Environment & Energy
Related: About this forum
'Deep concern' as deal to protect Antarctic seas fails
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20168508
The commission was considering proposals for marine reserves in two critical areas of the Ross Sea
Governments meeting in Australia have failed to reach agreement on new marine protected areas for the Antarctic ocean.
They have deferred a decision until July 2013 when all the relevant science will be considered.
Environmental groups have expressed deep concern about the lack of consensus on how to develop a network of protected zones.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)Although yes, you and I can agree that this is a dire problem, though.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)It shouldn't be that surprising to wake up one morning and find it's our turn. We might even be able to see it coming a generation or so ahead of time. Like those lily pads - "Hey, just a week ago this pond was half open water. Today there's no room for any more of us! What happened?"
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)We're the only species that's built civilization, gone to the moon, etc.
Not only that, but we've survived at least one disaster that came on far more suddenly and was quite a bit worse than AGW has been so far; the Toba eruption, 72k years ago. If humanity can survive that, then we can survive global warming too.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)We think we're special, but that's just because we can think a bit. We're smart enough to get ourselves into trouble, but not wise enough to keep ourselves out of it.
On the other hand, we are the only species besides bacteria that have ever changed the geochemistry of the entire planet, so that does make us a bit special.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)It all depends on what factors you consider and the timeline. I think it's highly unlikely (p < 0.01) that we'll go extinct due to climatic disruption within the next generation. But even that is just my opinion, and beyond 30 years I'm not prepared to put a number on it, just to note that it's a possibility.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)
NickB79
(19,253 posts)In relation to your statement about timelines:
http://theweek.com/article/index/205943/stephen-hawking-humans-will-go-extinct-without-space-travel
Because "great dangers" face the human race over the next two centuries, Hawking told delegates at a Big Think conference. With finite resources on earth and humankind's "aggressive" genetic instincts, our "only chance of longterm survival" may be to "spread out into space."
This may be our only shot at a space-faring civilization. If we crashed to a pre-tech era, the resources may no longer be there to rebuild far enough to get offplanet, in which case we will go extinct eventually.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)We are sapient. Even if H. sapiens does disappear, it will be because we will have modified ourselves into something new, not because we will go extinct.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)I don't think our self-congratulatory sapience gives us much of an edge at anything but turning resources, including other species, into excessive complexity and waste.
We are definitely clever, but I'd much rather we were wise - eusapient, if you will. Some individuals may be, but the species as a whole is still largely being ordered around by our reptilian brainstem and our limbic system. IMO the idea that our cortical cleverness makes us somehow immune to the forces that shape every other mammalian species is nothing but a conceit. That, we are good at.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)Over 90% of climate scientists agree that anthropogenic effects on the climate are indeed real and happening now.....
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)...and the people with power.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)I guess I misread the title, having thought about it again.
