First species extinct due to climate change possibly identified

[glenn1]

oh well... that's not as important as me getting to drive my muscle car around.

Exactly correct, even if it seems you'd prefer your elite masters to tell you how to live for your own good.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

There is NO logical reason to be "against" the notion that climate is changing DUE TO MAN, even if we were to only assume a small likelihood that this is the case. NO. REASON. AT ALL.

Except, that people at some point (due to political bias) formed an opinion, and now they *have to* defend their opinion/belief due to pride..and need to argue with others, or better even...wipe evidence that speaks for/against one view off the table, again...PRIDE.

It's, from a certain point of view, entirely insane.

As I see from that article, someone predicted that many more species (1 in 5) are going to be at risk due to raising sea levels/climate change...and this is the first confirmed one...so this is indeed relevant.

Good luck with that. Science is sooo overrated.

 

[dphantom]

Unfortunately votes of people who can only see the benefits now count the same as those with some forward vision, which is a fundamental failing of democracy vs any sort of merit based system.

ah yes, the "us smart people know better than everyone else" ploy...

 

[Jaskalas]

As I see from that article, someone predicted that many more species (1 in 5) are going to be at risk due to raising sea levels/climate change...and this is the first confirmed one...so this is indeed relevant.

You cannot deny that it was going extinct whether humans existed or not.
Confirmed my !@#. There are far better cases to make than that rodent.

 

[agent00f]

This little species has nothing to do with me.

Lead poisoning, littering, and such arguably has little to do with you, too. Climate change is a cumulative effect, affecting any number of things that only increases with time. If nothing else, there is a near irreversible economic cost which will grow significantly above that of doing anything about it now.

The science denialists are basically those children without impulse control, demanding gratification now while ignoring hazards down the road.

ah yes, the "us smart people know better than everyone else" ploy...

What you call a "ploy" is simple reality. For example, people who know math can use it as a tool for many exploits that those who don't can't. Most folks with above marginal intellect should realize this as they gain more expertise in something than their peers.

 

[Smoblikat]

Oh no, some random rat that has barely existed since the 1800's on some remote island near Australia is gone. What will we do now....

 

[glenn1]

Oh no, some random rat that has barely existed since the 1800's on some remote island near Australia is gone. What will we do now....

Obviously tax the shit out of the middle class, duh.

 

[Jaskalas]

Lead poisoning, littering, and such arguably has little to do with you, too.

Those are real problems, a rodent trapped on <10 acres isn't.

Climate change...

Has nothing to do with the rat.
Are you denying the indisputable science that it was going extinct without human existence?

 

[lopri]

Good riddance?

 

[mandrake99]

Dis rat ain't no sister of mine, I ain't gonna gives no cares 'bouts nothin's of that nonsenses, nuh-uh nosir, nots untils it gon' be ma cows gon' eggstinctshin, then ah's gonna gives a damns maybe, but untilts then, fuckits, gots me an' ma dirty burger an' ain't go climate change takin' ma burger buns from me!

Racist Post.

 

[lopri]

^ Relax.

 

[agent00f]

Those are real problems, a rodent trapped on <10 acres isn't.

First, they're not really problems for the person littering or otherwise benefiting from pollutants.

Second, this particular issue on the tip of the iceberg is meant to serve as an example of a class of significant problems. Sort of like a dead canary in a mineshaft isn't a problem in and of itself.

Has nothing to do with the rat.
Are you denying the indisputable science that it was going extinct without human existence?

As many people argue, climate changes without human intervention, which is true enough. If you can figure out why that's irrelevant to what's meant by climate change you'll be on your way to figure this one out.

 

[JockoJohnson]

There is NO logical reason to be "against" the notion that climate is changing DUE TO MAN, even if we were to only assume a small likelihood that this is the case. NO. REASON. AT ALL.

Except, that people at some point (due to political bias) formed an opinion, and now they *have to* defend their opinion/belief due to pride..and need to argue with others, or better even...wipe evidence that speaks for/against one view off the table, again...PRIDE.

It's, from a certain point of view, entirely insane.

As I see from that article, someone predicted that many more species (1 in 5) are going to be at risk due to raising sea levels/climate change...and this is the first confirmed one...so this is indeed relevant.

Sure, as long as taxes don't go up and certain items don't become more expensive all in the name of fixing man-made global climate change, then there is no other logical reason.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

That particular rat species had been destined to escape the island on storm debris and evolve, after human extinction, into a sentient race that would have traveled to the stars.

...and ultimately destroy Earth in order to facilitate an intergalactic highway construction project! Phew...that was close!

 

[Jmman]

Hmmm, not going to lose sleep over this one. 99.9% of all species that have ever lived are extinct. It is a completely natural process. I am not saying we need to accelerate the process, but there is no way we can ensure that every current living species will continue to exist.


http://paleobiology.si.edu/geotime/main/foundation_life4.html

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

...and ultimately destroy Earth in order to facilitate an intergalactic highway construction project! Phew...that was close!

Ok, much respect for that reference. :thumbsup:

 

[werepossum]

Climate change has been occurring on Earth for literally billions of years. We have had multiple ice ages which wiped out thousands or maybe even millions of species. Why is this animal now being considered the first? Why does NatGeo feel compelled to bullshit us?

The official progressive hymnal requires that we all agree the climate never changed before man. Specifically before the white man. And even more specifically, before the white man's evil Industrial Revolution. So if for every story about "Climate Change" you mentally substitute "Catastrophic Manmade Global Warming", these stories will make sense.

Granted, this rat was headed for eventual extinction regardless. But that's like saying "But officer, that eagle I shot was going to die anyway, eventually." It's different when we kill off something unique.

That particular rat species had been destined to escape the island on storm debris and evolve, after human extinction, into a sentient race that would have traveled to the stars.

So shouldn't we have some sort of reward from the universe for saving them from sentient space-faring rats?

LMAO!!!! Your response is a racist Ebonics rant.

How you can pick out racism from his typical steaming pile of stupid is impressive and beyond my abilities. I salute you, sir.

 

[agent00f]

The official progressive hymnal requires that we all agree the climate never changed before man. Specifically before the white man. And even more specifically, before the white man's evil Industrial Revolution. So if for every story about "Climate Change" you mentally substitute "Catastrophic Manmade Global Warming", these stories will make sense.

Granted, this rat was headed for eventual extinction regardless. But that's like saying "But officer, that eagle I shot was going to die anyway, eventually." It's different when we kill off something unique.


So shouldn't we have some sort of reward from the universe for saving them from sentient space-faring rats?

Understanding what's meant by "climate change" requires ability to compare large and small numbers. Climate changing over a number of years longer than humans have been civilized is a different problem than changing over a few human generations. Notice one number is much larger than the other, and the smaller number makes the issue rather relevant over human lifespans.

If that's still too hard, think of it like eating something that will kill you in hundreds of years is different than eating something that will kill you in 20.

 

[MajinCry]

Racist Post.

...Racist? It's white backwater talk about climate change not mattering unless it starts killing livestock. And by that time, it's faaaaaaar too late. 'Tis the right garble for the right insanity.

Didn't we pass the tipping point back in 2011? I remember there being some scientists that appealed to a bunch of countries (the UN?), and the guy started weeping because it's over, we passed the point of no return.

 

[pcgeek11]

...Racist? It's white backwater talk about climate change not mattering unless it starts killing livestock. And by that time, it's faaaaaaar too late. 'Tis the right garble for the right insanity.

Didn't we pass the tipping point back in 2011? I remember there being some scientists that appealed to a bunch of countries (the UN?), and the guy started weeping because it's over, we passed the point of no return.

Well you are from Scotland. It is understandable you don't have a clue.

 

[zinfamous]

This little species has nothing to do with me.

those hungry snakes will need to find a new source of food, and will likely migrate to more human-inhabited areas in search of that food.


Hopefully we have enough Samuel L Jacksons to distribute strategically around this earth when that happens.

 

[zinfamous]

The official progressive hymnal requires that we all agree the climate never changed before man. Specifically before the white man. And even more specifically, before the white man's evil Industrial Revolution. So if for every story about "Climate Change" you mentally substitute "Catastrophic Manmade Global Warming", these stories will make sense.

Do you actually believe this tripe, or are you just being humorous in a stupid way?

It's weird how you can be lucid and smart on certain issues, but when it comes to something like climate change science, you have to create hilarious assumptions about "your enemy" and argue from that swampland of false belief.

As much as you claim to not be a conservative, your true nature really does revert to its well-honed tactics whenever your unfounded belief structure is challenged by something as offensive as science.

 

[Jaskalas]

those hungry snakes will need to find a new source of food, and will likely migrate to more human-inhabited areas in search of that food.

You're suggesting there are snakes involved. Do snakes island hop in the south pacific ocean?

 

[zinfamous]

You're suggesting there are snakes involved. Do snakes island hop in the south pacific ocean?

yessir. Well, they can.

 

[sm625]

I consider it better than even odds that Polar Bears will be extinct by the end of this century...


___________

They're well on their way....