General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNeil deGrasse Tyson: Humans aren’t killing the planet, just all the people on it
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/02/neil-degrasse-tyson-humans-arent-killing-the-planet-just-all-the-people-on-it/In a video published Thursday by Business Insider, astrophysicist and Cosmos host Neil deGrasse Tyson explained that the human propensity for burning carbon fuels was warming the Earth, but not to worry about Earth since it will be here long after we are extinct.
Saying that science is true whether or not you believe in it, Tyson addresses the politicization of the science of climate change saying, Its odd because I dont see people choosing up sides over E=mc2, or other fundamental facts of science.
He explains how humans, by taking carbon that was previously underground and burning it, put that carbon into the atmosphere, creating greenhouse gases which are warming the Earth.
We are warming, and that comes with consequences, Tyson explains. By the way, Earth will survive this. People say save the Earth. No, dont worry about Earth. Earth will be here long after we have rendered ourselves extinct.
snip
Preach it Neil. We don't deserve this planet.
longship
(40,416 posts)R&K
Atman
(31,464 posts)What self-respected Republican will listen to a black scientist? They won't even accept the black president.
tclambert
(11,087 posts)He might not even be a Murican!
miyazaki
(2,249 posts)PasadenaTrudy
(3,998 posts)parasites on the planet. Spay and neuter your humans!
Duppers
(28,127 posts)Has to be said. Thx.
geomon666
(7,512 posts)paleotn
(17,960 posts)....I totally agree.
IDemo
(16,926 posts)While millions are likely facing death this century due to climate change-related reasons, not all people will be included.
And "the Earth" is a big envelope. While "we are not killing the planet" may be technically true, there is a huge list of species facing extinction from our C02 contribution, whether from ocean acidification or other effects.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)trouble. We watch them starve and do little to change anything. We send them our corporations that just make things (especially the environment) worse.
warrior1
(12,325 posts)Unless we are hit with a asteroid, super caldera like in Yellowstone, or we change our ways.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)to OP. I love it and human, especially repug clowns, will only have ourselves to blame for our eventual extinction.
Amonester
(11,541 posts)anymore when extinction hits.
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)cprise
(8,445 posts)A bad AGW outcome has more than 75% of all species dying off. Mankind would take down most of the biosphere with us, and recovering from that would take tens of millions of years.
I very much doubt that Carl Sagan was so dismissive about the risk to life on Earth.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)The Earth has had similar die-offs in the past.
I don't think Tyson is being dismissive at all. He's just noting that the primary effect of what we are doing as a species is to usher in our own demise.
cprise
(8,445 posts)as far as complex organisms are concerned. It took 200 million years for the biosphere to recover from the Permian extinction.
Of course Tyson is being dismissive. He's indicating that non-human organisms don't really concern him.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)I think it's a bit uncharitable to paint Tyson as not caring in this regard. He's consistently shown himself to be fascinated by the diversity of life on Earth, and concerned with what we're doing to the ecosystem.
"The dinosaurs never saw what hit them. What's our excuse?"
ck4829
(35,091 posts)Maybe things like:
"They had enough weapons to destroy themselves several times over."
"They turned some beliefs into dogma that nobody could question, but the things that destroyed their species into popularity contests that were unbelievable according to them... simply because more people refused to accept it or one of their leaders said the 'jury is still out' on it."
"They had a religious reverence to these green pieces of paper here, they followed people who had lots of these, they also turned them into leaders to represent them, and woe befell any individual who did not have them."
"As their ecosystem at the time crumbled, one communications hub kept repeating that the science is 'still not settled' on whether or not the environmental destruction is even real while also broadcasting xenophobic messages and proclaiming something about 'terrorist fist jabs'. This is indicative of a hive mind failure."
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Hestia
(3,818 posts)The Barbie Goddess Cult
In the year 5000, historians will seek to patch together traces of the past, to discover what life was like in today's current era. Here's one humorous view of what they might find:
We are proud to announce that archaeologists have made a major discovery explaining religious practice in the 1990's, over three thousand years ago! These discoveries help us better understand the myths and traditions which have been handed down over the years, and still survive today within the popular cult of the Goddess Barbie. This tradition is one of the fastest growing groups of modern-day Goddess worship.
Archaeologists have discovered that Barbie worship dates back to ancient times. Figures of the Goddess Barbie have been unearthed, preserved in nearly pristine state. It seems that ancient worshipers made their images of Barbie in a material known as plastic. It was known at the time that plastic did not decay to the elements over time and was nearly everlasting! Because of this, it is obvious to our research team that those items made of plastic were held in the highest regard by the ancient culture of the 1990's. They surely wanted to preserve these items for eternity! Research shows that ancient priestesses of Barbie were initiated at a very young age.
The initiation ceremony involved a complex litany which lasted several weeks, usually prior to the Winter Solstice. Young daughters would chant at length to their parents, repeating over and over the praises of Barbie, stating their desires for the Goddess to enter their lives. While these chants varied from priestess to priestess, the words "I Want" are common to many of the evocations. Later, after initiation, additional chants focused on a wide variety of magical tools and altar accessories used by the Goddess Barbie in Her temple.
more at link: http://www.mesacc.edu/~thoqh49081/handouts/barbie.html
totodeinhere
(13,059 posts)our species came along and it will continue to survive for several more billion years after we are gone. 99% of the species that have ever lived on this planet have gone extinct already and we will surely soon follow. It's the natural order of things. But who knows? Perhaps another intelligent species will eventually evolve after we are gone and it will take better care of the planet than we did.
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
cbayer
(146,218 posts)Go NDT!
thesquanderer
(11,992 posts)[link:
|radiclib
(1,811 posts)At first, he makes you cringe with the enviro-bashing, thus getting approval from the mouth-breathers, then gradually backs up to paint the big picture. George was absolutely a genius, and this was the grace note of perhaps the greatest 'comic' performance of all time. We all miss the hell out of him, whether we know it or not.
I recently revisited this Carlin clip in another context, and it's always been one of my favorites.
It's also great to see NDT making the point to a new audience, but I wish like hell Carlin were still around to do it, too.
Dominion over all things, my ass.
Hekate
(90,793 posts)That said, I was hoping my human descendents would have an Earth they could live in.
Response to warrior1 (Original post)
subterranean This message was self-deleted by its author.
FSogol
(45,526 posts)swilton
(5,069 posts)AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)We are not actually at risk for extinction thru AGW alone. Unless a Gamma Ray Burst zaps our part of the solar system or a K/T asteroid makes an impact before we are able to get off-planet, then humanity will still be around for a very, very long time to come; we may perhaps branch out one day into various different "subspecies" as it were, but that's not the same as outright extinction.
With that said, though, we DO need to take care of the problem.
jimlup
(7,968 posts)However unpredictable consequences of AGW could lead to humanities extinction. Basically we are moving towards a situation where the number of humans on the planet far exceeds it's caring capacity unless we change our ways. AGW and other factors will result in dynamics within this population which are very hard to predict. In my understanding and estimation the extinction of humanity is unlikely but possible in the event of the most extreme AGW. Yes, the high side of the models we could in principle "survive". But the disruptions in the food chain and wars that will result make the bottom line unpredictable. At best I will argue that a post apocalyptic situation with a relatively small number of individuals hanging on for several centuries seems entirely possible. Will they ultimate survive in the long run? Hard to say.
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)to even threaten the complete extermination of the human species, and even then, our intelligence and remnants of technology would give at least a small percentage of humans an edge in surviving.
What will be threatened long before that by climate change and other ecological damage will be quality of life and the infrastructure of civilization. Of course, some people would think that civilization was collapsing if they couldn't get their Grande Mocha Latte every morning or watch the latest cute animal video on their high speed internet connection, but they have no idea. What we will see, in the lifetime of many of us, is serious shortages of many foodstuffs and water to begin with (and concomitant rises in the prices of same), making it even more difficult than it is now (and in some cases, probably impossible) for certain segments of the population to access them. Significant civil unrest will follow, with the richer among us trying harder and harder to wall themselves off from the growing chaos and deprivation.
Initech
(100,102 posts)Who doesn't?
- The fundie nutjobs who are responsible for overpopulation and think women only exist to create babies.
- The corporations like British Petroleum who cause death and destruction through pollution and don't get punished for their crimes.
- The BFEE and the war mongerers who kill other people because they don't pray to the same god. (quoting George Carlin)
Blue Owl
(50,498 posts)Sadly many animals & entire species, in addition to humans...
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)paleotn
(17,960 posts)http://www.anthropocene.info/en/home
...oh, and the reason no one's denying mass-energy equivalence or germ theory or any number of other any other demonstrable facts is because it's not fabulously profitable to do so, unlike climate change. Just ask Exxon Mobil, Arch Coal or Peabody Energy.
tclambert
(11,087 posts)Oil companies want to delay the inevitable court cases that will demand trillions to settle. If they can hold it off another few years, the next CEO will have to deal with it. Tobacco companies held out for decades after medical authorities identified the health consequences of smoking. Oil companies are following that playbook, and have hired some of the same PR people to confuse the jury pool.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)(just saw it a few days ago)
note how the fundies only misread--ah, push Biblical interpretations--from only Genesis 1 and 5 and Revelation 20:1-6, with paltry focus or agreement on what's in between? funny how they don't put nearly so much effort into, say, the Firmament or a flat earth, which you can obtain with the same eisegesis
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)G_j
(40,370 posts)By AL GORE FEB. 10, 2014
Over the past decade, Elizabeth Kolbert has established herself as one of our very best science writers. She has developed a distinctive and eloquent voice of conscience on issues arising from the extraordinary assault on the ecosphere, and those who have enjoyed her previous works like Field Notes From a Catastrophe will not be disappointed by her powerful new book, The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History.
Kolbert, a staff writer at The New Yorker, reports from the front lines of the violent collision between civilization and our planets
ecosystem: the Andes, the Amazon rain forest, the Great Barrier Reef and her backyard. In lucid prose, she examines the role of
man-made climate change in causing what biologists call the sixth mass extinction the current spasm of plant and animal loss that threatens to eliminate 20 to 50 percent of all living species on earth within this century.
Extinction is a relatively new idea in the scientific community. Well into the 18th century, people found it impossible to accept the idea that species had once lived on earth but had been subsequently lost. Scientists simply could not envision a planetary force powerful enough to wipe out forms of life that were common in prior ages.
In the same way, and for many of the same reasons, many today find it inconceivable that we could possibly be responsible for destroying the integrity of our planets ecology. There are psychological barriers to even imagining that what we love so much could be lost could be destroyed forever. As a result, many of us refuse to contemplate it. Like an audience entertained by a magician, we allow ourselves to be deceived by those with a stake in persuading us to ignore reality.
For example, we continue to use the worlds atmosphere as an open sewer for the daily dumping of more than 90 million tons of gaseous waste. If trends continue, the global temperature will keep rising, triggering world-altering events, Kolbert writes. According to a conservative and unchallenged calculation by the climatologist James Hansen, the man-made pollution already in the atmosphere traps as much extra heat energy every 24 hours as would be released by the explosion of 400,000 Hiroshima-class nuclear bombs. The resulting rapid warming of both the atmosphere and the ocean, which Kolbert notes has absorbed about one-third of the carbon dioxide we have produced, is wreaking havoc on earths delicately balanced ecosystems. It threatens both the web of living species with which we share the planet and the future viability of civilization. By disrupting these systems, Kolbert writes, were putting our own survival in danger.
..more..
PasadenaTrudy
(3,998 posts)this book now. So good!