Are We In The Midst Of A Global Extinction Event?

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=3084 ^ | William M. Briggs

[mattstat]

“World Ends! Amphibians, Cartilaginous Fishes Hardest Hit.”

That was the headline yesterday in newspapers all over the country as editors reacted to a press release from Science magazine which described a broad study of species loss. Even the Wall Street Journal, which is not known for overreacting, ran this: “A War Against Extinction: The Number of Species Keeps Falling, but Conservation Racks Up a Few Successes.” Golly! A war!

What makes this headline odd is that this same paper, and many others, not one month ago, announced to us: “Census of Marine Life unveils 6,000 new species.” That’s a lot of new species!

In an article announcing the many new species, the WSJ said:

Researchers participating in the census say they have now pinpointed about 250,000 species that live in the sea, but estimate that another 750,000 species still elude human discovery. And that’s without counting millions of microbe species, which constitute 90% of the ocean’s biomass.

So, which is it? Are the number of known species dwindling towards one (us, naturally), or are they proliferating out of control? The answer depends on what statistical method is used to count species. And in not making common errors the authors of the Science study appear to have made.

Suppose you have a list of Officially Tracked Species which are, obviously, known to you. There can be any number of species not known to you. At some point you go out in the field and try to count the number of each officially tracked species. Some time later, you venture out again and re-count. Only two things can happen: (1) the number of each species can go up or stay the same or (2) they can go down...no matter what, the number of species on your list can only decrease...

[Doulos1]

Liberal Democrats? Hopefully.

[sodpoodle]

Do these studies take into account the reproductive and life spans of certain species?

i.e. if a unicorn has a life span of five years and mates once a year for only two. When the whole herd is decimated by a flood with only 2 five-year old females surviving. The unicorn is now extinct!!!!!!

[BobP]

Liberal Democrats? Hopefully.

--------------------------

Yes, tamp them down for a few decades!

The Rats are shovel-ready for the dust bin of history.

[Sacajaweau]

Intresting that they've found several NEW species in the last few years.

And, considering the extinction of the dinosaurs as an example, wouldn't you call extinction a "natural" phenonomen??

And then there's "use"....do we need wolves in certai areas...when they've moved on and still survive. And the idea that polar bears are endangered has already been proven "not so".

But the bottom line is that Man is responsible....Because he caused global warming....blah, blah, blah....and the whole thing is a vicious, unprovable cycle called "follow the money"...there's a lot of it in Al Gore's basement...and plenty of other basements....

[John O]

< evolutionist mode >It’s just evolution in action. Species come and species go. No big deal. < /evolutionist mode>

< creationist mode > If these species are disappearing because man is being a poor steward of the world then we need to fix our behavior. If not then it’s God’s issue to deal with. No big deal. < /creationist mode >

< environmentalist mode > WE’RE ALL GOING TO DIE UNLESS WE SLAP HUGE TAXES ON PRODUCERS AND GIVE THE MONEY TO PRESERVE ALL THE LAND AS WILD SPACES. WE MUST DECREASE THE HUMAN POPULATION WHICH IS A PLAGUE ON MOTHER EARTH. < /environmentalist mode >

< normal mode >Hey environmentalist, take a chill pill dude, you’re far too stressed out about nothing.

[mattstat]

It’s not just man that is responsible: the study authors are blaming American man. Nature loving Nigerians, for example, would never cause a species to go extinct.

[deadrock]

Extinction via Mooselimbs.