Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Warn That World's Wilderness Areas Are Disappearing (nytimes.com)
Scientists are warning that if human beings continue to mine the world's wildernesses for resources and convert them into cities and farms at the pace of the previous century, the planet's few remaining wild places could disappear in decades. From a report: Today, more than 77 percent of land on earth, excluding Antarctica, has been modified by human industry, according to a study published Wednesday in the journal Nature, up from just 15 percent a century ago. The study, led by researchers from the University of Queensland in Australia and the Wildlife Conservation Society in New York, paints the first global picture of the threat to the world's remaining wildernesses -- and the image is bleak. "We're on a threshold where whole systems could collapse and the consequences of that would be catastrophic," said James R. Allan, one of the study's authors. In the study, Mr. Allan and his colleagues urged the participants of a United Nations conference on biological diversity, scheduled for next month in Egypt, to protect all of the world's remaining wilderness areas. "We cannot afford to lose more," he said. "We must save it in its entirety."
Hope your stock returns keep you warm when you drown and/or starve to death with the rest of the species.
Where is this researcher asking for more research dollars? I'm not seeing it.
I am seeing the part where he is asking for protections on the remaining wilderness areas. See like a good idea to avoid collapse of biological systems.
Reading isn't as tough as you might think. But you don't get paid to read, just to comment. Is that correct, AC?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
Blah blah blah I'm just another worthless anonymous keyboard warrior who think I know more from living in my mother's basement and watching youtube videos every fucking minute of my miserable empty life than all those scientists who studied years and worked decades in numerous fields of science.
We can still fit the entire population of the world in Texas giving them 981sq ft. Pretty impressive that we have managed to touch and/or effected 74,682,719 sq miles of land. Pretty amazing numbers we are putting up.
In the late 1970's I visited Saint Andrews State park in Panama City Florida. Went snorkeling many times and was amazed at the amount of Color and Life that was there at the time.
30 years later in 2003 I revisited the park for a Honeymoon. Once again I went snorkeling a few times and was amazed at how Gray and lifeless everything was.
We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
"Oh no, I can't drive a smaller car to help save the biology of this entire planet. My stupid, selfish, fat ass won't fit."
I don't respond to AC's.
Well, those short-sighted, selfish asshole are going to learn the hard way, then, aren't they?
I'm glad I don't have kids. The world's largest ecosystems are currently collapsing at an unheard of rate, and it doesn't even warrant a "like" on the click click thing. Humanity's fucked.
I don't respond to AC's.
I can't decide if this is a flawless rebuttal or curiously-specific projection.
What's the problem they are pointing out? That humans are changing the planet too much? I've seen what happens when humans change the planet, they turn deserts to fruitful soil. I don't see that as a bad thing.
This is just a bunch of hatred on humanity. If the impact of humans on the planet bother you so much then don't breed. I'd suggest going further but I wouldn't wish death on anyone, even self hating idiots that would like to impose misery on their fellow humans to save the wilderness.
You know who does the best on saving the wildlife? Hunters. Licensed hunting has done more to save the wildlife than these self hating fools. You know who has done the most in turning sand to soil? Farmers. You know who has done the most to keep trees growing? Loggers. Who has done the most to maintain the fish populations? Fishermen. People in business collecting the world's resources will fight for making sure that there are resources to collect. Setting them off limits makes them worthless and therefore no one has any interest to preserve it.
Making the wilderness off limits to law abiding humans only opens it up poaching, littering, and all kinds of criminal behavior by the not so law abiding humans. We've seen this happen, don't make history repeat because of your ignorance of it.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
We have now almost completely consumed the systems that give us life.
But you don't get paid to read, just to comment. Is that correct, AC?
As I like pointing out on Slashdot. Not everyone who disagrees with you is a shill. Some people are genuinely stupid.
Ever seen what caged rats will do to each other when they hit their critical point of overcrowding?
Is it engage in intelligent discourse to arrive at a solution which alleviates the problem for future generations, with each rat selflessly playing its part? Yes, it's probably this. Let's learn from caged rats, everybody!
There is no solution for this. All the politicians in all countries want growth. Growth is incompatible with wildlife. It is growth or wild life. You don't have to hold degree in poly Math to see who will win. From the point of view of The Rest Of Nature humanity is a virus.
Stop sucking your own dick!
Yes because of the enormous cognitive dissonance of members of our two political parties. You have the mainstream political right in this country that wants to build pipelines thru the few large unspoiled sections of forests that remain east of the Mississippi; and anywhere else. Not to mention develop, develop, develop.
And you have the political left; which wants to keep growing our population which would be nearly stable if it was not for immigration by opening the door to literally everyone!
If you care and know anything at all about conservation you know the problem is always the number of people. Every other policy choice is a rounding error. If you look at American demographics you know there is once source of population growth - immigrants. Anyone who wants their grand kids to enjoy a country that looks like the one they were raised in; that has forests and wild life should be in favor of closing the f'ing boarders.
Until the left comes to their senses and stops its embrace of the most environmentally destructive thing they can do to the nation I live in; I have little patients for listing to why I pay double for everything because of carbon or give up beef.
Nationalism and Populism are the paths forward if you want to save America and not end up living in fifthly hell hole. Anyone who says different is misinformed or a liar.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Thanks, I do have it figured out.
It's not about disproving it, it's about pointing out that this guy should put his money where his mouth is, instead of trying to tell OTHER PEOPLE what to do.
What do you chalk this up to though? In the States, most areas now have much less pollution than they did in the 1970s. (The Mississippi dead-zone is a notable exception)
Perhaps there was a storm before you got there that stirred up the water?
You've just invented meta-whataboutism.
The pace won't be the same because:
a) easily/moderately accessible resources are pretty much being exploited therefore $$$ will temper further exploitation
b) farms/cities can't be built just anywhere and already exist anywhere that is easily/moderately feasible.
Bottom line: nothing increases linearly forever. A scientist should know that. There will be a plateau and we've likely reached it.
Instead think: it is cheaper to increase efficiency of resource use and higher densities of habitation.
Epilogue: this sort of 'science' means well (maybe) but only makes people doubt scientists in the long run.
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.