Page 1 on 14

Extinction of anthropogenic mass ... it left my kiki!

published: 29/01/13, 22:01
by Christophe
Scientists warn: one-fifth of vertebrates - including panda, tiger and black rhino - are threatened with extinction in the near future. Many species disappear even before being discovered, but other more well-known ones also live the last decades of their existence.

According to this new study, published in the magazine Science, the crisis affecting wildlife is serious and is likely to worsen due to climate change. While there are still many species to discover, mostly insects, fungi and plants, but this does not prevent already known animals from running a huge danger. And it is during the last half-century that the aggression of nature has completely degenerated.

While scientists estimate that nearly a fifth of vertebrates are threatened, the fate of most species remains unclear. A survey from 1998 found that 70% of biologists thought that one fifth of all species would have disappeared by 2030. Many experts now estimate that the world loses 5% of its species per decade, which means that their numbers will have been halved by 2150.

While conservation measures have made a big difference in recent years (many species have survived longer than expected), a "human-caused mass extinction is underway".

Moreover, the authors add that climate change threatens to make a huge difference, especially combined with the loss of already highly advanced habitat. "If we fail to keep global warming below two degrees Celsius, the darker predictions will turn out to be true," said Professor Nigel Stork of Griffith University in Brisbane, Australia.



http://www.7sur7.be/7s7/fr/2668/Especes ... ages.dhtml

published: 29/01/13, 23:36
by Forhorse
I heard the other day on the radio (france inter) that man and his pets represented 98% of the mass of vertebrates living on earth ...

published: 30/01/13, 00:35
by elephant
Well, it's simple: some (illuminati, freemasons, grp bilderberg) think - it seems - that there are 6 or 7 billion more human beings on this earth.

So, it does not matter.

Only a few "savages" and a few very rich will survive with a few million slaves to serve them.

published: 30/01/13, 09:08
by Forhorse
I am not one of those, and I also think we are far too many humans on earth.

published: 30/01/13, 09:34
by Flytox
Forhorse wrote:I heard the other day on the radio (France inter) that the man and his pets represented 98% of the mass of vertebrates living on earth ...


Chai not what is counted in there, I would like to see the details of the calculation ...... ??????????????? : Shock: : Mrgreen:



Well, it's simple: some (illuminati, freemasons, grp bilderberg) think - it seems - that there are 6 or 7 billion more human beings on this earth.

So, it does not matter.

Only a few "savages" and a few very rich will survive with a few million slaves to serve them.


I am not one of those, and I also think we are far too many humans on earth.


It is well known, it is the others who are useless / in excess. : Mrgreen:

published: 30/01/13, 10:31
by Christophe
Flytox wrote:
Forhorse wrote:I heard the other day on the radio (France inter) that the man and his pets represented 98% of the mass of vertebrates living on earth ...


Chai not what is counted in there, I would like to see the details of the calculation ...... ??????????????? : Shock: : Mrgreen:


+ 1 some time ago I read that the biomass of the only ants had exceeded that of the men ... just to have an idea ...

published: 30/01/13, 10:34
by Macro
Ants are they vertebrates ???

published: 30/01/13, 10:34
by Forhorse
Flytox wrote:
It is well known, it is the others who are useless / in excess. : Mrgreen:


It's not a story the other would be useful / useless ... should just stop thinking population growth that's it. Limit the number of children per couple pendants 2 few generations already shoed good for the planet.
Besides I act according to that belief because I do not want children.

published: 30/01/13, 10:36
by Forhorse
Flytox wrote:
Forhorse wrote:I heard the other day on the radio (France inter) that the man and his pets represented 98% of the mass of vertebrates living on earth ...


Chai not what is counted in there, I would like to see the details of the calculation ...... ??????????????? : Shock: : Mrgreen:



It was not specified, if I remember correctly it was the program "CO2 mon amour"
and the intervener who gave this figure made it clear that it is the mass of vertebrates excluded therefore insects, arachnids, molluscs etc, etc ...

published: 30/01/13, 11:15
by Christophe
Yes, of course, ants are not vertebrates ...

Nevertheless, there is still a bunch of animals in the wild anyway ... in Africa and South America, the wild biomass of vertebrates must far exceed that of humans + domestic ...

And fish in the oceans?

In any case, mass extinction is characterized not by the extinct biological mass but by the number of extinct species... deceive me?

So if 4 billions of men disappeared, we could not talk about mass extinction ... I think ...