Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Please, explain the difference. When the horse was discovered, it wasn't technically a "new" species. It was newly discovered and therefore considered "new". Same with pretty much every other species that we now consider commonplace, considering that most of them predate mankind on the evolutionary tree. All of those "new" species that were discovered by Darwin in the Galapagos weren't actually "new", as they had existed prior to him arriving there. But the world sure went crazy over all of those new species, didn't they?
My point is that when life goes extinct it is gone forever, so every day there is less diversity on the planet...When we discover a previously unknown species that has been on earth for perhaps millions of years, it hasn't just popped into existence.... How can you not see the difference? Extinctions are a net loss of species...We are losing as many as 10,000 species every year.
Your whole diversity game has never and will never work. I guess it's multiculturalism now. Another re branded liberal tactic. We find as many new species at the same time your buddies die off. That is how the old earth has been for a long time. You folks don't think there is enough room for humans yet declare all these species need room. Now why is that? You care more about bugs than humans? It appears so.
Things change. Sometimes over geologic time and sometimes in a split instant. The former allows a sane civilization to figure out how to survive. The latter just resets the system. The Earth does not care either way.
I really did not want to know this....Civilization was pretty great while it lasted, wasn't it? Too bad it's not going to for much longer. According to a new study sponsored by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, we only have a few decades left before everything we know and hold dear collapses. NASA Study Concludes When Civilization Will End, And It's Not Looking Good for Us - PolicyMic
I hate to believe that.....given the desire to have my offspring live long lives.....but I have recently come to a similar conclusion, which has influenced me NOT to want to have more kids. I Hope both the study and my own feelings are wrong. People have been predicting that the end is nigh for a long time....and they were wrong. Humanity is resilient but one thing to me is clear and that is that the "system" cannot survive very long the way it is. Its an untenable model for the continued longevity of our species.
The "developing world" cannot develop and become robust economies and glutenous consumers (the prerequisite of a robust economy) because resources are either finite or cannot be naturally replenished fast enough to keep pace with human consumption of those resources. Not only that, the moral decay of society is rampant as "individualism" seems to supersede all other considerations. People are hell bent on doing whats best for them and hence all "collective" concepts, like family, are deteriorating. Everything is disposable and replaceable and the concept of loyality and commitment has been replaced by a consumerism mentality in which we see everything as commodities....including relationships, that should be traded in or replaced every so many years.
this is a no brainer. It took from the time life emerged on the planet for people in reality that is many millions of years ago, for the religious nuts who will believe anything if the guy telling them has a color in white, 6k years ago, to 1860 for humans to come to 1 billion in population. It took from 1860 to present to go 7x that to 7 billion. We are live on oil and fossil fuels for everything from planting your food, to fertilizing it to trucking it to your local store. Making your homes, cars and our whole way of life. If not for fossil energy we would not be any where near where we are at today, in technology or population. We are not using our technology in fracking, not finding new renewable energy but squeezing the toothpaste tube more to get that last bit of recoverable energy out at a cost to the environment. All the while more people are being born, population grows and emerging markets want to live like we expect to live in the USA. Its not possible to keep supporting a growing population, there is a limit and when it hits it will not be fun for those alive to see it. When it is I have no idea, its like having a tank of water and more and more people pumping out of it, will it go dry, it has to, when that depends on how many people pump how much out of it. Unless ma nature puts a new Spanish influenza on us that wipes out a few billion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
