If all the environmentalists were as reasonable, I wouldn't be as concerned.
If you look back at the original link, and go down the left margin, those are flat statements, numbers intended to be carried away by the reader.
I see that 30,000 number repeated a thousand times, in the context of 30,000 species ARE becoming extinct every year. Google it, and look for yourself. How many of those references add the caveats, or the means by which it was arrived at? It takes damn little for a number like that to be carved in stone, which is why it becomes a problem.
"30,000 species a year" is not on the same level of reality as "the speed of light is about 186,000 miles per second," and in many places, it's being treated like it is.
Here's another reference on the subject, but limited only to the U.S.
Space/Science » in reply to Gee, Tom, I'm sorry Biology isn't more like Engineering
Your response was quite reasonable
The whole thread (22 posts)
- The Sixth Extinction
- Gaia
- re: The Sixth Extinction
- re: Gaia
