|
|
Post by greenchristian on Mar 15, 2022 18:25:39 GMT
The mass extinction event that means that around 28% of all species on the planet are currently assessed to be at risk of extinction. Assessed by whom and on what basis? The IUCN. Their process is explained here. |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Mar 15, 2022 18:56:01 GMT
There is a mass extinction event taking place,but it has little to do with climate change. It relates to the gross overpopulation of humans and the way they have changed the planet to accommodate their ever increasing numbers.
Snowball earth was prior to the development of complex life and did not cause a mass extinction event because there was nothing but bacteria and archaea in existence, and they were all in the sea.
The main cause of mass extinction events has been huge mantle plumes causing enormous volcanic outpourings which poison earth and sea alike. Although the asteroid strike is a popular explanation, it would not have such an effect on its own without the volcanic eruption of the Deccan traps.
Global heating will have considerable negative effects, much enhanced because overpopulation means people (and other life) can’t simply move, but is no threat overall to life, human or otherwise. That doesn’t mean hundreds of millions of people won’t have a very bad time if the worst happens.
|
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Mar 15, 2022 21:18:20 GMT
There is a mass extinction event taking place,but it has little to do with climate change. It relates to the gross overpopulation of humans and the way they have changed the planet to accommodate their ever increasing numbers. Snowball earth was prior to the development of complex life and did not cause a mass extinction event because there was nothing but bacteria and archaea in existence, and they were all in the sea. The main cause of mass extinction events has been huge mantle plumes causing enormous volcanic outpourings which poison earth and sea alike. Although the asteroid strike is a popular explanation, it would not have such an effect on its own without the volcanic eruption of the Deccan traps. Global heating will have considerable negative effects, much enhanced because overpopulation means people (and other life) can’t simply move, but is no threat overall to life, human or otherwise. That doesn’t mean hundreds of millions of people won’t have a very bad time if the worst happens. Yep, that seems about right. |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Mar 15, 2022 21:50:13 GMT
There is a mass extinction event taking place,but it has little to do with climate change. It relates to the gross overpopulation of humans and the way they have changed the planet to accommodate their ever increasing numbers. Global heating will have considerable negative effects, much enhanced because overpopulation means people (and other life) can’t simply move, but is no threat overall to life, human or otherwise. That doesn’t mean hundreds of millions of people won’t have a very bad time if the worst happens. Climate change is one of the things that is contributing. It is, for example, completely destroying the ecosystem of the Great Barrier Reef. |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Mar 16, 2022 4:45:46 GMT
There is a mass extinction event taking place,but it has little to do with climate change. It relates to the gross overpopulation of humans and the way they have changed the planet to accommodate their ever increasing numbers. Global heating will have considerable negative effects, much enhanced because overpopulation means people (and other life) can’t simply move, but is no threat overall to life, human or otherwise. That doesn’t mean hundreds of millions of people won’t have a very bad time if the worst happens. Climate change is one of the things that is contributing. It is, for example, completely destroying the ecosystem of the Great Barrier Reef. That is correct. But corals are in no danger of extinction as they will start to grow in areas further from the equator where the sea has previously been too cold. |
|
|
|
Post by batman on Mar 16, 2022 9:21:40 GMT
why do we have an off-topic section when we manage that so well elsewhere?
|
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Mar 16, 2022 9:45:05 GMT
why do we have an off-topic section when we manage that so well elsewhere? To discuss elections in. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Mar 16, 2022 14:20:50 GMT
why do we have an off-topic section when we manage that so well elsewhere? There is off topic. And then there is off off topic. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Mar 16, 2022 23:35:01 GMT
Climate change is one of the things that is contributing. It is, for example, completely destroying the ecosystem of the Great Barrier Reef. That is correct. But corals are in no danger of extinction as they will start to grow in areas further from the equator where the sea has previously been too cold. The danger to corals and many shellfish would be mainly ocean acidification, also caused by CO2. Some species may also run out of places to migrate to if they do not have pelagic larval forms.. There is a mass extinction going on that is caused by us. Global warming is one of the things we are doing but pollution and exploitation are probably bigger factors, as said above. We are not good stewards |
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,405 
|
Post by johng on Mar 23, 2022 21:29:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by timmullen1 on Mar 26, 2022 20:04:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Apr 5, 2022 9:08:51 GMT
They're using an entirely new methodology that eliminates the usual variable turnout dynamic in favour of fixed assumptions about voter behaviour projected from the last election. The next stage in the shift of polling away from being an actual survey and towards a projection model that incorporates survey data. I'm dubious, but we shall see. I deplore this increasing move by polling companies away from actually polling public opinion in favour of trying to predict the result of a mythical election by the use of dubious “adjustments”. It is no more scientific or plausible than the old method of interpreting the cracks in sheep shoulder bones. Public opinion should be reported straight, and then we can all have a discussion about what it means. This also requires much more attention to be given to “don’t know” responses, and changes in them. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 34,926
|
Post by The Bishop on Apr 5, 2022 10:42:51 GMT
Amen, a fellow believer  And its not like trying to make polls more like quasi-predictions hasn't come to grief in the past (one exhibit, of course, being the 2017 GE) |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 14,972
|
Post by Sibboleth on Apr 5, 2022 13:08:23 GMT
We have - it seems - just seen an election (Hungary) in which attempting to do this has blown up quite horribly.
|
|
|
|
Opinium
Apr 5, 2022 13:16:27 GMT
via mobile
Post by Merseymike on Apr 5, 2022 13:16:27 GMT
The polls were so remarkably wrong that it does raise all sorts of questions.
|
|
|
|
Post by batman on Apr 5, 2022 18:12:32 GMT
It's hard to believe other than that in Hungary the pollsters just wanted to believe that Orban would lose & "adjusted" the figures accordingly. I'm quite sure that wishful thinking occurs within some British polling too, although polling in this country has become more reliable than it was a generation ago (e.g. the 1992 election)
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 34,926
|
Post by The Bishop on Apr 6, 2022 11:45:49 GMT
We have - it seems - just seen an election (Hungary) in which attempting to do this has blown up quite horribly. What, they actually did "pseudo-predictions" rather than actual polling? Jesus. |
|
|
|
Post by timmullen1 on Apr 9, 2022 19:22:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by bridgyoldboy on Apr 9, 2022 21:18:09 GMT
what is the lead on old methodology? |
|
|
|
Post by bridgyoldboy on Apr 9, 2022 21:24:38 GMT
what is the lead on old methodology? |
|
