Posted on 06/20/2015 12:28:03 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
We are entering a mass extinction that threatens humanity's existence, researchers have declared.
Researchers say a new study shows 'without any significant doubt' that we are entering the sixth great mass extinction on earth.
The study says that the window for conserving threatened species is rapidly closing.
The study shows without any significant doubt that we are now entering the sixth great mass extinction event,' said Paul Ehrlich, the Bing Professor of Population Studies in biology and a senior fellow at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment who led the research.
The new study, published in the journal Science Advances, shows that even with extremely conservative estimates, species are disappearing up to about 100 times faster than the normal rate between mass extinctions, known as the background rate....
Despite the gloomy outlook, there is a meaningful way forward, according to Ehrlich and his colleagues.
'Avoiding a true sixth mass extinction will require rapid, greatly intensified efforts to conserve already threatened species, and to alleviate pressures on their populations – notably habitat loss, over-exploitation for economic gain and climate change,' the study's authors write.
In the meantime, the researchers hope their work will inform conservation efforts, the maintenance of ecosystem services and public policy....
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Man has a pen and a phone.
Weought to extinct the delta smelt so California farmers can get the water they need
The little secret that most loggers, farmers and miners don’t keep very well is that that because of insane govt regs, many animals in some areas mysteriously disappear before operations begin.
The highest rates of population growth are in 3rd world countries. The more miserable and polluted countries are, the higher the birth rate.
Since the developed countries have the lowest birthrates and are the least polluted, whenever I see bilge like that posted above, I conclude that it was concocted for political purposes. If the authors of those "studies" were truly concerned about pollution and overpopulation, they would look at the fact that countries of the first world are cleaner, have lower birthrates, do more about protecting endangered species, etc., and conclude that we need to bring the third world countries up to our level, not try to push us down to theirs. But of course, their concerns are never what they state they are. They want to force everyone to live like serfs while they set themselves up as kings--in other words, they are trying to force socialism on us by any means necessary.
2. According to the World Bank, ALL world birth rates have trended down. Total pop will rise for a while, but will peak and trend down in next 20 years, even in undeveloped countries. (http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/beyond/beyondco/beg_03.pdf).
3) According to Julian Simon, "The Ultimate Resource," who disproved Ehrlich a famous bet, birth levels ALWAYS fall when people reach $450 per capita annual income (as of 1980s, so that's probably close to $700 today. For perspective, the average American colonist in -770 made $750 (1990s $$)
RC, you’ll go with a smile, knowing your to do list was done :)
Paul Ehrlich has predicted so many wrong catastrophes in his lifetime that I’m quite surprised any one will even publish his work any more. Analyzing goat entrails would be more successful.
I’m sure the thousands of diseased and starving serfs were bolstered by that. Before starving and dying of disease of course.
“....But of course, their concerns are never what they state they are. They want to force everyone to live like serfs while they set themselves up as kings—in other words, they are trying to force socialism on us by any means necessary.”
bttt
It has become increasingly apparent over the past half-century that there is a growing tension between two seemingly irreconcilable trends. On one hand, moderate to conservative demographic projections indicate that global human numbers will almost certainly reach 9 billion, perhaps more, by mid-21st century. On the other, prudent and increasingly reliable scientific estimates suggest that the Earth's long-term sustainable human carrying capacity, at what might be defined as an "adequate" to "moderately comfortable" developed-world standard of living, may not be much greater than 2 to 3 billion. It may be considerably less, particularly if the normative lifestyle (level of consumption) aspired to is anywhere close to that of the United States.
-- snip --
That there will be a large-scale reduction in global human numbers over the next two or three centuries appears to be inevitable. The primary issue seems to be whether this process will be under conscious human control and (hopefully) relatively benign, or whether it will turn out to be unpredictably chaotic and (perhaps) catastrophic. We must begin our new manner of thinking about this critically important global issue now, so that Einstein's prescient and legitimate concerns about human and civilizational survival into the 21st century and beyond may be addressed as rapidly, fully, and humanely as possible.
--------------------------------
Nine Population Strategies to Stop Short of 9 Billion
3. Eradicate gender bias from law, economic opportunity, health, and culture. Women who can own, inherit, and manage property; divorce; obtain credit; and participate in civic and political affairs on equal terms with men are more likely to postpone childbearing and to have fewer children compared to women who are deprived of these rights.
4. Offer age-appropriate sexuality education for all students. Data from the United States indicate that exposure to comprehensive programs that detail puberty, intercourse, options of abstinence and birth control, and respecting the sexual rights and decisions of individuals, can help prevent unwanted pregnancies and hence reduce birth rates.
5. End all policies that reward parents financially based on the number of children they have. Governments can preserve and even increase tax and other financial benefits aimed at helping parents by linking these not to the number of children they have, but to parenthood status itself.
6. Integrate lessons on population, environment, and development into school curricula at multiple levels. Refraining from advocacy or propaganda, schools should educate students to make well-informed choices about the impacts of their behavior, including childbearing, on the environment.
Current Population is Three Times the Sustainable Level
Current global population of over 7 billion is already two to three times higher than the sustainable level. Several recent studies show that Earth’s resources are enough to sustain only about 2 billion people at a European standard of living.
An average European consumes far more resources than any of the poorest two billion people in the world. However, Europeans use only about half the resources of Americans, on average.
-- snip --
If all of the world’s 7 billion people consumed as much as an average American, it would take the resources of over five Earths to sustainably support all of them. On average, each American uses nearly 20 acres of biologically productive land and water (biocapacity) per year.
-- {Let's do the math. 310,000,000 (US population) X 20 (acres) = 6,200,000,000 (acres)} Hmmm....do you see a problem?--
Earth’s 29.6 billion acres of biologically productive land and water could sustainably support only about 1.5 billion people at an 'American standard of living and consumption.'
It’s a lesser evil...
Yet, there Ehrlich remains (since 1959) at Stanford, with a seat at the table of public policy and all his lifelong fellow travelers pulling the levers.
That word encapsulates what they see as their key to control - being the ones who decided how the world's resources need to be shared (and by how many) equally - and that global government is the only way to do this equitably.
This is why science has been taken over by the Left and been completely politicized.
That word by definition, means ‘stagnation’. If you sustain, you are fighting a holding action, not advancing or ...ahem...”progressing’.
What we surely need are many voices willing to state that clearly. “Stagnatability”
Well then,We all might as well sit down and enjoy the show.
The experts have spoken there is nothing left to do.
Just like 'without any significant doubt' we should all be under water / fried today.
Oh I dunno. Seen the economic outlook lately? We are quite underwater. See? The liberals were right. You just misunderstood what they were talking about!
I expect that many of the extinct species were actually discovered by splitter biologists that existed only on the papers written to enhance career prospects
I would relish having a spotted owl stuffed and hanging up in my house.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.