I’d say by the time that comes around we’d have killed ourselves some other way. O well, plenty of other planets to destroy.

I <3 hippies.

If you remain unconvinced by Niles Eldredge’s supporting data in the final page one link to his article that I supplied, I suggest you look more closely at some of the links he supplies in his article, particularly this one.  

The point is not that the sixth extinction is not a political slogan by “tree-huggers” associated with the current four-year election cycle.  It is a historical process associated with the mass movement of humans out of Africa 100,000 years ago and our development of agriculture 10,000 years ago and our development of technology 1,000 years ago and our development of industry 100 years ago.  Seen from this broad perspective, humanity is as sudden and powerful and overwhelming a force to most other species on this planet as an asteroid impact was to the dinosaurs.  If you’re a dog or a cat or wheat or corn and live in a nice defined house or field or yard, your survival is pretty much assured.  Free roaming bison or mastadon?  Cod or gorilla?  Some niche organism found in a limited local ecosystem?  Watch out…there’s a new kid on the block.

And it’s not MY conclusion, it’s what was presented in the press release verbatim.  If you disagree, go find an article and publish it here on SciScoop that says species diversification is thriving.  Complete with facts, of course.

Tree-hugger.  Sheesh.    

NONONO, you miss HIS point.

If your results can’t be quantified, then they’re ‘fuzzy science’. What do I mean by quantified? I mean dollar$ and cent$. I mean profit and lo$$. Good $cience make$ money. Fuzzy $cience interfere$ with making money.

It’$ a$ $impli$tic a$ that.

In ca$e it i$n’t obviou$, thi$ i$ $arcasm.

Even if you want to doubt mass extinction as a problem, it really disturbs me that there is considerable evidence that Earth’s climate is a nonlinear system, yet we continue thinking, "It’s only a few degrees, no problem worth losing profit over." By the time we hit a tip point, say stopping the North Atlantic Conveyer, it’ll be too late to take ANY action, because we’re in for the trip to the new equillibrium (sp?) climate. Perhaps we don’t need to change a thing about our carbon habits, but we DO need major efforts to understand climatic nonlinearities, and how we may induce one. We know just enough to be tantalizing – or frightening.

Back to extinction, same there. We say, "species are dying out every day, even without Man, what’s the problem?" Apparently we haven’t learned from the warning shots of Dutch Elm Blight or the Irish Potato Famine that simplified ecosystems are more vulnerable. Oh well, it get$ in the way of profit$.

Oops? The article is about the mass extinction of most of the life on Earth and your response is ‘Oops?’ Whether or not you are serious (if serious you are obviously ignorant) its not funny. There’s something really wrong with you if find that humorous.

鲜 /–*i
googler”r-
鲜 /–*i
/-绿A`d摆