Climate risk 'to million species

[MrBishop]

What you're saying is that, even though we evolved here and are native to the planet, we are somehow outside of nature.

The planet has undergone catastrophic climate changes time and again throughout geologic time. We very well may succeed in destroying our species (and many others), but something will take our place. I agree that we as a species use the planet irresponsibly, but I get tired of hearing how we're "raping" or "destroying" the planet. The planet will be here for another 5 billion years or so, you and I won't be.

Sorry, but somebody's going to do it.

We're not outside of nature, but factories, automobiles etc...aren't eveolved natural things. They're created objects. We created them and they're helping to fuck up the environment.

How about...we're in the process of making our planet uninhabiteable for humans and animals in general?

If society is against bio-engineering and politics is against it, then the market for it dissapears and it's not viably sound for companies to invest millions into R&D...therefore, no R&D, no unpopular bioforms and no slippery slope.

 

[MrBishop]

PT/Hex - good points, but we need to get rid of landfills, oilspills etc... and it would take a very long time to do it by hand, not that I can see anyone volunteering to trudge through piles of garbage, seperating out paper, from metals, and plastic and glass, etc... recycling them as they go. We're dalking about decades of landfills...and 3-5times as many years to undo what was done.

 

[Professur]

PT/Hex - good points, but we need to get rid of landfills, oilspills etc... and it would take a very long time to do it by hand, not that I can see anyone volunteering to trudge through piles of garbage, seperating out paper, from metals, and plastic and glass, etc... recycling them as they go. We're dalking about decades of landfills...and 3-5times as many years to undo what was done.

Funny. I thought that exactly what archeology students were for.

But seriously. We've the entire prison population. Welfare receipients. Enron VPs. More than enough people. And one helluva deterrent, IMHO

 

[Rose]

But seriously. We've the entire prison population. Welfare receipients. Enron VPs. More than enough people. And one helluva deterrent, IMHO

I agree. I'm a very strong supporter of having inmates earn their keep and work off those tax dollars that come from our pockets. I love the idea of welfare recipients having to give a little back, too - work 'em hard and work 'em cheap - see how long they last on Welfare before they get a real job.

 

[chcr]

We're not outside of nature, but factories, automobiles etc...aren't eveolved natural things. They're created objects. We created them and they're helping to fuck up the environment.

Do you want to do without them? If so, you are in a vanishingly small minority.

How about...we're in the process of making our planet uninhabiteable for humans and animals in general?

Can't disagree with that one. What do you want to do about it that the majority of the planet will go along with?

If society is against bio-engineering and politics is against it, then the market for it dissapears and it's not viably sound for companies to invest millions into R&D...therefore, no R&D, no unpopular bioforms and no slippery slope.

Hmm, they could grow you new limbs, organs, double your life span, you're right, no market for that at all. Bish, we're right on the edge of this and whether or not you or I like it, it's inevitable. Ethics become very situational for most people where money and health are concerned.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Frankly, there are too many political and social walls int he way of that kind of research. We might see microbes or fungi that eat styrofoam, much like the ones that eat oil-spills, but is that really such a bad thing? How about bacteria that is waterborne and eats petrol-based chemicals and releases carbon and oxygen? Perhaps something that can digest hydrocarbons, or larger worms that can turn clay-soil into viable soil? Something that desaalinizes water?

There's potential in bio-research...it's just a matter of taking the long view on all attempts. It won't make anyone rich, by any means.

I'd rather not take the slippery slope that you're suggesting Unc... it's bound to lead to a broken ankle

Ummm...One thing you mentioned earlier about mankind being the greatest polluter was off by a wide margin. More damage was done to the atmosphere in the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo than in 100 years of man-kinds polluting ways. Even taking into account the number of different pollutants that man makes, nature has us beat by a wide margin.

 

[Professur]

Montserrat too. Hawaii. St-Helens. Krakatoa, Vesuvius, to name just a few.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Montserrat too. Hawaii. St-Helens. Krakatoa, Vesuvius, to name just a few.

I was only naming the one of the most recent ones that is well-remembered.

BTW...most active voncanoes spew pollutants 24/7...not just during eruptions. That part isn't added to my 'equation', though. Don't want mother-nature to look too bad.

 

[Professur]

Yeah, but almost everyone remembers the clouds of ash from st-Helens. It was even found here. Vesuvius ... well look at the polution that left. Mostserrat ... they had to evac the island, and cancel the entire tourist season. Terrible.

Yet people seem to consider the polution laden Hawaiian islands a paradise.

 

[Gonz]

Well, please gentlemen, in your discussion, don't forget the natural oil leaks located throughout the oceans. One or two of them so big they leak into the hundreds of thousands of BARRELS weekly & not a drop hits a shore, since the ocean eats everything.

 

[The Other One]

According to http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/12/031222071851.htm
it has happened before:

- 2003-12-25
Tropical Oceans Were Overheated During Prehistoric Greenhouse Effect
Biogeochemists from the Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research have shown that prehistoric tropical oceans were no less than five to eight degrees warmer than they are now. Their findings have been published in the December issue of the renowned American journal Geology.

During the mid-Cretaceous period, some 90 to 120 million years ago, the seawater around the equator had a temperature of 30 to 37 degrees Celsius, which is five to eight degrees higher than the temperature now. This was revealed in research that used a new method to determine the temperatures of oceans in the distant past.

The finding concurs with recently developed climate models, which indicate that higher carbon dioxide concentrations in the greenhouse climate of 90 to 120 million years ago resulted in warmer tropical oceans. The biogeochemists' findings reveal how seawater temperatures changed when large quantities of greenhouse gases entered the atmosphere. Scientists had suspected that seawater temperatures were significantly higher then, but no method had been available to precisely determine these."



Seems that SUVs are ok; it's those giant meteors that will kill us off just like dinosaurs...

 

[BeardofPants]

According to my environmental sciences prof. theses temps have occurred before in the last 150 years, and they didn't lead to a series of mass-extinctions.

 

[AlphaTroll]

*pictures hordes of animals comitting mass suicide*

Hmm, ye know - somehow I reckon nature will take care of her own, after all climatic changes etc are just part of the evolusionary cycle innit?

 

[chcr]

*pictures hordes of animals comitting mass suicide*

Hmm, ye know - somehow I reckon nature will take care of her own, after all climatic changes etc are just part of the evolusionary cycle innit?

So are mass extinctions.

 

[AlladinSane]

BTW..What I meant to say by controlling something means reducing emissions from cars, factories, stop the burning of fossil fuels, reduce greenhouse gasses in general...not bio-engeneering

Add to that the fact it would be a lot cheaper.

As has happened numerous times throughout geologic history. Some species survive, others die out. Arrogant of us, don't you think, to believe we're in control of it?

So, if they found out WE are going to be the next victims you propose we cross our arms and wait?

 

[chcr]

So, if they found out WE are going to be the next victims you propose we cross our arms and wait?

Not at all. Nor do I think we should ignore other species going extinct. My point is that everyone frequently panics about changes in the weather and so forth, and I would point out that the planet is not what we should worry about saving. It's going to be here long after we're gone. Oh, and if it comes down to them (pick a species) or us, it's going to be us every time.


If we found out we were next, do you really believe we'd manage to stop it in time? Tell me again when the population of Africa is about five thousand.