · · Score: 5, Funny

      We need to energize that one percent to invest in its own future by creating an explosion of sustainable technologies and new industries that serve life and living as opposed to undermining life for billions while enriching dozens. Its time to turn things on their heads. Its time to kill the sacred cows, and shatter the broken paradigms that have been shaping this slow motion catastrophe for the last 30 years. Its time to put an end to business as usual, and making the kinds of changes that will ultimately serve the future.

      BINGO! What do I win?

      (Sorry, I couldn't resist. I agree with you for the most part, but that was awfully heavy on the buzz-words.)

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    7. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We were being warned of the immenent human-driven catastrophe that would subsume our civilization and imperil human existance. That was 1977.

      When a problem is described as "irreversible within a few GENERATIONS" then talking about it as something that's happening now, even over a 30+ year spread is perfectly valid.

    8. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by bunratty · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're referring to a single research paper. If you pick any particular research paper, it has a decent chance of being wrong. Any scientist will tell you that one research paper is only the beginning. Actual science requires reproducibility.

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    9. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by connect4 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Nonsense

      United States area = 9 trillion square meters (approximate)
      United states average insolation over 24hrs = 100w (pessimistic)
      United States average energy draw all forms of energy = 3.4 trillion watts
      Photovoltaic conversion factor = 15% (pessimitistic)

      area * insolation * conversion factor = 135 trillion watts average over 24hrs

      135 trillion watts > 3.4 trillion watts, even given these wildy pessimistic assumptions.

      of course covering the whole of the USA with solar panels is ridiculous, then you have storage to deal with, but yeah, your sums are out by several orders of magnitude.

    10. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by jc42 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And how is declaring "engineering solutions will be found" not just simply passing the buck to the future?

      Well, of course, it has to be in the future, because we've so resolutely refused to solve the problems in the past. ;-)

      But various others have pointed out that the "engineering solutions" may not be very far in the future, if we want to implement them. One of the consequences of the accumulated evidence that the recent climate changes are primarily due to human activity is that we know that we're capable of pushing the world' climate around, and we know how we've been doing it. So from an engineering viewpoint, pushing it in a different direction (e.g., stability or slower change) is within our capabilities. Granted, the "Further Research is Needed" mantra applies, but we know enough to take effective action now if we want to.

      The major questions aren't scientific or technical; they're economic, political and religious. That is, it doesn't do much good to convince the engineers that there's a problem that they can fix. They already know about it (and are looking for funding ;-). We also have to get the go-ahead from the leaders of our governments and major corporations.

      The outlook isn't necessarily good. We do have documentation about various major disasters throughout human history, including many that were caused by humans who understood that they were causing a disaster. History says that humans often don't act on such knowledge, even when their society is collapsing around them.

      We saw a good small-scale example of this back in 2005. Before Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, the US Government ran a simulation study of such events. Google "Hurricane Pam" to read all about it. Katrina was pretty similar to Pam. The US Army Corps of Engineers produced a thorough report on the physical infrastructure of the Mississippi Delta, which listed all the places where the levees would later break during Katrina, plus estimates of the maintenance required to fix the problems. Congress turned down the applications for funding. Everyone involved knew that it was just a matter of time until the disaster hit, but the government didn't fund the maintenance, and the disaster followed the engineers' prediction practically to the letter.

      This is a local example of the sort of disasters that our political systems have historically perpetrated with full knowledge beforehand. It looks like the climate-change story is a repeat performance. Some of the scientists involved decided to try to publicise it a couple of decades back, on the grounds that it was a growing problem that we could probably fix if we want to. But history says that we probably won't do anything about it, although we know how to.

      (If you want a bigger example, look up the history of ozone depletion. That's actually a fairly good example of partial success. The depletion is known to be almost entirely due to chemical compounds added to the atmosphere by human activity. Our dumping of those compounds has been radically decreased, and the depletion has nearly leveled off, though it hasn't been reversed. But it is an interesting example of human governments cooperating on a global level to deal with a global problem. So there's some hope. We don't always fail when facing such large-scale problems. ;-)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    11. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by F34nor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Bullshit. Food and water are it. Who cares about uranium when you are starving to death? The reality is that all our food is currently produced by using fossil fuels which Hubbard's curve indicates are either past their peak or approaching it rapidly. His math for the US was spot on and the best predictor of future performance is past performance. Watch "Arithmetic, Population and Energy" by Al Bartlett. Your estimates do not account for growth. Also watch or listen to David Suzuki's talk about growth and resources; anything that grows will double, anything that grows will exhaust its resources, even if we could quantumly duplicate earth twice one more doubling and the second earth is exhausted, the second doubling and all four are exhausted. You have no fucking idea what you are talking about and are not the least bit insightful. The argument that past scientists were wrong about the date is in fact a straw man argument and not deserving of any consideration. Math is the master here and she is an unforgiving mistress.

    12. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, think about it. You wake up, expect to see your tooth brush in the medicine cabinet, it's there. You look outside and it's light, you expect to see the sun shining, you're right. you turn on the stove, expect heat to come out, and your right. You turn on the light switch, and expect the light to turn on, and it does. You move one foot in front of the other and expect that to get you across the room, and it does. In the first five minutes of a day, each person is right hundreds of times.

      It's not surprising then, that it's hard for people to see their blindspots, because they are relatively rare.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    13. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by BlueStrat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This "wealth" is an illusion - conjured up by the ponzi-scheme of debt, coerced with state violence.

      Are you for real or am I being trolled?

      Are you against barter as well? That's all "wealth" in currency is. It's a means to barter without carrying around chickens, cows, etc or fixing a computer or digging a ditch on the spot in order to exchange it to someone else who spent their time/effort/skill to make/grow/create/build something that you need or want. Wealth itself is simply goods, services, or other valuable/useful things you have earned through labor, created, or can provide.

      People won't work for nothing or just hand over something they worked and put materials into creating/building/growing. Oh, unless one goes back to that old standard solution that's eventually been employed every time such utopian ideas have been tried through history, and to which I referred to in one of my previous posts: At the point of a gun/sword.

      Just like the Soviet farms. Production was extremely poor until the farmers were offered a way to benefit from what the farm produced.

      Capitalism is terrible. However, it's STILL the best, most successful system that's ever been created in all of history by any reasonable standard.

      >Capitalism is the only system ever created where wealth is a renewable resource for everyone and anyone willing to work and/or come up with an idea, skill, or invention that is useful or valuable to another person that you can then trade with for something you need or want.

      >Capitalism has raised more people from poverty and dramatically raised the standard of living of more people than any other system ever created.

      >Capitalism has allowed more people to live in more freedom than any other system ever invented.

      >Capitalism has allowed the US to provide more humanitarian assistance to those in need around the world than any other system or country in history.

      Now, the second part about government-run Ponzi schemes, crushing debt, and coercion by the state through the threat of violence I agree with to a great degree.

      "I place economy among the first and most important of republican virtues, and public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared." - Thomas Jefferson

      "The principle of spending money to be paid by posterity under the name of funding is but swindling futurity on a large scale." - Thomas Jefferson

      "If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretense of taking care of them, they must become happy." - Thomas Jefferson

      The root of the government corruption and the power the big corporations and ultra-rich wield originates and is enforced by a too-large and powerful central government. Corporations and the rich don't have military or civilian police forces. They don't pass laws or regulations. It's the government that passes the corrupt laws and regulations and enforces them, sometimes quite selectively, to the benefit of those with power and influence. It's the government that will kick in your door, shoot your dog and terrorize and threaten you and your family at gunpoint.

      Any power you give government, you give to those who have bought government influence. The only real protection is to keep government small and tightly restricted to only those few powers actually granted by a plain-language reading of the Constitution without "lawyering" the meaning of plain words to twist their meaning to suit a political agenda.

      "How strangely will the Tools of the Tyrant pervert the Plain Meaning of Words." - Samuel Adams

      "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." - Thomas Jefferson

      A large government makes hiding and/or obfuscating corruption and other improper behavior and guilt/blame easy.

      If the government doesn't have the power to r

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    14. Re:This Announcement Hot on Heels of Bilderbergers by progician · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I understand your scepticism however we know that we are far away from hitting any hard physical limits. We know, that we don't exploit fraction of the energy we receive from the Sun. We know, that fusion is possible. We know, that space travel, hence, spreading in the solar system is possible. This is not a belief or optimism, we know for sure.

      Take for example the drinking water problem. It is not that we don't have enough H2O on this planet, quite the opposite. To purify the sea water is not just possible, but we are doing it already. The drinking water problem hits those countries that haven't got the means to do so, which is due the distribution of wealth and has nothing to do with science or technology. If people are dying from the lack of water it is because their areas are excluded from the overall wealth of the human race.

      Everywhere I look, food shortages, drinking water problems, even Earth-quakes, I see social problems, not technological or hitting the limit of some physical constrain. The density of population is governed by house prices, and not reasonable organisation of life. Why would people leave the rural areas with plenty of living space for a cramped little place? Lack of work and house prices. Why would people starve in countries where there's large scale agriculture? Because the the crops are sold for higher prices to people with higher earnings thousands of kilometres away only to produce enormous amount of food waste. I can go on...

      The problem is that while our population grew in proportion of our technical advancement, our social organisation did not develop as much. We are still stuck with capitalism, ideologies of work ethic, while the automation of production is steadily growing. Our political establishment in the developed world is committed to keep things as they are with every means possible while it is clear that the organisation of the human race can not be tied to the timely structures of nations, ethnicity, while capitalism in the last 200 years acts as a global force already (that is, there's no "globalization" as such). Democracy, at least as it is today, does not serve the population better than any previous oppressing political establishment. Competition is idealized by many while it is nothing but wasting resources on pointless redundancies, all thanks for the bourgeois ideology of "free market" capitalism, which was never really true, and which can not be really true anyway.

      My point is in short, that while there's no evidence of hitting our natural boundaries any time soon, we are pretty much like a zombie when it comes to our social system. And the social factor is already causing massive disasters on a never seen global scale.

  2. Choice B it is by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sure we're going to pick Choice B, "throw up our hands and say, 'Let's just go on as usual and see what happens.'" Choice A would require some serious coordinated effort from all the world's industrialized nations, and there's absolutely no way that's ever going to happen.

  3. Yeah by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good luck with that. Humans will continue plodding along exactly the same as they always have, until they start dying off suddenly once the reserve is gone and some minor catastrophe or other strikes that is just too much to deal with, pushing everyone over the edge. After all that's how disease happens. You're fine until the day you're not. This will happen because everyone thinks it's someone else's problem. Witness people - not even only lower class uneducated peasants but middle class supposedly educated people - gladly boasting of having 5 or more kids even today. Now consider the undevelopped world parts of which are still growing at rates like 6% (which means doubling in size every 12 years). I'd say a few generations is too generous.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  4. Re:Deniers howling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No really, it really IS reaching a tipping point, no matter what your energy company overlords are saying.

    If you're so big into peer reviewed research, you might want to scale back your claims there, mate. The scientists in the article are a lot more careful in their claims than you, as we see from this quote, "The authors of the Nature review argue that, although many warning signs are emerging, no one knows how close Earth is to a global tipping point, or if it is inevitable." The world would be a better place if more people were careful in what they asserted,like these scientists.

    In other words, don't load up on oil futures just yet.

  5. Re:evolutionist's by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Why don't evolutionist's believe in evolution?"

    We don't believe in evoltution. Your phrase implies a faith that is not necessary. We merely understand evolution. For example, we understand that evolution is a biological mechanism, not an all encompassing silver bullet that guarantees survival of the human race regardless of the behavior of the planets inhabitants on a global scale. It is called an ecosystem for a reason, which leads to a need to understand entropy. Note that you don't need to believe in entropy. It is going to happen even if you become best friends with the flying spaghetti monster. The question is, can we dynamically counteract it. Some of us believe we can, and so it matters how we behave. Others don't believe it is necessary to change our behavior as a species, and will keep ignoring any evidence that is contradictory to their comfortable world view.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  6. Read the full article? by kasper_souren · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Instant access to this article: $32" I'd say were doomed.

  7. Re:Choice B has worked before by bunratty · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I see people driving dangerously all the time and I realize the driver is thinking "Hey, I've done this hundreds of times before and it's never been a problem." And they're right. Until the one time they're not right. Then it's too late. I don't think getting away with something many times is an excuse to keep doing it. People die that way every day.

    --
    What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
  8. Re:No need to worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Everything will correct itself. Once things get real bad, there will be large scale fighting which will kill off a fairly significant number of people which should bring us to the balance needed. Nature is self-correcting after all.

    Maybe, but then again you may not like the results from nature correcting itself.

  9. Re:The sky really IS falling! by JoshuaZ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Curious, one person replied to the graph claiming that it looks like it is leveling off (correctly noting that the rate of growth is expected to slow down) and someone else then claims the graph is somehow maniuplated. So could you explain what is manipulated in this graph? It isn't using a wonky time scale or a wonky population scale. The most common trick of this sort is to cut off the base and essentially start the y value at some higher level, but that's not the case here. It is also possible to cut off early data (say if one wanted to hide large scale fluctuations) but if you include data before 1800 the prior time looks pretty similar. So that's not. You can't just dismiss any graph as bad just because it is possible to make graphs look bad. It is a reason to actually look carefully at graphs, and if there's no problem with it, actually pay attention to it.

  10. Re:Choice B has worked before by _8553454222834292266 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Species around less than a million years thinks it will be around forever. LOL.