General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMass Extinction: It's the End of the World as We Know It
Mass Extinction: It's the End of the World as We Know It
Monday, 06 July 2015 09:35
By Dahr Jamail, Truthout | Interview
Guy McPherson is a professor emeritus of evolutionary biology, natural resources and ecology at the University of Arizona, and has been a climate change expert for 30 years. He has also become a controversial figure, due to the fact that he does not shy away from talking about the possibility of near-term human extinction.
While McPherson's perspective might sound like the stuff of science fiction, there is historical precedent for his predictions. Fifty-five million years ago, a 5-degree Celsius rise in average global temperatures seems to have occurred in just 13 years, according to a study published in the October 2013 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. A report in the August 2013 issue of Science revealed that in the near term, earth's climate will change 10 times faster than during any other moment in the last 65 million years.
Prior to that, the Permian mass extinction that occurred 250 million years ago, also known as the "Great Dying," was triggered by a massive lava flow in an area of Siberia that led to an increase in global temperatures of 6 degrees Celsius. That, in turn, caused the melting of frozen methane deposits under the seas. Released into the atmosphere, those gases caused temperatures to skyrocket further. All of this occurred over a period of approximately 80,000 years. The change in climate is thought to be the key to what caused the extinction of most species on the planet. In that extinction episode, it is estimated that 95 percent of all species were wiped out.
Today's current scientific and observable evidence strongly suggests we are in the midst of the same process - only this time it is anthropogenic, and happening exponentially faster than even the Permian mass extinction did. ..............(more)
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/31661-mass-extinction-it-s-the-end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)I just wish there was some way to be able to store our knowledge as a species in a way that the next species along that rises to sentience in a few hundred million years could find it and use it without having to relearn it the hard way.
I dunno, maybe bunkers scattered across the moon with libraries in them? Of course, any species that could get offplanet to find them might already have passed us up in many ways.
Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #1)
Lochloosa This message was self-deleted by its author.
luvspeas
(1,883 posts)How to make endless horrible war and genocide?
How to make one group of humans with a certain lack of melanin gain all the resources and power while the rest suffer?
How to coerce humans into believing that an invisible deity is more important than the welfare of the humans that they see in front of their faces?
How to make humans willingly give up every right and freedom they possess to collect pieces of metal and paper.
How to make humans believe that the ones with the most paper and metal are better and more deserving than humans without?
How to make the humans who do not carry children believe that they possess the ones who do.
I think a clean slate would be much better.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)The best way to learn not to do stupid things is to have examples of other people who did do those stupid things, and how badly it turned out for them. That's a lot better than making those mistakes yourself.
StandingInLeftField
(972 posts)....done that, did not work out too well.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)These big brains mean our species won't be going extinct from climate change.
Let's say it's worse than all of the worst-case scenarios, and 5 billion humans die from starvation, wars, drought, and similar climate effects. That leaves 2.5 billion humans alive.
It would be chaos, and very unpleasant to live through. But our species would still be here.
CrispyQ
(36,557 posts)We are not so special that we will survive anything & everything. Arrogance is one of our biggest faults. Yes, we have some brilliant individuals, but as a collective, we aren't too bright.
Also, where do you get your worse case scenario figure of 5 billion from? Do you have a link for that?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)That kinda indicates that 5 billion was pulled out of the ether as a number much worse than the predictions.
To wipe out our species, you have to kill 7.5 billion of us. Climate change can't do that. The droughts, famines and wars from climate change could kill billions. But when you eliminate several billion, you also eliminate demand for food for those several billion. And now you can actually feed the much smaller number that remain, despite the droughts.
You need a much larger event than climate change to actually kill all of us. Something like a comet impact.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)disappear and people have to move underground to avoid the worst of it, the whole way to survive will be challenged - whop is outside working the oil drills with the increase in storms. where will the food come from, where will.....? How will we survive with the changing oxygen content, with the change needed in nutrients,
No we won't die out in a couple of years, but dwindle away until there is no trace.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Climate change can't turn Earth into Venus. The surface will still be quite habitable.
Pretty much the same kind of people who work them today. If we still have to drill in the oceans, we'll figure out how to harden the rigs so they can withstand storms. Or we'll get better at disconnecting them and moving them out of the way.
Generally, from land closer to the poles or artificial environments (massive greenhouses, massively irrigated areas, etc.)
Again, there's about 75% fewer humans in this nightmare scenario. That means we have a lot less mouths to feed.
Oxygen levels are not going to change much. We're talking about atmospheric changes on the parts-per-million scale. It's not like we're going to go from 23% oxygen to 10% oxygen.
Photosynthesis will still work. And will still produce oxygen.
We will still need the same nutrients. We aren't going to suddenly mutate into a new species.
haikugal
(6,476 posts)And die off of the biome. If the ocean dies we won't have those oxygen producers and on land the growing things and insects etc. will be stressed as well...
As you say, not pleasant...everything we know, and love, may die.
I don't know if we can make a difference now, twenty years late, but we should get moving anyway.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)The "oxygen producers" are algae at the bottom of the ocean's food pyramid. They are much less susceptible to acidification than higher-order species.
Yes they will. But we would still be able to feed ourselves in that dystopia.
All it takes is sufficient money and will.
NickB79
(19,297 posts)Because, in addition to rising temperatures, you also encounter rising relative humidity.
And the relative humidity expected over equatorial regions of the planet in the next 200 years will be above anything humans can survive unaided by technology.
http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/research/2010/100504HuberLimits.html
Steven Sherwood, the professor at the Climate Change Research Centre at the University of New South Wales, Australia, who is the paper's lead author, said prolonged wet-bulb temperatures above 95 degrees would be intolerable after a matter of hours.
"The wet-bulb limit is basically the point at which one would overheat even if they were naked in the shade, soaking wet and standing in front of a large fan," Sherwood said. "Although we are very unlikely to reach such temperatures this century, they could happen in the next."
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)golly...I wonder if that leaves other parts of the planet's surface...
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)They published Joseph Mercola, as if he was credible, while questioning the credibility of Dr. Paul Offit.
Any publication with an eye toward accuracy would know that situation should be reversed.
Edit: rationalwiki on Guy McPherson
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Guy_McPherson
Sid
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)We have embarked on the sixth great extinction, and since we are basically doing fuck all to change course (instead doubling down on climate change) it would be totally unsurprising to me if we ended up taking ourselves with it...or at least destroyed our civilization as we know it.
Are you familiar with the concept of runaway warming? Unlike the opposite extreme of a "snowball" planet, it is not recoverable.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Which is quite a large difference.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)So....you didn't bother to read your own link?
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
haikugal
(6,476 posts)Climate change has always pushed us to the brink and we almost died out once before..we should take this very seriously. Billions of lives, not just ours, depend on us.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)in this case, you offered no alternative to McPherson as to who we can believe where it relates to the timing of consequences related to climate change.
May was recorded as the hottest month in recorded history. June will probably break that record. So, who should we be reading for the latest forecast on the effects of climate change?
NV Whino
(20,886 posts)appalachiablue
(41,199 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)Humans won't be dying out. These big brains mean we can adapt quickly enough to survive as a species.
Every other species? Well, they might be in trouble.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)I would imagine that it'll be pretty hard to survive with no food....ymmv...
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Yes, it's not possible to feed 7.5 billion humans from greenhouses and food production moved towards the poles. We don't need to feed all 7.5 billion to keep the species alive.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...
jeff47
(26,549 posts)"Do nothing" will eventually cut greenhouse gas emissions, due to the massive reduction in the number of living humans. But that still leaves some humans alive.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)....There may well be some humans left alive....but alot of that depends upon whether anything else edible survives as well...
jeff47
(26,549 posts)There are advantages to being omnivorous.
If we have to, we can feed people from crops grown in artificial conditions. We will not be able to feed anywhere near 7.5 billion people that way. But we could easily feed a billion or two with our current technology.
NickB79
(19,297 posts)Why do you assume we'd still have current technology?
When Rome fell, centuries worth of technological advances were lost. Same goes for the loss of the Library of Alexandria, and multiple Greek city-states. The new civilizations that took their place had to relearn much of what was lost on their own, or piece it together from scraps.
A global die-off would not be orderly, or give any assurances much of our ability to maintain modern tech would be intact. At the same time, we've reached the point where most of the mining of raw materials for maintaining modern tech are themselves dependent upon modern tech. IE, the easy oil gushers are all gone, and more and more you need advanced deepwater or fracking rigs to get to the remaining large oilfields. Easily smelted ore reserves are now largely played out, and the remaining ones are in inhospitable areas or deep underground. Coal seams close to the surface are largely played out as well.
A global collapse (and lets be fair, that's what 2/3 of the global population dying off would be) is a crapshoot in every way. We might come through with a fair amount of technology, or we might be thrown back to Medieval times. IMO, how the global nuclear-armed powers react to the constriction of resources will be the deciding factor.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)I've thought for some time that our "big brains" are exactly what has gotten us into this mess, and I am doubtful that they can get us out. I think the ability to alter one's environment in a wholesale fashion--in effect, to perform a scientific experiment on a global scale--is not a survival trait.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Climate change will create famines and droughts that lead to wars. But that still won't kill all of us.
Let's say it's worse than every prediction for "we do nothing". And 5 billion people die. That leaves 2.5 billion people alive.
It will not be pleasant to go through that. But we do not need pleasant to survive as a species.
Teacheral
(33 posts)will subduct all evidence of man's existence in the convection cycle of the earth's mantle. Jesus will be pissed.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)and that's with the assumption that the collapse of our ecosystem doesn't do it first. With the speed the climate is changing, plus the fact that we are doing nothing but accelerating the destructive process, plus the fact that CO2 and other greenhouse gases will stay in the atmosphere for hundreds of years after we stop emitting them...I wouldn't give good odds on our chances. Big abilities + big egos + zero forethought is not a good combination.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Even the worst-case scenarios have the temperature leveling off well below the point where the planet is uninhabitable by humans.
Again, to actually go extinct you have to wipe out all humans. That's actually really damn hard to do. Wipe out all but a million? That means we are still around.
AZ Progressive
(3,411 posts)including plants and food, oxygen, fresh water, etc...
You don't really get how sensitive organisms are until you have tropical fish as pets. Then you can understand ecosystems and the sensitivity of life.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)If we were, we'd still be living on African savannas. Instead, we successfully moved into every biome on the planet. Long before we invented writing.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sensationalism sells.
Sid
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Avalux
(35,015 posts)Let's say all of a sudden, we lose electricity and satellites for good. How many people would be able to survive without their phones? How many people would be able to survive without modern conveniences?
I don't think very many. Geez I know a lot of people that have no idea how to cook a meal as it is now.
We're the ones who will be in trouble, because we'll be aware of what's happening to us and we'll know it's our fault, unlike the other species.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)while walking around my garden. I think a lot of people cannot even identify what edible plants look like whilst growing. I think the mass migration of people will cause a lot of death. No area can absorb the amount of people who will need to be absorbed and sustain them.
NickB79
(19,297 posts)A half-dozen countries, all armed with massive militaries and nuclear weapons, trying to stop waves of human refugees from flooding their borders while at the same time fighting to secure habitable land in the Arctic Circle, has the potential for disaster.
A nuclear war wiping out billions and poisoning the planet with fallout for a century, followed by a nuclear winter, followed by massive global warming as the soot settles, would be a multi-punch assault that may indeed push our species to the brink.
I think it is naive to expect humans to just die out by the billions as climate change ravages the planet and not fight one another for resources with all the horrible weapons at our disposal.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Planet in peril: Humans must act against a new mass extinction (7/6/15)
http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/editorials/2015/07/06/Planet-in-peril-Humans-must-act-against-a-new-mass-extinction/stories/201506300045
Measuring the sixth mass extinction (7/6/15)
https://cosmosmagazine.com/life-sciences/measuring-sixth-mass-extinction
The Sixth Mass Extinction: We Arent The Dinosaurs, Were The Asteroid (6/28/15)
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/28/the-sixth-mass-extinction-we-aren-t-the-dinosaurs-we-re-the-asteroid.html
We're Entering A Sixth Mass Extinction, And It's Our Fault (6/24/15)
http://www.popsci.com/were-entering-sixth-mass-extinction-and-its-our-fault
And many more~
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=mass+extinction&oq=mass+extinction&gs_l=news-cc.3..43j0j43i53.800.5098.0.5614.15.7.0.8.8.0.113.658.6j1.7.0...0.0...1ac.1.HN0MbFolhCk
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)That is nice, but the title is AS WE KNOW IT...which I guess is too hard to argue with a shitty hand.
"professor emeritus of evolutionary biology, natural resources and ecology at the University of Arizona, and has been a climate change expert for 30 years"...but you know...what does he know compared to the DU experts (that have no reply but snark).
madinmaryland
(64,934 posts)haikugal
(6,476 posts)From the link..
"A Child Born Today May Live to See Humanity's End, Unless ..." reads a recent blog post title from Reuters. It reads:
Humans will be extinct in 100 years because the planet will be uninhabitable, according to Australian microbiologist Frank Fenner, one of the leaders of the effort to eradicate smallpox in the 1970s. He blames overcrowding, denuded resources and climate change. Fenner's prediction is not a sure bet, but he is correct that there is no way emissions reductions will be enough to save us from our trend toward doom. And there doesn't seem to be any big global rush to reduce emissions, anyway.
But some might survive..
I want more than that for the world and it's children...
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)Some think we will engineer our way out. Some think Jesus will save us.
Both are as likely.
So many feedback loops, so little time.
Say, while those lucky billions are running around with all that extra space and extra food. Or at least, whatever is considered "food" at that point, I hope a few of them will take the time to make sure all those nuclear power plants are properly shut down. I've heard those can be tricky if you don't keep an eye on them.
Bah, I'm sure someone will leave a post it note.
4dsc
(5,787 posts)the masses are too busy being consumer of goods to be bothered with mass extinctions. As long as the malls are open and their credit cards allow them to buy goods they are happy. They don't care about the future because they have been brainwashed that way. Like most people here.
Sad but oh so true.
luvspeas
(1,883 posts)created by the Hadron collider. This is all just a figment of a Boltzman's brain anyway. There will always be other dimensions.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)...people. I like to think that those on the left would feel the same as we do...we care and want the best for our planet and it's life forms.
However, most of us also know how a lot of Republicans think: Why should I give a damn about Global warming ? It's not true anyway. My children won't have to deal with much and they'll be rich anyway...and the MOST important thing..heh..heh..I'll be dead..so screw it!
That's the kind of thinking we have to fight.
cstanleytech
(26,350 posts)but look at the size of our population? The current expansion is totally unsustainable because the resources of the planet are finite but people keep on having more than one child and in some countries they are literally breeding like blowflies.
olddots
(10,237 posts)The word responcabilty comes to mind .We may never know what makes some people believe that the world owes them a living and others believe that they owe the world a living .
" snark " is a defence mechanism maybe we can defend ourselves from ourselves before its too late .
Cleita
(75,480 posts)If some of those who think they will miss out because they are supposed to die soon, what if they knew they would have to be reborn? Maybe they would think differently about the world they are leaving behind, which they will have to reenter.
I know, it's crazy, but I sometimes wonder if that belief would change people's actions.
BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)cstanleytech
(26,350 posts)and the lava one in Siberia was still only considered as one of a number of possible explanations.
C Moon
(12,226 posts)NV Whino
(20,886 posts)StevieM
(10,500 posts)LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)AZ Progressive
(3,411 posts)centuries?
AZ Progressive
(3,411 posts)Greed built empires, greed built the industrial revolution, greed hollowed the hearts of many, and greed has kept society from effectively fighting back and saving humankind from it's own destruction.
AZ Progressive
(3,411 posts)Dahr Jamail | The Methane Monster Roars
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/28490-the-methane-monster-roars
Read more at: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/28490-the-methane-monster-roars
wundermaus
(1,673 posts)We are part of the web of life on this planet. And when we alter the atmosphere by making it a global, corporate toilet, things can and do go horribly wrong. Like killing off foundation species that feed the plants and animals that feed us. The earth is like an island. Take a good look at Easter Island. There is an example of what can go wrong when people keep doing the same stuff expecting different results. The other funny thing about us is we think in human time frames... The stuff we have been doing for the past couple of hundred years has set in motion feedback loops that are already in process. There is nothing we can do about them now. The cows are already out of the barn. The best we can do is now is enjoy the trip over the cliff. Flying is fun, hitting the ground sucks. Have a nice trip everybody.