The 6th great extinction is occurring

[SSDD]

That the current extinction rate is 100 times the background rate is empirical data

Care to list 25 species that have gone extinct in the past 25 years that aren't due to hunting?

 

[Old Rocks]

That the current extinction rate is 100 times the background rate is empirical data

Care to list 25 species that have gone extinct in the past 25 years that aren't due to hunting?

What the fuck is your point? We are talking of human induced extinctions. The creature that goes extinct hardly cares whether the cause is hunting, acid rain, pesticides, or destruction of it's habitat by global warming. It is dead and gone.

 

[SSDD]

That the current extinction rate is 100 times the background rate is empirical data

Care to list 25 species that have gone extinct in the past 25 years that aren't due to hunting?

What the fuck is your point? We are talking of human induced extinctions. The creature that goes extinct hardly cares whether the cause is hunting, acid rain, pesticides, or destruction of it's habitat by global warming. It is dead and gone.

Again...

Is it your claim that we are hunting species into the next great extinction?...it is absolute alarmist bullshit to claim we are in the midst of a great extinction when you can't even name 25 species over the past 25 years....in order for even a mild "great extinction" to take place, 20% of all genera go extinct...that is something like 70 million species..and you can't even name 25 in the past 25 years....f'ing alarmist, handwaving claptrap...nothing more.....nothing less.

 

[Crick]

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v427/n6970/full/nature02121.html
One-Third of Reef-Building Corals Face Elevated Extinction Risk from Climate Change and Local Impacts | Science
Extinction and climate change : Nature : Nature Research

 

[mamooth]

Soooooo, you don't understand the difference between estimates and empirical data. Go figure.

I understand you moved the goalposts yet another time. It's your favorite tactic.

You made the stupid claim that new species being found means old species can't be going extinct. That got laughed at.

So, you moved the goalposts, and demanded evidence that a new extinction wave is happening. That evidence was provided.

So, you moved the goalposts again. Now you're declaring that because we're only on the way to 50% extinction and haven't got there yet, it's no big deal. That's damn near criminal in it's stupidity. You're the polar opposite of an environmentalist, being how you seem to be okay with all forms of environmental destruction, so long as the extinction rate hasn't already hit 50%.

 

[westwall]

Soooooo, you don't understand the difference between estimates and empirical data. Go figure.

I understand you moved the goalposts yet another time. It's your favorite tactic.

You made the stupid claim that new species being found means old species can't be going extinct. That got laughed at.

So, you moved the goalposts, and demanded evidence that a new extinction wave is happening. That evidence was provided.

So, you moved the goalposts again. Now you're declaring that because we're only on the way to 50% extinction and haven't got there yet, it's no big deal. That's damn near criminal in it's stupidity. You're the polar opposite of an environmentalist, being how you seem to be okay with all forms of environmental destruction, so long as the extinction rate hasn't already hit 50%.

Wrong bozo, you are the clowns who move goalposts all of the time. I asked for you to provide a simple thing, a factual, meaning empirical, which means they can actually see the dead critters, link to your so called 6th extinction. What I see is more computer derived fiction that has NO basis in reality. I provided a link to 18,000 new species found just last year. I would think that if this extinction of your were truly happening you could show us the pictures of some dead critters.

 

[Crick]

In the past 500 years, we know of approximately 1,000 species that have gone extinct, from the woodland bison of West Virginia and Arizona’s Merriam’s elk to the Rocky Mountain grasshopper, passenger pigeon and Puerto Rico’s Culebra parrot — but this doesn’t account for thousands of species that disappeared before scientists had a chance to describe them [4]. Nobody really knows how many species are in danger of becoming extinct. Noted conservation scientist David Wilcove estimates that there are 14,000 to 35,000 endangered species in the United States, which is 7 to 18 percent of U.S. flora and fauna. The IUCN has assessed roughly 3 percent of described species and identified 16,928 species worldwide as being threatened with extinction, or roughly 38 percent of those assessed. In its latest four-year endangered species assessment, the IUCN reports that the world won’t meet a goal of reversing the extinction trend toward species depletion by 2010 [5].

The Extinction Crisis

 

[mamooth]

Wrong bozo, you are the clowns who move goalposts all of the time. I asked for you to provide a simple thing, a factual, meaning empirical, which means they can actually see the dead critters, link to your so called 6th extinction.

What I see is more computer derived fiction that has NO basis in reality.

Given that the future hasn't happened yet, why yes, models are required.

According to your logic here, no future predictions of any sort in any field are allowable, because they're all "models". That's why everything thinks your logic is stupid.

I provided a link to 18,000 new species found just last year. I would think that if this extinction of your were truly happening you could show us the pictures of some dead critters.

So, we go full circle, and end up back at your your original hilarious logic failure.

For the third time, can you explain to everyone how "new species are being discovered" leads to "it's impossible for species to be going extinct at a high rate"?

 

[Crick]

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

 

[SSDD]

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v427/n6970/full/nature02121.html
One-Third of Reef-Building Corals Face Elevated Extinction Risk from Climate Change and Local Impacts | Science
Extinction and climate change : Nature : Nature Research

Based on models?....and that qualifies as data in your mind?

 

[SSDD]

So after all this...the claim is still that we are in the midst of a mass extinction which would involve more than 70,000,000 species but they can't seem to manage even one species per year over the past 25 years...

 

[westwall]

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

They ain't dead yet nimrod. And, more to the point none of them are endangered due to the fraud of "climate change", they are endangered through over hunting, and loss of habitat. Big difference.

 

[Crick]

The Critically Endangered list has 105 pages, 48 species per page. The tiniest of fractions are hunted. Most are plants, insects, birds and reptiles. And what do you think would be the primary means by which climate change would cause a species to go extinct if not by habitat loss?

Fool.

 

[Old Rocks]

That the current extinction rate is 100 times the background rate is empirical data

Care to list 25 species that have gone extinct in the past 25 years that aren't due to hunting?

What the fuck is your point? We are talking of human induced extinctions. The creature that goes extinct hardly cares whether the cause is hunting, acid rain, pesticides, or destruction of it's habitat by global warming. It is dead and gone.

Again...

Is it your claim that we are hunting species into the next great extinction?...it is absolute alarmist bullshit to claim we are in the midst of a great extinction when you can't even name 25 species over the past 25 years....in order for even a mild "great extinction" to take place, 20% of all genera go extinct...that is something like 70 million species..and you can't even name 25 in the past 25 years....f'ing alarmist, handwaving claptrap...nothing more.....nothing less.

Here, dumb fuck. A partial list, I am sure that you can find twenty five on it that have gone extinct in the last 25 years. In particular, one that was a very intelligent mammal, the Yangtze River Dolphin.

These Animals Have All Gone Extinct In The Last 100 Years - David Avocado Wolfe

 

[Old Rocks]

This is a group of insects that are losing population very fast, that are very important to us. Pesticides seem to be the primary culprit. However, the synergic effects of a warming climate, and the fact that the bees weakened by the pesticides are more easily killed by viruses and bacteria.

You’re Worrying About the Wrong Bees

SAVE THE BEES!” is a common refrain these days, and it’s great to see people interested in the little animals critical for our food supply around the globe. But I have one quibble: you’re talking about the wrong bees.

Honey bees will be fine. They are a globally distributed, domesticated animal. Apis mellifera will not go extinct, and the species is not remotely threatened with extinction.

The bees you should be concerned about are the 3,999 other bee species living in North America, most of which are solitary, stingless, ground-nesting bees you’ve never heard of. Incredible losses in native bee diversity are already happening. 50 percent of Midwestern native bee species disappeared from their historic ranges in the last 100 years. Four of our bumblebee species declined 96 percent in the last 20 years, and three species are believed to already be extinct. A little part of me despairs when I read in a scientific paper: “This species probably should be listed under the Endangered Species Act if it still exists.”

 

[westwall]

The Critically Endangered list has 105 pages, 48 species per page. The tiniest of fractions are hunted. Most are plants, insects, birds and reptiles. And what do you think would be the primary means by which climate change would cause a species to go extinct if not by habitat loss?

Fool.

Habitat loss by PEOPLE is the most critical issue at hand. The widespread destruction of the rain forests is THE leading cause of habitat destruction. You may be stupid, but we're not.

 

[Old Rocks]

The Critically Endangered list has 105 pages, 48 species per page. The tiniest of fractions are hunted. Most are plants, insects, birds and reptiles. And what do you think would be the primary means by which climate change would cause a species to go extinct if not by habitat loss?

Fool.

Habitat loss by PEOPLE is the most critical issue at hand. The widespread destruction of the rain forests is THE leading cause of habitat destruction. You may be stupid, but we're not.

LOL Arctic Ice is disappearing, the Greenland Ice Cap is melting, more rapidly every decade, and the climate in changing. Add that to habitat loss, pesticides, and pollution, and you have the perfect recipe for the sixth major extinction.

 

[westwall]

This is a group of insects that are losing population very fast, that are very important to us. Pesticides seem to be the primary culprit. However, the synergic effects of a warming climate, and the fact that the bees weakened by the pesticides are more easily killed by viruses and bacteria.

You’re Worrying About the Wrong Bees

SAVE THE BEES!” is a common refrain these days, and it’s great to see people interested in the little animals critical for our food supply around the globe. But I have one quibble: you’re talking about the wrong bees.

Honey bees will be fine. They are a globally distributed, domesticated animal. Apis mellifera will not go extinct, and the species is not remotely threatened with extinction.

The bees you should be concerned about are the 3,999 other bee species living in North America, most of which are solitary, stingless, ground-nesting bees you’ve never heard of. Incredible losses in native bee diversity are already happening. 50 percent of Midwestern native bee species disappeared from their historic ranges in the last 100 years. Four of our bumblebee species declined 96 percent in the last 20 years, and three species are believed to already be extinct. A little part of me despairs when I read in a scientific paper: “This species probably should be listed under the Endangered Species Act if it still exists.”

Funny how the bees in Brazil seem to be doing OK and it's 6 degrees warmer there. Face it dude your hysterical whining is trumped (see how I did that) by the real world

 

[Crick]

The Critically Endangered list has 105 pages, 48 species per page. The tiniest of fractions are hunted. Most are plants, insects, birds and reptiles. And what do you think would be the primary means by which climate change would cause a species to go extinct if not by habitat loss?

Fool.

Habitat loss by PEOPLE is the most critical issue at hand. The widespread destruction of the rain forests is THE leading cause of habitat destruction. You may be stupid, but we're not.

On top of clearing land for agriculture, mining, logging and setttlement, altering the planet's temperature and precipitation patterns causes habitat loss. Fool.

 

[SSDD]

The Critically Endangered list has 105 pages, 48 species per page. The tiniest of fractions are hunted. Most are plants, insects, birds and reptiles. And what do you think would be the primary means by which climate change would cause a species to go extinct if not by habitat loss?

Fool.

Habitat loss by PEOPLE is the most critical issue at hand. The widespread destruction of the rain forests is THE leading cause of habitat destruction. You may be stupid, but we're not.

On top of clearing land for agriculture, mining, logging and setttlement, altering the planet's temperature and precipitation patterns causes habitat loss. Fool.

All one need do is look at the number of peer reviewed papers being withdrawn to see that the system is broken...

and then there is this...


“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”...Phil Jones