3 ms·
This is the part that stood out to me, though not entirely unexpected. Earth, as biologist E.O. Wilson has noted, is in the midst of a sixth mass extinctio
by datashovel 12y ago
This is the part that stood out to me, though not entirely unexpected.
Earth, as biologist E.O. Wilson has noted, is in the midst
of a sixth mass extinction. (There are five others in the geologic
record, stretching back 500 million years.) “Extinction is now proceeding
thousands of times faster than the production of new species,”...
- happyscrappy 12y agoThis part stuck out for me. "Again and again, time has proven the Malthusian pessimists wrong."
- datashovel 12y agoI get the impression you read that passage as a "feeling" or a "belief". I read it as the person quoted was citing scientific fact that, regardless whether the outcome for humans is negative or positive, is an observable phenomenon in the physical world. I have no stake personally in whether it will turn out good or bad for humans, though of course I wish no ill upon future generations. However, the fact is I will be long gone before anyone will know what the impact will be.
- happyscrappy 12y agoHow in the world would you get the impression that it was a feeling? You are projecting your and the medias doom mantra. Malthusian pessimists were wrong, sorry.
- datashovel 12y ago"doom" and "pessimism" are human constructs. In the objective physical world things "are" or "are not". The quote says that objectively verifiable facts indicate the earth is experiencing a mass extinction. There is no such thing as "doom" or "pessimism" besides that in which humans perceive it.
- happyscrappy 12y agoUmm. We will not know if it was a mass extinction event for thousands of years. The great thing about science is if new data is found then the conclusions are changed but that bothers some people.
- datashovel 12y agoWith all due respect, in my mind whether scientific studies "bother someone" or not shouldn't really be a primary concern. What should be primary concern is understanding these phenomena and whether or not they truly have a long term impact on humanity's well being. Lack of water, mass starvation, and other similar problems should be more of a concern than whether a news story "bothers someone".
- happyscrappy 12y agoScience does not care if it offends the left or the right and frankly the center is more reasonable. Starvation comes from bad logistics not some disproven Malthusian claptrap.
- datashovel 12y agoI can't seem to respond to your most recent comment, but one thing I find interesting is I think (at least for my own sake) I've found a fundamental idea that may be what wedges people on these issues, but never seems to get expressed in these comment threads. I get the impression that many people with views which (for the most part) dismiss warnings about environmental issues, etc. have a fundamental belief that the earth will always be habitable by human beings. (forgive me if I'm putting words in your mouth). Whereas I, along with probably many others who are more sensitive to environmental issues, think this is far from a certainty. EDIT: Didn't know the numbers off the top of my head, but here's what Google had to say: 1) # of years where life has existed on Earth: 3.5 billion 2) # of years humans have been on earth: 200,000 So given these numbers humans have been around for 0.0057143% of the entire history of life on earth. EDIT #2: Given these numbers it seems uncertain we're anything more than an anomaly (ie. intelligent life) in the history of life on earth.
- coolsunglasses 12y agoMalthus wasn't a pessimist and I really wish people would stop projecting their views onto his work.