“THEY’VE BEEN SAYING THE SKY IS FALLING SINCE THE 70’S AND NOTHING HAPPENED! IT’S ALL BOGUS”
Dumb fucking cunts, it’s BEEN happening. 50 years might as well be overnight on earth’s lifespan, but even if this shit happened literally overnight you’d have these stupid fucking mouthbreathers saying “NUH UH”
I don’t get it. When did republicans start hating science? What is their vested interest in denying climate change? It’s literally just the republican thing to do now so they do it, and then call the rest of brainwashed for good measure.
It makes me want to slam my fucking head into the wall I cannot wrap my mind around their fucking stupidity.
One, they've been heavily propagandized for decades by oil companies. The whole "in the 70s scientists warned of a coming ice age!" and "junk science HOAX!" bullshit. Part of their belief is the contrarian "if democrats believe this, I believe the opposite" stupidity that's become common. Also, since they're reactionaries, they loathe the idea of anything changing, so they fear "they're taking away my gas guzzling truck!" or "I don't WANT an electric chainsaw!".
Because we’ve been running over the goalposts like a goddamn freight train. First it was about avoiding mass extinctions. Oops, too late. Then it was about saving coral reefs. Oops, too late. Then it was about avoiding massive worsening chaotic weather systems. Oops, too late. Now it’s about reducing the severity of the droughts and floods. Now it’s about keeping the oncoming death toll in the hundreds of millions instead of billions.
I struggled to find this story on any outlet that isn’t a tabloid, an official-sounding never-heard-before bumfucknowhere gazette or a repeater like msn.
The original article seems to be from the guardian (quoted as such by the university itself) in a far less sensationalist way. It was written so long ago that people still thought Russia was a superpower, unilad decided to sensationalise it and publish it as fresh news one and a half years later.
The story is worrying don’t get me wrong, but this is just doom porn.
We’re all fucked, enjoy what’s left of natural beauty because it’s all going to be gone in the blink of an eye.
Humanity gets so fucking horny over the idea of alien life, meanwhile we have absolutely amazing, surreal, awe inspiring life forms ALL OVER THE PLANET. We’re living with fascinating, alien lifeforms, and we’re just watching them all go extinct while we furiously masturbate the dick of late-stage capitalism.
For all we know these creatures are the only companions we will ever know in the universe, and we’re just crossing species off the list by the thousands each year (and rapidly accelerating).
I feel like I’m drowning in despair—it’s enough to sometimes wish I was one of the fucking countless people who are just too small-minded/ignorant/selfish to care. Just blissfully reciting talking points created by rich old men, bumping and bumbling my way through life completely oblivious to the hell we’re collectively approaching.
Probably, the discharge from the nuclear plant might have aggravated some issues but I’d bet the main problem is related to temperature increases -> more bacteria -> less oxygen
Something similar happened on Brazil a while ago on some sections of the Amazon river
They didn’t think that the animal was extinct for over 100 years though. There are threatened populations in QLD, NSW, tassie etc.; they just hadn’t been seen in the state of SA in 100+ years.
It’s a bit weird because it’s “in a region”, which begs the question if I capture a creature from a different region and move it to a region where it was extinct, is it extinct anymore? (There being only one also means it will quickly become 0 again.)
Local extinction (extirpation) is a legitimate concept that is heavily studied in ecology. Just because an animal is still alive somewhere it doesn’t mean that its absence from a region it has historically lived is irrelevant.
The audience for Newsweek is lay people not ecologists. It’s completely predictable that this usage of the word would create misunderstanding. Seems like misleading clickbait to me with a cover of plausible deniability.
Obviously, but that doesn’t mean they don’t interview ecologists or biologists. “Extirpation” is way less layman friendly than “locally extinct,” and the article makes it extremely clear that this is an animal that hadn’t been seen in a specific region for years. Skimming the headline and deciding it means “they thought it was completely extinct” is a problem with the reader, not the headline or the term “locally extinct.”
You know I guess you have a point, if they’re writing for people who are too dim to realize “locally extinct” and “extinct in region” are the same concept.
A prehistoric New Zealand bird thought to be extinct in 1898 (but found again in the middle of the 20th century) is doing its best to avoid going the way of the dodo — with lobbying from some tribal leaders who value the bird’s presence. 1he Guardian recently reported on the return of the Takahē, a large, flightless bird that thrives in grasslands. They are colorful creatures, standing at a little over 1.5 feet tall, with a unique song.
But a glyphosate-free version also killed 96% of exposed bees, they said, “demonstrating that the active ingredient, glyphosate, is not the cause of the mortality.”
Since they know that the surfactants are toxic to bees, this is like comparing pure arsensic to a mixture of arsenic and cyanide and concluding that cyanide is not dangerous.
When a rat lungworm finds itself in a human, it does what it usually does in rats—it heads to the central nervous system and brain. Sometimes the migration of the worms to the central nervous system is asymptomatic or only causes mild transient symptoms. But, sometimes, they cause severe neurological dysfunction. This can start with nonspecific symptoms like headache, light sensitivity, and insomnia and develop into neck stiffness and pain, tingling or burning of the skin, double vision, bowel or bladder difficulties, and seizures. In severe cases, it can cause nerve damage, paralysis, coma, and even death.
Advertisement
It's often thought that the worm can't complete its life cycle in humans and that it ends up idly wandering around the brain for a month or two before it's eventually killed off by immune responses. However, there has been some evidence of adult worms reaching the human lungs.
Is this gonna be another bunch of morons blaming pet owners and their pet cats instead of the feral colonies?
It’s a stupid, pointless argument.
Only two ways to deal with this, catch-spay-release, or catch-kill.
Nature has a tough time restoring balance because cats can more easily live in developed areas, where their natural predators cannot.
I much prefer Catch-spay-release, but it costs money. So I urge everyone to support their local organizations that use humane methods to control the feral populations.
Edit: Like I said, morons. Y’all just want to pick a fight and feel superior instead of actually addressing the real problem.
Domestic cats are descendants of a specie that was native to the fertile crescent so unless you think that feral colonies appeared by magic then yes, cat owners are 100% the people that should be blamed.
Fifty thousand years from now, when humanity clings to existence near the poles on an otherwise inhospitable world, those living in Antarctica will thank their ancestors for making it a lush sanctuary.
Very bold of you to assume humanity still exists in 50,000 years. It’s been 100 since industrialization and everything has already gone to shit and is only getting worse more and more rapidly.
We’ll still be around. Humans are uniquely capable of surviving in a wide variety of climates, on a wide variety of diets. We may decimate the wildlife population, and billions of us may die, but humans are super good at survival.
Humanity will survive. It will be rough, trillions of people will die unnecessarily, billions more will suffer their entire lives in torment, but we’ll find a way. The only thing that strives to survive even more than an animal is an intelligence with an idea of a future. Even if that’s the belief in a perfect future that can never exist, even if in our ignorance we destroy the utopia we try to create, ideas and plans will never cease driving us to continue. Even if we replace ourselves as a species with something no longer human, we as an intelligence, or at least a kind of collective hive-mind of our creation, will continue to exist. The human will to stay alive will exert itself upon the depths of the universe, even if in doing so it becomes unrecognizable…
biodiversity
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.