You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: We are living through the greatest extinction event since non-avian dinosaurs died 65 Million years ago
I don't want to detract from your post at all, because I think it's an excellent presentation of our predicament. You use only the most incontrovertible evidence to back up your argument. But I think in your attempts at restraint, you understate the magnitude of the crisis.
According to the Center for Biological Diversity:
Scientists estimate we’re now losing species at 1,000 to 10,000 times the background rate, with literally dozens going extinct every day.
I wish it were only 100 times, as you suggest! We are exceeding that by orders of magnitude.
During my research, I did read through Center for Biological Diversity. However, their numbers were a bit higher than the consensus. I totally understand why they are doing it though, we are much more bound to take notice the larger and more shocking the numbers are. Given how dire the situation is, they are doing the right thing.
Given the nature of a blog post, it's necessary to boil it down to one data set which I find is most consistent, and for this, it was the first paper linked in the Sources. This paper has also been peer-reviewed extensively.
Remember, scientists are always conservative on these matters. And I have made it clear more than once that these are very conservative estimates. On the other hand, given this a blog post, perhaps I should have not been as conservative as a scientific paper. Point taken.
Yeah, advocacy groups are going to use research that supports their position and not necessarily the most widely accepted findings. But also, in comparing the two studies, it seems like the 100 times figure is specifically for vertibrates. Other species are likely experiencing higher rates of extinction. There is something to be said for digging a little deeper than the headlines.
Like I said, I thought your post was great and it wasn't my intention to argue the point. I just wanted to note that you weren't being alarmist, although the subject matter is alarming. But the research you highlighted was among the most conservative.
I was trying hard not to be an alarmist, and I see why that may have been a misguided approach.
Like I said in another reply here, I plan to write a follow up once there's more peer-reviewed data about the extinction of plants. It's a bit of an unknown at this point but the first indications are they are affected much worse than vertebrates. I'll keep whatever you have said in mind and be much more of a downer next time. :)