SeaGypsy wrote: Currently the Panda bear has been lifted from 'critically endangered' to endangered', there are maybe 30,000 now. Get back to our most vulnerable status when there are a few tens of thousands of people left. I don't buy it.
dohboi wrote:"We are the most vulnerable, but not to extinction"
That's exactly the contradiction that SG and I object to.
My guess is that you have taken a metaphor/likeness/similarity (human society is like an ecosystem) and turned it into an actual and evaluative equivalence (loss of some part of that 'human ecosystem' has the same intrinsic value as loss of parts of the actual global ecosystem).
dohboi wrote:"...where natural ecosystems start reclaiming..."
Unfortunately, many of our harms will continue and even increase even if we all disappeared tomorrow.
We have a whole thread on runaway GW that you can peruse--permafrost, methane hydrates and other carbon feedbacks have been destabilized and triggered by our ff emissions, and are taking on a life of their own, continuing the trajectory of global heating long after we are gone.
All out nuclear plants will go critical, poisoning vast regions around them for a long period of time.
(Don't be fooled by the apparent short-term recovery of wildlife around Chernobyl: recent studies have showed that the radiation has wiped out the fungus critical for turning dead wood, for example, back into productive soil. The interruption of that crucial cycle will spell eventual disaster for that whole ecosystem.)
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Return to Environment, Weather & Climate
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests