4 ms·

If interested in the Earth before humans exploded onto the scene, I recommend The Once and Future Earth by JB MacKinnon. http://www.jbmackinnon.com/books.html h

by spodek 6y ago

If interested in the Earth before humans exploded onto the scene, I recommend The Once and Future Earth by JB MacKinnon. http://www.jbmackinnon.com/books.html http://www.jbmackinnon.com/books.html I had no idea what we'd lost -- about 90%. North America had more large animals than Africa. Sailing ships in the middle of the Atlantic would grind to a halt from the density of fish. Whales as far as the eye could see all day. Beautifully written.

jstanley 6y ago
> Sailing ships in the middle of the Atlantic would grind to a halt from the density of fish. This seems absurd. How could fish survive in such conditions?
burlesona 6y ago
Sorry, ships would grind to a halt? I find it very difficult to imagine the physics that would make that possible as opposed to the fish simply shifting apart, and I googled for a while and was not able to find any corroboration. Do you have some links on that?
- x87678r 6y ago
  I believe its probably like this quote: > and around 1600 English fishing captains still reported cod shoals "so thick by the shore that we hardly have been able to row a boat through them." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_fishing_in_Newfoundland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_fishing_in_Newfoundland
- spodek 6y ago
  I did a couple video essays on the book that quote that passage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLAvBiols2Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLAvBiols2Y and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4NZdciDozI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4NZdciDozI. The passage about the fish comes 45 seconds in to the first video in a NY Times quote from it, then the quote in context from the book at 5:15, though I recommend watching both videos and reading the book whole.
interestica 6y ago
> The Once and Future Earth by JB MacKinnon. The title is actually "The Once and Future World". I find it fascinating that the two similar titles create very different expectations in my mind. Maybe it's just my own cognitive associations, but 'world' makes me think of wider implications (eg social, political, environmental) while 'earth' seems more scientific (eg natural processes). Someone might say "look at the world around you" but not "look at the earth around you." In French, 'tout le monde' translates literally to "all the world" but is used to mean 'everybody' -- and specifically, humans.

by spodek 6y ago

jstanley 6y ago

> Sailing ships in the middle of the Atlantic would grind to a halt from the density of fish. This seems absurd. How could fish survive in such conditions?

burlesona 6y ago

Sorry, ships would grind to a halt? I find it very difficult to imagine the physics that would make that possible as opposed to the fish simply shifting apart, and I googled for a while and was not able to find any corroboration. Do you have some links on that?

x87678r 6y ago
I believe its probably like this quote: > and around 1600 English fishing captains still reported cod shoals "so thick by the shore that we hardly have been able to row a boat through them." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_fishing_in_Newfoundland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cod_fishing_in_Newfoundland
spodek 6y ago
I did a couple video essays on the book that quote that passage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLAvBiols2Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLAvBiols2Y and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4NZdciDozI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4NZdciDozI. The passage about the fish comes 45 seconds in to the first video in a NY Times quote from it, then the quote in context from the book at 5:15, though I recommend watching both videos and reading the book whole.

interestica 6y ago

> The Once and Future Earth by JB MacKinnon. The title is actually "The Once and Future World". I find it fascinating that the two similar titles create very different expectations in my mind. Maybe it's just my own cognitive associations, but 'world' makes me think of wider implications (eg social, political, environmental) while 'earth' seems more scientific (eg natural processes). Someone might say "look at the world around you" but not "look at the earth around you." In French, 'tout le monde' translates literally to "all the world" but is used to mean 'everybody' -- and specifically, humans.