Art by NoName_13
The prophesy of the Sixth Mass extinction has popped up again with hyperbolic modelling to scare us out of our money and just in time for a UN convention. As Steve Milloy says it’s just a giant land and power grab by the UN, which has just finished another meeting for “Biodiversity” — it’s the Baby-IPCC for biology. It was co-hosted by Canada and China. They couldn’t even be bothered thinking up a new acronym so it was called COP15. Rinse, repeat, and press go for spin.
Journalists can cut-n’-paste the formula and adjectives from the IPCC climate press releases: blah etc blah, …close to 200 countries reached “a watershed agreement to stem the loss of nature worldwide” (but not the US). Somehow the “bleary eyed delegates” (who arrived in jets), have waved their magic wands and cast a spell to save the Earth. The solution, apparently, is for the rest of us not to use about a third of our own country, or something like that. The UN bureaucrats can decide what use is OK, and punish us with threats of “endangered listings” if we don’t spend enough on their favourite lobby group, just like they are with Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, even though it has record high coral cover.
Currently “only” 17% of land, and 10% of marine areas are protected. They want to make that 30% to remain “undeveloped“.
It’s just one more baby step on the way to centralized global government. We will need to ask their permission to use our land soon.
Conserve 30% of our land by 2030? (30 x 30)
Nations promise to protect 30 percent of planet to stem extinction
Washington Post
MONTREAL — Close to 200 countries reached a watershed agreement early Monday to stem the loss of nature worldwide, pledging to protect nearly a third of Earth’s land and oceans as a refuge for the planet’s remaining wild plants and animals by the end of the decade.
Nations now have the next eight years to hit their targets for protecting life. With few legal mechanisms for enforcement, they will have to trust each other to protect habitats and funnel hundreds of billions of dollars over conservation.
The 10-year deal sets nearly two dozen targets. The banner commitment calls on nations to collectively conserve for wildlife at least 30 percent of land, inland waterways, and coastal and ocean areas by 2030 — the promise dubbed “30 by 30.”
Thus spake the prophet Supercomputer:
Earth could face a mass EXTINCTION by 2100: Supercomputer predicts more than a quarter of species will die by the end of the century
Daily Mail
Australian and European scientists have developed a ‘virtual Earth’ to better plot global extinctions caused by climate change. The results point to the loss of 10 per cent of all plant and animal species by 2050, rising to 27 per cent by the end of this century. The scientists blame ‘over-exploitation of resources’, land-use change, over-harvesting, pollution, climate change and ‘biological invasions’.
‘Children born today who live into their 70s can expect to witness the disappearance of literally thousands of plant and animal species, from tiny orchids and the smallest insects to iconic animals such as the elephant and the koala,’ Professor Bradshaw said.
Using a supercomputer, the scientists created a world with more than 15,000 ‘food webs’ to predict the fate of interconnected species.
So a supercomputer adds up 15,000 webs of low level data on sloths, bark and butterflies, with error bars larger than trends, in systems we don’t understand, and a million lines of code, and extrapolates up the kazoo — what could possibly go wrong?
And these people call themselves scientists.
Let’s get a grip on the current state of the Sixth Mass Extinction — so far the only mammal extinction officially due to “man-made” climate change was a colony of little brown rats which had washed up on a sandy spit south of Papua New Guinea. The “island” is so small it has no fresh water, no trees, and the highest point is all of 3 meters above the high tide mark. One king wave could have wiped out the colony. Relatives of these rats live in Papua New Guinea, and presumably more rats will wash up there again sometime and the cycle will start over. As of 2019, that was the only actual mammal anyone can name as an extinction “caused by climate change”.
Almost the whole island was protected by the Native Title Act. A lot of good it did the dead rats.
As Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace says — most of the species “going extinct” never existed in the first place:
“Since species extinction became a broad social concern, coinciding with the extinction of the passenger pigeon, we have done a pretty good job of preventing species extinctions.”
Moore bluntly mocked species extinction claims made by biologist Edward O. Wilson from Harvard University. Wilson estimated that up to 50,000 species go extinct every year based on computer models of the number of potential but as yet undiscovered species in the world. Moore: “There’s no scientific basis for saying that 50,000 species are going extinct. The only place you can find them is in Edward O. Wilson’s computer at Harvard University. They’re actually electrons on a hard drive. I want a list of Latin names of actual species.”
As for Koalas, nearly everything we’ve been told about koalas is wrong. Far from being in danger of being wiped out, they have been in a boom bust cycle for 200 years.
Before the first fleet arrived, koalas were so rare that the new settlers didn’t even see one for fifteen years! But after the indigenous cool burns programs stopped, dense forests grew which were choc-full of tender new shoots that koalas love to eat. So koala populations would flourish and boom right up until a fire wiped them out.
They recover so fast sometimes they are in plague proportions.
Save species with fossil fuels — Rich countries protect the environment
The solution, of course, is cheap energy:
1. The worst pollution is in countries with a low income per capita — when people are hungry they raze forests. The most polluted cities are in places like Ghana, Ukraine, Bangladesh, Zambia, Argentina, and Nigeria. The most deforestation occurs in Brazil, Indonesia, Russia, and Mexico. The worst air is in India and China.
2. Only rich nations have the resources to save the environment.
3. Countries that produce more CO2 are richer.
Source: UNEP – a graph so useful they had to remove it.
Quick, burn more fossil fuels to save life on Earth
h/t Willie Soon
REFERENCES
Giovani Strona and Corey Bradshaw (2022) Coextinctions dominate future vertebrate losses from climate and land use change, Science Advances, 16 Dec 2022, Vol 8, Issue 50, DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abn4345
This is best summed up by GIGO.
200
All real modelers knew that back in the day.
Apparently that concept is no longer taught and you don’t even have to look out the window to see if yiur model is correct. Just ask the IPCC or our very own Bureau of Meterology.
They both make models that are never validated.
They think that if the prediction of the model is wrong it’s the measured
data that’s wrong and then the data is altered to match the model prediction.270
Correction:
The words in my last sentence were not meant to be struck out. I don’t know what happened.
Should read:
They think that if the prediction of the model is wrong it’s the measured data that’s wrong and then the data is altered to match the model prediction.
310
A prominant feature of reverse engineering.
20
All of these Models are based upon assumptions. So, if the assumptions ate incorrect then the Model is wrong. The actual data can never be wrong unless the measurement is wrong. All IMHO of course as I am not a Scientist. Just a 70 year old with some basic Common Sense.
250
“Assume” – the word that makes an “Ass” out of “U” and “Me”
130
If you can “Assume a spherical cow” I guess you can assume “A spherical mass extinction”?
80
What has taken its place is the other ‘GIGO’ — Garbage in, Gospel Out.
120
At some point model results began to be “data.”
180
Garbage in,Gospel out!
170
Excellent!
110
Glad I’m not going to be around for 2100, it looks like it’s going to be a very nasty year.
Most of the wild life will be extinct, & the little still around is going to fry along with us. The place sure is going to get smelly.
80
Or encased with ice; not much to choose between them!
60
Totally off topic, but how did the Namoi floods treat you blokes?
10
Is the terror of a supposed mass extinction why the EU has just introduced a CO2 tax and no one noticed?
https://www.euractiv.com/section/emissions-trading-scheme/news/eu-agrees-co2-tax-on-heating-and-transport-fuels-softened-by-new-social-climate-fund/
SEE LINK FOR REST
170
But they also, early this year, declared natural gas was GREEN.
120
That’s the pretext.
They predict another Paleocene-Eocene type thermal maximum on the basis of falsified climate models using unreliable data.
They don’t mention that the PETM wasn’t much of a mass extinction event and that “many of the species that were present during the Paleocene persisted through the PETM and into the Eocene, and only a relatively small number of extinctions took place.”
50
They don’t mention that the PETM wasn’t much of a mass extinction event…
Back then their computers weren’t as fast nor their programming as up-to-date, as today’s. The Killer software hadn’t been written but now, it’s all in place … so we get the bad nooze much sooner …
10
Present company excepted, most people were and are unaware that we really were heading for a mass extinction event if CO2 continued to drop the way it was.
Depending on the photosynthetic route used by plants either C3 or C4, plants need a minimum 150-200 ppm to survive, let alone thrive.
Fortunately CO2 levels started to naturally increase. Hopefully they’ll confine to do so. I would like to see 800-1200ppm.
And I’ve never heard an anti-energy lobbyist state what they consider to be the optimal level of atmospheric CO2 even when asked. They have no idea.
Also, these days, how many even know that plants require CO2? (I’m not joking.)
370
It is far more likely that mass extinction events will be CAUSED by the green agendas.
Off-shore wind turbines, unknown effect on ocean life.
On-shore wind.. decimating insect, bat and bird colonies. Denuding land and stripping it of all life.
Solar farms.. toxic waste in the making, alter the local climate and ecosystem radically.
Then add in all the new mining etc that will be needed to reach illogical, totalitarian “net-zero” targets.
180
How many people know that there are some plants that release oxygen at night too in the absence of daytime CO2 photosynthesis?
The Peace Lily is one, and they produce a single white flower once a year.
My 2nd favourite plant, behind Bottlebrushes.
60
Plants that use crassulacean acid metabolism do that.
60
42
140
For the unaware, ‘the supercomputer Deep Thought reveals that the answer to the “Great Question” of “Life, the Universe and Everything” is “forty-two.”
50
Or 3,6 & 9 according to Nicola Tesla…
40
The plural of koala is koalas. Enough apostrophe’s (joke).
[Good point. Two apostrophes exterminated. Thanks. _ Jo]
100
But these are ABC koalas so each is treated as an individual.
I am not sure what pronouns koalas want to use but that is their choice (and after all each is probably more intelligent than Chris B.)
120
Koalas are people too!
Incidentally, they are the world’s least intelligent mammal and their brains have actually shrunk over the course of evolution.
They have a smooth (lissencephalic) brain with no folds and are incapable of anything but the most primitive cognition e.g. recognise a gum leaf on a tree but if leaves are put on a table, they are unable to recognise them.
What more appropriate an icon could there be for Australia?
250
It’s difficult to be more stupid than a sheep.
50
There was something I read years ago, which I thought was from the “Dad in Parliament” chapter of “Our New Selection.
Two parliamentarians were debating vigorously, and one said about the other “The Honourable Member has the brains of a sheep”. Of course, the insulted party demanded an apology, which the Speaker duly enforced.
The apology was “Oh, very well. The Honourable Member doesn’t have the brains of a sheep”.
90
“It’s difficult to be more stupid than a sheep.”
Albo and Bowen manage it !
140
My limited experience with sheep suggests that they are silly rather than stupid.
I think Albo and Bowen are trying to reach peak stupidity; they are certainly well on the way. But then, didn’t someone indicate that human stupidity is infinite?
120
To be fair, Banjo Patterson did devote a short essay to their remarkable ingenuity in finding ways to die en masse.
30
The Damara sheep breed are quite intelligent animals
00
I would have given that prize to politicians and health experts…
60
When I was working on a farm in my student days we had a sheep called Larry (what else) in the flock. When I had to herd them from a paddock up through the village by road, Larry would go ahead as she (!) knew the way and she would lead the flock right up to the home paddock and through the gate. Not stupid was Larry, she never got sent to the abattoir!
100
Shouldn’t that have been Harold?
50
Our old Snowy (RIP) was the leader of the gang; now Shauna is left. Shauna’s offspring were Shaun and Shaunette. What a surprising choice of names.
20
The best defence of sheep was in the Letters in The Spectator. (shortened slightly)
Your correspondent is wrong in saying sheep are stupid.
Recent University research has shown that they are very good at behaving like sheep,
can recognise individual humans by their face,
and are quite good at solving simple problems.
Only the last rules out a career in politics.
30
How the HECK are they going to achieve this when 100% of the earth will be covered by windmills and solar panels.
These people are INSANE!!
You can’t have it both ways (net zero AND 30% land put away for conservation) WITHOUT nuclear.
Grow a brain you sycophantic MORONS.
Cheers,
290
“sycophantic”
and psychopathic !
80
Perhaps the reason that they want to leave 30% undeveloped is that they can then have plenty of room for solar panels and windmills.
80
Yet these same Communist loonies want to change to TOXIC S & W that has to be replaced every 15 to 20 years and the entire mess buried in LANDFILL FOREVER. Every 15 to 20 years.
These liars and con merchants will never give up on their Communist beliefs and objectives and Plibersek was our Aussies’ clueless know nothing donkey at this booze up?
Meanwhile the Earth is GREENING at a very fast rate because of the EXTRA co2, but these delusional MORONs also want to reduce this GAS of life?
We’re entering a downward spiral of UN RULE and we’re also going to WASTE billions of $ FOREVER on so called REPARATIONs, at a time when life is very safe everywhere and all the data proves that this is the best + SAFEST time to be alive.
Just look up the UN DATA for yourselves.
200
Koalas… The neighbours have three of the darn things that live in the trees in their back yard.
Can be very noisy at night.. 🙂
70
COP15 Australia – represented by Left Leaning
Australian Senator David Pocock freezing his bits off in Canadian snow for global warming.
It’s worse than we thought. – We must do more.
David Pocock
@DavidPocock
At COP15 in Montréal where countries are negotiating a global agreement to halt and reverse environmental decline and the destruction of Nature.
From the Comments
– Thanks for that, David.
It seems, now, we’ve gone from Global Warming to Climate Change and, now, Destruction of Nature.
These clowns must think we are as stupid as they are.
And to think, they get a bigger say in the world than us plebs do.
Some serious stuff is wrong.
– No doubt he’s on a tax payer funded rort like the rest of them/they/her/she/him/he!!
210
I saw a social media post of Pocock uttering those crazy statements. I wont pass on my first thoughts, but my second thought was – “I’ll bet I (taxpayer) paid for this trip and that was his reward for voting with Labor”.
130
“Destruction of Nature.”
If they were really concerned about “Destruction of Nature”, they would immediately call a stop to all wind turbine industrial estates, and toxic solar
farmsestates. Also to ethanol crops etc.But its not about “Destruction of Nature” at all… they don’t care about that..
Those are just the next words to be used for their virtue-seeking and global control agendas.
60
The UN has 40,000 full time people. What do they do? Plot their path to total political control of the planet with the support of left leaning politicians from across the globe. You could call it a meeting of the International Marxists party. The claim is we the politicians of the planet, paid to pose for photographs and speeches about ourselves, have to unite against a common enemy. Who? Martians? Bugs from another universe?
No. The enemy is mankind, humanity, mortal enemy of the planet.
Only a supra national Marxist government can save the planet from man. It’s a replay of Avatar from James Cameron. UN members have needy families too, families left behind while they party in New York first class. Send money, lots of money. Call them Carbon Credits. Your planet needs your help!
190
So the unelected swill that is the UN want to save 30% of the planets land mass from development, but on the other hand they want the world to go renewables everything. The land required for renewables everything will include that 30% UN biodiversity part, lol. You can’t make this up, they have no idea. If the UN ,IPCC and the climate alarmists get their way, it will be standing room only left amongst the renewables everything.
150
This is just stage 1. Stage three is where they save 100% of the planet by controlling all of it.
80
I would think that Australia already has a much larger amount than 30% of its land area which is undeveloped.
70
I think it depends on how “developed” is defined. Apart from absolute desert and National Parks, etc, the bulk of the non-urban land area is used for agriculture of some sort.
30
How would countries like India manage a 30% land reservation for biodiversity when just over 60% is utilised for food production? If another 30% is reserved for biodiversity that leaves the remaining 10% for the population and renewable energy farms! Someone hasn’t done the math.
120
And the UN solution for not enough Chinese windmills to keep society going when there is no wind or sun is to install more Chinese windmills and Chinese solar panels!
Meanwhile China outputs more CO2 than all other countries combined. Their excuse is that they need to manufacture windmills and solar panels to save the planet. So they need more coal. And ask politely this time if we would please stop pushing the price up.
100
Rational thinkers here understand that it is impossible for wind, solar and Big Batteries to replace proper power generation.
But that’s not the plan.
The Left hate the standard of living that Western Civilisation and the free enterprise system has produced for us. They intend to destroy it all and give us non-Elites a spartan life of:
1) Eating insects and no meat and no “luxury” food. Insects and gruel.
2) Public transport rather than cars plus with transport range restrictions. No travel beyond 15 mins without “papers”, the “15 min city”.
3) Living in tiny high density apartments with minimal or no heating and cooling.
4) Universal tracing and tracking of people movements and currency transactions.
5) Dictatorship rather than representative democracy.
6) Abolish private ownership
7) Provide minimal electricity for a few light globes in the house, a TV to deliver 24/7 propaganda, a computer to order groceries and minimal if any cooking.
Etc. Etc.
Astute observers will see that all the elements for that are already in place.
230
“The Left hate the standard of living that Western Civilisation”
And yet the Left almost invariable live in inner city suburbs, and are totally dependent on that western standard of living for the virtue-seeking.
If only they were the first and only people to SUFFER from all their idiotic agendas.
140
I don’t believe its the left, women around the world are far more inclined to believe CO2 causes global warming. This is patently clear with the election of Teals in Australia.
161
“with the election of Teals in Australia”
A result of Gillard’s and the far-left deep-seated misandry being played on for political advantage. !
140
That is true, the centre left and right take political advantage to win elections, picking up chatter along the way.
My main argument is that more women vote Democrat because of the maternal instinct, think of the grandchildren.
This same phenomenon is exhibited around the world.
60
More women vote Left because they’ve never had to work or own their own business.. You can only be a Socialist on someone else’s money!
80
That is unfair and wrong headed, more women vote for the green persuasion, leaving the centre left scrambling to regain those lost votes.
20
Meanwhile here’s another great, informative interview from Dr John Christy trying to teach us about the climate.
But alas our silly pollies + the MSM + other so called scientists and uneducated teenagers etc have all the say and can tell all their lies and never be challenged.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/12/18/data-shows-theres-no-climate-catastrophe-looming-climatologist-dr-j-christy-debunks-the-narrative/
80
I find it galling that so many politicians who are generally failed lawyers like Andrew Bandt, a devout Marxist, not scientists of any type, are on platforms telling us how they are going to change the weather, save species, save the planet by making energy vastly more expensive and stopping people in third world countries from improving their lives, forcing them to migrate. This in turn destroys national borders which suits the UN/EU perfectly.
But the dead hand of the EU on food supply has had one bit of comic relief. This in the Telegraph “Christmas dinner costs soar as price of Brussels sprouts shoots up! Average wholesale price of sprouts rose by 30p per kilogram year-on-year, according to new data”
120
The UN. A international body of the world’s representative countries formed post WWII to prevent similar wars from happening again. Yet, every day since the formation of this body there has been a war in some part of the world. That’s about 70 years of continuous war .So, their original mission has totally failed. A lot of people have been saying it for years- time to disband the UN. Another thing Trump got right.
120
The aim of the UN charter was to prevent WW3 and that seems to be working out okay.
24
With the UNs support for the West’s war on Russia via Ukraine I’ve never felt so close to WW3 as i do now. So no the UN is a total failure and is getting worse. Defund and downsize to the bare bones.
10
I don’t know if it’s been noted here before but Β. GΑΤΕS published a new book last year.
After spotting it in the library recently, I had a quick browse. It’s all about Net Zero to save the planet so I put it down quickly before it burned my hands.
The ‘good news’ is it was in pristine condition. I was careful to maintain its unread appearance.
190
Great, if you have better information than that used by the modellers, lets have it. For example, how many extinctions are ok, what is an expectable level of biodiversity.
Its easy to decry, but you are offering nothing in its place.
126
The old “don’t point out problems if you can’t do better” trick.
I couldn’t hit the side of a hay shed with a bow and arrow, but I can still see how close you get to the bulls eye.
180
Read the post Peter Fitzroy. I do have a solution. Rich countries have national parks, poor countries raze the forests. If we all have cheap energy again we might lift some of those poor countries out of the eco-destruction phase.
Coal saves forests in every way.
230
Indonesia is the world’s largest coal exporting nation. Coal has not helped protect Indonesia’s biodiversity.
010
What aids vegetation growth, always helps biodiversity.
Certainly, using coal has saved massive amounts of deforestation, wouldn’t you agree.
HUGE benefits to the country.
70
Indonesia has a tropical climate – they don’t need firewood. If their forests are being depleted, there is another agenda.
11
Cooking.. Of course they need firewood if they haven’t got electricity.
10
Most of them use kerosene or LPG.
01
CARBON BASED FOSSIL FUELS have save the world’s forests.
Thanks for the verification.
10
Coal usage is an indicator of a developing country which relies upon resource extraction. Eventually, there are no more resources or they are too expensive to extract. The economy then has to become circular, relying upon reusables and renewables. Europe is going through that transition now, other countries will have to follow.
08
More nonsense rhetoric from Simon.
You can never rely on renewables…. Germany and the UK are finding that out. They are NOT transitioning, they are collapsing !
Wind and solar are massive consumers of materials, especially if you have to add batteries.. and repeated replacements every 15-20 years.
Talk about expensive to extract !! Not circular, but an ever-increasing spiral of environmental destruction.
Coal will make way, eventually, to nuclear / thorium….
… Once the far-left bed-wetters get out the way.
70
Like Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan?
50
Of course those countries could stop wasting resources on things like heating, lighting and food production as is happening in much of Europe. If that doesn’t save them they could start ‘culling the useless mouths’ in the Public Services, Universities and Doom predicting Institutes.
60
‘ … what is an expectable level of biodiversity.’
After all the rain we may have to cull kangaroo.
90
Its NONSENSE, based on NOTHING but non-science assumption.
Nothing to disprove, any more than any other Grimm Bros fairy-tale.
Apart from the little rodent washed off an atoll by a small wave, name one single species that has gone extinct due to “human induced global climate change” in the last 50 years…
That is that base data you should be looking at.. you know ACTUAL DATA..
ps.. the answer is ZERO !
First, of course, you have to prove that human induced global climate change actually exists.
So far you are batting about negative 100% on that !
130
“what is an ex
pcectable level of biodiversity.”You need to talk to the instigators of wind turbine and solar ultra-factories about that.
And the people ripping out pristine forests to grow ethanol crops.
The greenie agenda has done more to decimate environmental diversity than any other agenda…
…. and you don’t care.
100
“expectable “ ??
Still trying to figure out which word you meant… “acceptable”… maybe ?.
30
We are fully conscious that biodiversity needs to be retained, but ultimately its down to weather. The Macquarie Marshes have been saved for posterity.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-12-20/how-to-manage-water-as-climate-extremes-deepen/101769978
20
So all we see is dismissive criticism based on nothing – is everyone here a nihilist?
114
Que?
50
As you say.. This paper is BASED ON NOTHING !
Well done for finally realising that fact.
60
ps I repeat, since I know you will not have an answer..
“Name one single species that has gone extinct due to “human induced global climate change” in the last 50 years…”
First prove that human induced global climate change actually exists.
Until you do that…
… its based on NOTHING !
120
They have supposedly found one on the GBR.
‘The Bramble Cay melomys (Melomys rubicola) is the first mammal reported to have gone extinct as a direct result of climate change. Previously found only on the island of Bramble Cay in Great Barrier Reef, its habitat was destroyed by rising sea levels.’ (IUCN)
05
More likely a large, storm driven wave, I would think!
40
That is the rodent I was referring to.
On a tiny atoll 3m max elevation, in a known cyclone area.
Nothing to do with human induced anything. !
50
And it was off the coast of Papua (near the mouth of the Fly river).
10
Peter thats nonsense. I dont have to present a new computer game to dispute the output of a failed fantasy computer game. What i ask for is measured and measurable data. The fictions from computers are just fantasy.
10
Is it any wonder there’s so much stress and anxiety in the world? An extinction event can’t be changed….
51
Pure garbage coming out of UN, as usual. However, the real motives become clear when the discussion I heard this morning went on to the topic of funding being supplied to ‘developing’ nations for this latest round of UN babble. Always the money…
160
“But after the indigenous cool burns programs stopped,…”
Programs? seiously?
140
My thoughts as well. There is so much garbage talked about Aboriginal land burning. Most of the burns pre European settlement were probably accidental or used as a tactic vs rival tribes. Very few were “ cool” , mostly all were “ hot” and so similar to Northern Australia burns during the “dry”.
80
Oh yes, they were all transcribed on to message sticks and sent by courier to all parties.
70
The forests of the Great Dividing Range, will never cease to exist. Never! The mountainous topography dictates it. There is nothing you can do with it except leave it, so forest will grow. This is simple fact. But the image of bulldozers knocking it all down is the image people have in their minds.
Koalas that live in these forests will always have a home. The chances of Koalas going extinct is NIL.
For a “professor” not to be able to make this obvious deduction, shows just how non analytical these people are. They are a complete joke.
110
Always remember that ecologists and their whacky science theories are the real danger. That whack job Allan Savoy (name correct not sure) ordered 40,000 elephants be destroyed because of his “science”. He was wrong but he went through with it to find out.
70
Ecosystems ae complicated and the loss of a single species can cause cascading coextinction events. None of this should be surprising, but it is useful that there is now some empirical validation. Corey Bradshaw’s papers are always well worth reading, although they are often critical of the utility of current species’ preservation practices. It is further confirmation that more ecosystem protection is necessary; 30 by 30 is a worthy goal. The UN is not going to steal your land. ‘Centralized global government’ is a fiction, the world is, if anything, becoming less centralised and more dysfunctional.
022
Despite the openly publicised claims that it’s needed by the very organisations now implementing it.
I wonder if some people should have a syndrome named after them. 🤣
160
Its bizarre that people who worship the global agenda, keep trying to DENY that it is happening !
The very people that they “believe” and follow, have said that is their aim.
And these people are so unaware that they still can’t allow themselves to see it.
150
“Corey Bradshaw’s papers are always well worth reading”
So are Grimm Bros fairy-tales, and many other fantasy novels.
(Bradshaw’s paper should be classed as fantasy.. it lacks any science to be classed as sci-fant)
Fantasies like this paper are basically just propaganda non-science… But no-one would expect you to recognise that fact.
Does the use of a “SUPER-computer” persuade you ?
Just means it churns out more garbage, quicker.. especially when fed with nonsense to start with.
Apart from the little rodent washed off an atoll by a small wave, name one single species that has gone extinct due to “human induced global climate change” in the last 50 years…
That is that base data you should be looking at.. you know ACTUAL DATA..
ps.. the answer is ZERO !
First, of course, you have to prove that human induced global climate change actually exists.
So far, utter failure on that account.
Pity you DON’T CARE enough about the environment to fight against wind turbine ultra facilities utterly destroying local diversity…
.. and toxic land destroying solar factories., and the resultant massive pollution they represent.
And let’s talk about ” ‘over-exploitation of resources’”… as mentioned.
Are they so naive and unaware that they don’t know that greenie agenda will requires a magnitude MORE “exploitation of resources” for turbines, solar, EV’s, batteries etc than are currently used?
Sorry, but the whole paper is built on rancid misinformation of the far-left. Science does not intrude. !
90
“and more dysfunctional.”
Well yes…
Leftist agendas are infecting/infesting everything…
Of course the world is becoming more dysfunctional.
30
“the loss of a single species can cause cascading coextinction events. ” or not.. The nearest species just moves into that niche and the predators move over also.
100
Most species loss has been caused by habitat loss (very localised species, which probably aren’t distinct species anyway), over-predation, disease, or displacement.
Ecosystems are sufficiently diverse and resilient that they can readily absorb even quite large shocks.
80
Are you sure? Many ecologists are now saying that ecosystems are less resilient than we thought. Can you provide recent scientific evidence of your claim?
08
It’s your claim, so you first.
Simulations don’t count.
60
btw, how much less resilient? Cascading extinctions indicates remarkable fragility.
50
“Can you provide recent scientific evidence of your claim?”
Now that’s deeply ironic, Simon asking for evidence when he has never been able to provide any himself.
Do you have any scientific evidence to back up your “ecologists say” meme. 😉
Or did you read it in some far-left
newspropaganda rag. !70
Simon you state:
“Many ecologists are now saying that ecosystems are less resilient than we thought.”
Ok Simon.
By your statement above, you are inferring that the ecologists were WRONG in their previous claims/theories and published papers.
Now those previously infallable ecologists, (that you wanted us to believe in), want to change their original finding to another.
So I humbly ask, would you class their previous claims as disinformation?
40
I take it that none of you read the paper then. Jo provided a link at the bottom.
04
Yes, have read.. I described it exactly.
Super-dooper-computer game… masquerading as crystal ball gazing
Meaningless to anything real.
Again, noted that all you do is whinge when asked for evidence.
20
As soon as you see the words..
“across different CMIP6 carbon-emissions scenarios (25)]”
It becomes a matter of if you can stop laughing enough to keep reading.
ITS BASED ON FANTASY !
Carbon emissions ENHANCE the biosphere and hence biodiversity. !
30
Uh-huh.
So, new studies using virtual species show ecosystem simulations are less robust than over a century of observational evidence?
40
Larger impacts in SSP2-4.5 than SSP5-8.5?
20
No limits on the amount of food for herbivores and insectivores, an an arbitrary limit placed on the amount of herbivores and insectivores?
Surely they can’t be serious.
20
parasites?
Pathogens?
Reproduction rates (gestation period, litter size, letters/year)?
20
Oh dear. I’ve let myself be trolled 🙁
10
“and the loss of a single species can cause cascading coextinction events”
Please explain how the only “normal weather” related species extinction, (a rodent on a tiny atoll), has caused any other species to go extinct !
We await your next fantasy with high expectations ! 😉
Maybe a species of flea that only existed on that rodent, on that island ??
90
“there is now some empirical validation. “
Sorry, but computer models, even run on a super-dooper-computer…. ARE NOT “empirical” anything !!
You need a remedial course in basic junior high science… again !
100
Five rants to a single post is a bit over the top.
I’ve met Corey a couple of times, he knows quite a bit more about ecology than you or I.
09
So, No answer to any questions asked.
Just silly little computer games, and a plaintive call to “authority”..
Very funny.
btw… your post was so full of nonsense statements, that the reply needed to be broken into parts.
Now.. where’s that evidence for “human induced global climate change”.
And where’s that list of extinct animals.
Without those, you have NOTHING…. even from a super-dooper-computer.
50
What a load of nonsense Simon. Have you ever been outside?
70
Ecoligical niches will be soon occupied by other species.
A computer model can’t tell you anything about, don’t start fingercrossing…
40
5 yeers ago I kouldnt spel scinetist, now I are one.
More graph-extrapolating prophets of doom with track records of accuracy rivalling government health experts.
I’m more concerned with 2023.🙄
90
Well then, the mass extinction can’t happen soon enough. I hope that it takes out the bandicoots at my place. These nosey sods deserve to be dudded because they’re making my lawns extinct.
30
We should never forget that over the last 3.7 + billion years fully 99 % of all species that have ever existed on our planet have become EXTINCT.
Just THINK about that statement and what it means?
And fully evolved Humans have only existed on our planet for just 200 K years.
When will we throw away our INFANTILE, delusional ideas and start to WAKE UP?
https://ourworldindata.org/extinctions#how-many-species-have-gone-extinct
50
Let me guess: climate modelling based on RCP8.5?
40
The business as usual model.
‘RCP 8.5 refers to the concentration of carbon that delivers global warming at an average of 8.5 watts per square meter across the planet. The RCP 8.5 pathway delivers a temperature increase of about 4.3˚C by 2100, relative to pre-industrial temperatures.’
13
Sounds about right. I think we all agree that 4.3C increase would be a problem. We also agree that this scenario is entirely unlikely to ever occur.
30
Please compare these graphs
1. Coal production 1900 to 2021
2. CO2 1960 to 2021
and try to make the argument that coal use means increased CO2. Or any human activity at all, like the two year shutdown.
What is behind the climate armageddon has no basis in CO2. Admitting humans have no impact on CO2 destroys the entire story, supercomputers or not.
60
Also the known science that CO2 partial pressure of highly soluble CO2 is totally dependent on sea surface temperature is confirmed in the very clear seasonal variations in CO2 which are very comparable in size to the growth. It is just so obvious that slow warming produces CO2 in almost a straight line. CO2 does not produce warming, the false claim of the IPCC.
And the massive greening of the planet and all ecosystems since 1988 as reported by NASA and other countries, a new green area the size of Brazil or Australia shows that trees do not change CO2 levels by sequestration. Rather more CO2 means more trees without affecting CO2 levels, so there is an infinite source of CO2. Now where could that be, I wonder?
70
And I know I repeat myself, but the reason the profiteers of Doom push ’emissions’ is that CO2 levels show no impact of human ’emissions’.
Ridiculous, opportunistic, fake Climate Science is based entirely on the idea that the world’s oceans cannot easily absorb a tiny bit of extra CO2.
But they cannot explain where all the extra C14 from the 1965 atom bomb blasts went, a time when C14 based CO2 levels doubled. The C14 tagged man made CO2 is completely gone and the long term C14 levels have returned. C14 is a radioactive carbon isotope with a half life of 5400 years! It can’t totally vanish from the ‘biosphere’, but it has. And no one in the IPCC knows where. And the man made CO2 has vanished with it. End of message, as Joe Biden recently said.
They can stick that in their supercomputer.
60
I wonder if they programmed in the fact that CO2 has caused the world to become greener, thus increasing biodiversity.
The places with the highest biodiversity are those which are warm and green !
40
OH F@CK OFF: Op-Ed Argues ‘Put Down the Burger’ to Protect Earth’s Biodiversity.
“Earth is in the midst of the worst mass extinction since an asteroid wiped out the dinosaurs 66 million years ago — and this time, the asteroid is us.” So says Michael Grunwald, an environmentalist, in an opinion piece for the New York Times.
But his larger point is that “biodiversity loss is not that complicated a mystery.” The amount of area on planet earth devoted ot agriculture is now more than twice the size of North America.
We’re destroying and degrading the habitats of other species to grow food for our own. This means the fate of the world’s bugs, bunnies and other creatures and critters — and what’s left of the forests, wetlands and other habitats they call home — depends more than anything else on what we put in our mouths and how it gets made….
Humanity needs to start shrinking our agricultural footprint and expanding our natural footprint, after thousands of years of doing the reverse. This will be an extraordinary challenge, because we’ll also need to produce more than 7.4 quadrillion additional calories every year to feed our growing population, in an era when climate-fueled droughts, heat waves, floods and blights could make it harder to grow food…. If we are serious about cleaning up the mess we’re making for less influential species, there are four things individuals as well as nations and corporations can do. The first is to eat less meat, which would be a lot easier if meat weren’t so beloved and delicious….
But the inconvenient truth is that when we eat cows, chickens and other livestock, we might as well be eating macaws, jaguars and other endangered species. That’s because livestock chew up far more land per calorie than crops. Producing beef is 100 times as land-intensive as cultivating potatoes and 55 times as land-intensive as peas or nuts. Livestock now use nearly 80 percent of agricultural land while producing less than 20 percent of calories. Cattle are the leading driver of deforestation in the Amazon, followed by soybeans, another commodity, which get fed to pigs and chickens…. If Americans continue to average three burgers a week while the developing world starts to follow our path, it’s hard to see how the Amazon survives.
But it’s at least possible that we could shrink agricultural footprints by shifting our diets toward meat made without livestock, like the plant-based substitutes offered by companies such as Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat or maybe someday cultured meat grown from animal cells.
Grunwald also recommends wasting less food. “About a third of the food grown on Earth is lost or tossed before it reaches our mouths, which means a third of the land (as well as the water, fertilizer and other resources) used to grow that food is also wasted.”
The third way to ease the global land squeeze “would be to stop using productive farmland for biofuels like ethanol and biodiesel — and to stop burning trees for power.” And finally, “farmers will have to supersize their yields enough to make a lot more food with a lot less land.
00
If the NYT told me today was the 20th of December, I wouldn’t believe them. Their credibility is shot, as far as I am concerned.
60
Koalas and sheep do have some rather stiff competition.
50
Experts can be very useful for explaining either current or past events /subjects. The better experts can put all the factors contributing to a subject in priority and explain the basics. To that point generally “experts” are very valuable in todays info hungry world. However, where experts generally all go wrong is that they make predictive statements. So, they try to predict events that might happen in the near future or distant future based on those current or historical data. Of course, they are generally never right and are usually spectacularly wrong. Paul Ehrlich in the 1970’s with his Population Bomb predictions was one of the first. All his predictions of over-population, food shortages were completely wrong. Yet, in his 90’s he still holds an Emeritus professorship from Stanford University. The same could also be said of all the climate change predictions – all have either been proved incorrect or will be very soon. In the complex biosphere that is our Earth in an even further complicated universe, it’s just not possible to predict the future.
During COVID all the so called quoted “experts” were, in the majority, just plain wrong. Well, at least the “experts” that were the source of most of the information for the media. Not only could they not accurately describe the current or most recent COVID events, their predictions for future trends were massively incorrect. The best advice was from the conspiracy theorists. Here we have the same ” experts” trying to predict future biodiversity trends and you know that their predictions are all just plain WRONG.
30
Lock up 30% of Aussie.. I don’t mind, there’s the red center they can have, so long as they also lock up that ACTing place between Queanbeyan-Brindabella-Shannons Flat. No-one allowed in or out.
50
Just another excuse to justify the idea of removing 90% of humanity.
Perhaps they have “mistaken” a human’s nationality as a “species” (not as idiotic as it sounds going by what they call “science ” now) and that is the expected (and actually desired) “mass extinction”. I would not mind such if it were confined to the species known as “politicus unethicus”(apologies as my Latin is well over 50 years old and I am too lazy to check even slightly)
OT>> for those who wonder why JFK was “removed” https://twitter.com/i/status/1603562651262496769
I am not on twitter and have never been, but this video is worth far more than the 2 minutes of your life it takes to watch.
40
“Elon to stay as Twitter CEO after counting mail-in votes.” Tweet of Babylon Bee in there…
Love it!
20
But what does extinct mean. A few years ago there was a protest in Melbourne about extinction. One of the animals mentioned was a possum that is extinct in Victoria. Observing the protest from the sidelines was a New Zealander whose comment was “How many do you want.” Apparently a NZ Governor visiting Australia saw the particular possum and took some home with him. They thrived and have become a nuisance.
50
[…] Australian science blogger Jo Nova had an interesting take on the latest mass extinction science paper. “So a supercomputer adds up 15,000 webs of low level […]
00
[…] Australian science blogger Jo Nova had an interesting take on the latest mass extinction science paper. “So a supercomputer adds up 15,000 webs of low level […]
10