Quote:
Originally Posted by niky
Long story short: we're already in the midst of a mass extinction event. While some species have recovered in isolation thanks to conservation efforts, there are several high profile species that may not see the next decade.
|
Except that doesn't cover the degree of the claim that was made.
Take that up several orders of magnitude.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jamesqf
Indeed, I think we are experiencing the beginnings of such a catastrophic failure right now. Without major changes, I fully expect most vertebrate life to be extinct within a thousand years or so.
|
In all the entire history of the earth .. there has not been that magnitude of global extinction that was claimed ... not from ICE ages .. not from dinosaur ecosystem collapse ... not from asteroid impacts ... not from super-volcanoes ... etc ... none of them.
Is it possible ... sure ... the whole planet could be wiped out by a number of cosmic events ... but that's not the same as the human caused , degree of extinction claimed in as short a period as 1,000 years.
- - - - - - - -
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
You know, that applies equally well to the extraordinary claim that the world can sustainably support vast numbers of humans. Where's the evidence?
|
#1> "Vast" is way too vague .. 1 million might be called 'vast' by one person ... 1Billion by another ... 1 Trillion by a 3rd ... etc.
#2> Depending on the quantification of #1 ... no one might be making the claim... thus it would be mute.
#3> I don't think they are equal claims.
You are claiming an unprecedented level global extinction.
vs
Some un-specified qty of people being sustainable.
#4> Even if we assumed they were equal magnitude of claims ... that doesn't make either one correct by default ... nor wrong by default ... extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof to support it .. There is no ... Person A's extraordinary claim is correct by default until dis-proven.
#5> I've pointed out what is actually happening ... thus none of those are extraordinary claims ... rate of population growth % has been declining for over 40 years (true) ... Current resources in many areas are mostly used for luxury items (true) ... many of those area of significant growth % decline are areas that spend some of the most resources on luxury items (true) , ie the reduction is not from lack of resources... we do not currently utilize all the global space , resources, etc that would be possible for us to use (true)... meat eating humans consume more resources (larger ecological impact) than non-meat eating humans (true) .. etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
Accumulated CO2 from burning fossil fuels will cause the temperature to rise to a level which won't support mose life.Seef for instance the Permian-Triassic extinction event
|
Not good enough to reach the magnitude of the claim made.
You're claiming a greater total magnitude event of global extinction ... and more than 1,000x faster ... and without some of the contributing factors that were part of that event.
If anything ... that event is actually evidence against the degree of extraordinary extinction event claimed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
In the real world it'd be rats, maybe.
|
Every species of rodent are vertebrates.