Slashdot Mirror
Study: Sixth Extinction Event Is Underway
garyisabusyguy writes: We've heard proposals in the past that a new extinction event is underway. However, a new study takes into consideration many other factors that may be tilting the data, and still comes to the inevitable conclusion that we have triggered a large die-off, and that we may become victims of it as well.
From the paper's abstract: "Even under our assumptions, which would tend to minimize evidence of an incipient mass extinction, the average rate of vertebrate species loss over the last century is up to 114 times higher than the background rate. Under the 2 E/MSY background rate, the number of species that have gone extinct in the last century would have taken, depending on the vertebrate taxon, between 800 and 10,000 years to disappear. These estimates reveal an exceptionally rapid loss of biodiversity over the last few centuries, indicating that a sixth mass extinction is already under way."
The authors suggest that rapid work to avert the worst of the die-off is still possible. The question may really be whether we can get past paid trolls, FUD, and finger pointing in order to act wisely in a timely manner.
From the paper's abstract: "Even under our assumptions, which would tend to minimize evidence of an incipient mass extinction, the average rate of vertebrate species loss over the last century is up to 114 times higher than the background rate. Under the 2 E/MSY background rate, the number of species that have gone extinct in the last century would have taken, depending on the vertebrate taxon, between 800 and 10,000 years to disappear. These estimates reveal an exceptionally rapid loss of biodiversity over the last few centuries, indicating that a sixth mass extinction is already under way."
The authors suggest that rapid work to avert the worst of the die-off is still possible. The question may really be whether we can get past paid trolls, FUD, and finger pointing in order to act wisely in a timely manner.
Funny you should mention FUD in the summary, considering the entire premise is a textbook demonstration.
We can have an intelligent and productive movement towards a clean, ecologically healthy world without the fear mongering bullshit.
I think the human species as a whole is well positioned to make it through this extinction event and come out even stronger than we are right now. It's really about competition and natural selection being two fundamental characteristics of nature. In a system such as this, if a 'super' organism evolves, eventually it is the ultimate end result it will dominate the species space at the expensive of lots of others who are less adaptable or capable. There's nothing un-natural about this, it's and end stage of the system that got us to this point. A lot of the species that exist right now should be identified, analyzed, sequenced, their DNA digitally saved, and then allowed to fade from the ecosystem into the dustbin of history along with the mammoth and the dodo. A fully 'mature' world may very well consist of a single dominant intelligent species, with only a handful of supporting species. No need to panic about this or try to alter the natural progression of things. We should celebrate that we've finally made it this far as a world.
The question may really be whether we can get past paid trolls, FUD, and finger pointing in order to act wisely in a timely manner
In other words, "the question is whether we can get past people who don't agree instantly with me. We just need to put aside our differences and agree with me. "
So, last time I checked (a couple of days back, when this first appeared in the news), "background extinction rate" is a great deal of SWAG (Scientific Wild-Ass Guess).
We don't know the total number of species alive now or at any particular time in the past. We never have, and it's likely we never will (until that number is 1). Which makes any estimate of the rate of extinction now or in the past more guess than science.
Without an accurate guesstimate of number of species at any given time, "background extinction rate" is an even less accurate guesstimate.
And with the denominator of (current extinction rate/background extinction rate) a guesstimate, the number produced (114 in this case) is another guesstimate (we don't even know the number of species going extinct now, much less the average number - what we know is the number of species that we notice going extinct).
So, I'm less than excited by this particular prediction. Maybe in a century or two we'll know enough to make this a major concern (note that 114x background rate translates to ~225 species going extinct per million years - it's hardly going to be a swift extinction, except in geological terms).
Or not....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Barely populated but still heavily manipulated by humans.
It only takes a couple of people to run a 3,000 acre farm but the entirety of that 3,000 acres is strictly for human purposes and quite hostile to most animals (a monoculture alone will cause numerous issues).
"Overrun" can mean more than just someone having a house covering a spot. In that 3/4 of the world that is ocean, look at how several of the commercially important fisheries have collapsed. And the big whales? They had all those oceans to live in and it didn't do them any good once technological humans decided they had useful oil and parts. Just because an area is big and no one has a house there doesn't mean it hasn't been effectively "overrun". As it is now, we need a lot of open land, water, and air to provide the resources we want and to take back the trash we create. Those areas are "overrun".
Cause... umm... you know... extinct is extinct.
You can't say "no it isn't" if all you have to show for as evidence of existence it is... you know... nothing.
This ain't a religious but a question of biology and of ability to count up to more than "one animal".
E.g. You can't go around claiming that T. Rex is actually hiding. And no, Bill Legend's T. Rex is not THE T. Rex.
The summary warns of "paid trolls", "FUD-ers" and finger pointers going around acting holier than thou, trying to "solve the problem" by placing the blame and spreading "it's the End Days" fear and panic.
You know...
People generalizing the entire humanity as being "people who cannot imagine anything beyond 3 months" and "folks who actually want the world to end" and assuming that "we're going to drive the bus off that extinction cliff while singing happy days are here again."
Which is also a bit of ye old irrelevant conclusion fallacy.
Cause... umm... people not able to think beyond 3 months about pandas or people wanting to burn all pandas and people singing "happy days" instead of working on preserving pandas...
Well... they are not the ones actually working on preserving pandas, aren't they?
It's almost as if a relatively small group of people (compared to the world population or even the population of China) is taking steps to preserve the damn pandas - regardless of all those other people.
Making them kinda irrelevant as long as they don't make it their business to get off their ass, fly off to a game preserve and start shooting pandas.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
You and I, sir, are apparently of like minds, even if we are brothers only in our cynicism; I, unfortunately, completely agree with your asessment: Humanity, in general, is suffering from a case of extreme, chronic myopia, and it could very likely end in discovering we're about to walk off a cliff only after we've walked off it.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Okay. If we want to start with the ocean, which is 3/4 of the world: marine fish biomass has dropped by 80% over the last century.
So sad to see cute, cuddly and some magnificent animals die off. But they are of little significance compared to small and microscopic life forms. When they die, we die. Poison the ocean, the air and the soil and we are killing vast, unimaginable numbers of critical life forms that make our planet livable. Who is measuring our losses of algae and bacteria, the providers of oxygen that made all the rest of life possible?
You've heard about the dying honeybees, now consider the rest. You may not care for cockroaches, amoeba, bacteria or fruit flies; but they matter. And it's not just the external ones. Inside our bodies are critical critters that digest our food and symbiotically live with us. They too are at risk as we experiment with chemicals, radiation, genetics, nanotech and other fun stuff.
We all love lions, tigers and bears. Who can resist adoring a panda, koala or even an ordinary baby kitten? But are these things critical to human survival? Human emotions are fascinating but they often lead us astray.
...omphaloskepsis often...
How much of our problems stem from overpopulation? I think he was right about the dangers of overpopulation, but his timeline, and efforts to mitigate the damage was off. I remember when deer overran our area. They denuded large swaths of land. By the time the local governments got around to doing something to cull the herd, disease and hunger took them down. The human race will be culled either by self discipline (ZPG), or war, disease, and famine. Which course is the best in your opinion?
photosMy Photostream
With one key difference. The crowding out is being caused by humans and humans alone; die-offs as a result of "extinction events" are unavoidable natural catastrophes. There is absolutely nothing "unavoidable" or "natural" about the way mankind is butchering this planet.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
I understand the term perfectly well, and the carrying capacity of the earth is at least 15 perhaps 20 billion. Currently we produce more food that we can consume. The problem is we distribute it rather badly.
In terms of water, we wast so much of it, that this is not really a problem. Call me back when we have ripped out our lawns, moved to high efficiency European washing machines, 1 gallon toilets, drip irrigation, etc. Then I'll believe your claims of water shortages.
Just because Ehrlich was wrong doesn't mean we aren't facing a crisis.
Ah crisis, the most over used word of the environmental movement. Everything is a crisis. Ebola is a crisis of a million dead with an actual final tally of thousands, rape on campus (which happens at lower rates than elsewhere) is a crisis, water "shortages" are a crisis even though Israel seems to manage fine (though not without trouble and ingenuity), population is a crisis even though most countries are moving rapidly towards below replacement fertility levels .