search results matching tag: species

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (596)     Sift Talk (19)     Blogs (27)     Comments (1000)   

Diatoms: Tiny Factories You Can See From Space

newtboy says...

Ignorance, and narcissistically acting as if people's dreams of excess are more important than another species's existence.

What if my dream was to be both, like the hero Samuel Jackson played in Kingsman?

BSR said:

I think you know ignorance is what destroys. Not dreams.

Earth is where dreams can come true. Whether you are a hero or a natural born killer.

Diatoms: Tiny Factories You Can See From Space

newtboy says...

Diatoms, and other phytoplankton, are incredibly sensitive to ocean PH and CO2 levels. This can be another feedback loop already in action.
As fewer diatoms photosynthesize, more CO2 goes unused, raising the concentration, lowering the numbers and health of phytoplankton, allowing more CO2 to go unused, raising the concentration, .....
Every molecule of CO2 added to ocean systems removes one molecule of carbonate, which is necessary for the uptake of iron among other processes. By 2100, surface carbonate is expected to decrease by up to 50%. That may well be below the levels diatoms can tolerate.

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/key-biological-mechanism-disrupted-ocean-acidification

If phytoplankton goes, so does the food web. They are the base. If the ocean food web collapses, eventually the bacteria that eat dead sea life will create huge clouds of hydrogen sulfide that cover the land, poisoning any still living organisms there. This has happened before, but on a much longer timescale, with near life ending results for earth.

Hydrogen Sulfide, Not Carbon Dioxide, May Have Caused Largest Mass Extinction. ... "During the end-Permian extinction 95 percent of all species (and >98% of all biomass) on Earth became extinct, compared to only 75 percent during the KT when the dinosaurs disappeared,"

A better title might be "diatoms, the tiny glass shards that support all life on earth, are struggling".

The 7 Biggest Failures of Trumponomics

newtboy says...

Interesting suggestion.

I believe that with 1/10 the population, near today's per capita resource usage would be sustainable....although there would be a necessary time period with net zero or better emissions required to return the atmosphere to "normal" before runaway greenhouse effects and feedbacks turn earth into Venus 2.0. After that, there is an amount of emission the planet can absorb, so resource usage need not be curtailed excessively, but it wouldn't hurt.

I'm all for the lottery system if everyone draws straws, no exceptions except those willing to just move to the reservation voluntarily.
Even a lottery system simply for procreation would do wonders, but remembering the outrage at China for just allowing one child per couple, I doubt that would fly either. Also, it does leave the possibility that the lucky procreators might all be imbecilic morons incapable of following/continuing the plan...we don't want to become a species that is dumber than our pets....or do we?

I think the priorities should be reversed too, what's best for life on earth first, humanity second.

moonsammy said:

It's an extreme solution certainly, but not without merit. I doubt there'd ever be a willing acceptance of such a plan though, so a slightly more realistic solution would need to be moderated some. How's this for dystopian-but-not-quite-genocidal:
Worldwide lottery, a small percentage (total of 500M - 1B maybe) wins the right to live in what will be the new model of the world: something like what we have now, but with drastically reduced usage of non-renewable resources (until they can be replaced completely) and a target of zero negative impact on the environment as a whole. Still some version of democratic (generally at least), freedom of whatnot and such, open travel to the degree that sustainable transportation options allow, all the (again, sustainable) mod cons. I suppose different countries / regions could still run things according to their preferences, as long as the net-zero goal remains.
The other lottery entrants, the non-winners, don't need to die, hooray! They will however live on something akin to reservations, as serfs, without the right to further reproduce. These poor bastards, in exchange for not being outright murdered to save civilization, are to be consolidated into agricultural communes to do whatever they can to regrow the world's flora and fauna until they all eventually die. Their goal is not net-zero, but as far into the positive as possible. It would all be overseen according to some grand scheme(s) to be as beneficial for the overall future of humanity and life on Earth in general as possible.

Probably also unworkable, but preferable to megamurder?

shinyblurry (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

God so loved the world that He tried to murder it, including all innocents; babies, unborn babies (proof God does believe in and practices abortion, btw), plants, animals, fungi, everything....according to your lore. Sure, the story goes he saved most (not all) species magically, but outright violently murdered 99.999999999999999999% of all individuals with a tantrum.

Then, to those few left, he demanded complete incessant obedient subservience and worship of himself and his son under threat of eternal torture for any found lacking.

That.
Is.
Not.
Love.

That's disrespectful distain and empty promises for those who meet his impossible, self contradictory requirements.

shinyblurry said:

There is one thing we can't afford to be wrong about:

John 3:16-18
16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 "For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. 18 "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

How This Cyclist Hit 184MPH and Set the World Record

BSR says...

I think we both know that doubling the previous record would be impossible under the conditions the pros compete in. Plus the pros make their record on indoor tracks if I'm not mistaken.

I made my trip on the east coast as I wanted stay closer to home if something unexpected happened.

This map shows my round trip route from Cape Canaveral to High Point NC and back. The blue was created with my GPS tracker which caused some lost data due to battery drain and poor signal. I flipped the image so the text was easier to read.

https://imgur.com/a/GhrmEkA

I met a lot of nice people. If you like to travel you might like this sight.

https://www.couchsurfing.com/

I was able to stay with people who invited me into their homes on 5 different occasions and never actually had to sleep on a couch.



EDIT: Someone else brought up the possible invasive species point so I'm on the fence with that. I don't want to be blamed for the next BIG earthquake that gives birth to the new Godzilla. Although, it's California. He could probably get a SAG card.

newtboy said:

that speed would have more than doubled the previous record and that would be amazing.

Nice trip. 2500 miles is a good chunk of the distance coast to coast (depending on the route). Where did you ride to/from?

I'm intrigued by the sand swap idea, but also concerned about the introduction of invasive species that may be living in that sand. Just a thought if you make the trip.

How This Cyclist Hit 184MPH and Set the World Record

newtboy says...

Perhaps you misunderstand me. I don't accuse her of taking anything from professionals, as I don't think they're competing. I only think, when making a claim of record bicycle speeds, if those speeds are not achieved without assistance it should be clearly noted. They didn't hide it, but the title slightly mislead me and left me disappointed it wasn't a human powered speed, because that speed would have more than doubled the previous record and that would be amazing.

This is a feat of skill and bravery. It simply is not a feat of purely human powered speed. Nothing wrong with that, as long as it's clear, imo.


Nice trip. 2500 miles is a good chunk of the distance coast to coast (depending on the route). Where did you ride to/from?
I've never done a long distance ride like that, I just rode to school and back daily...over 35 miles round trip...and around town. Up here in Humboldt, the roads are terrible so I don't ride much anymore, skinny racing tires don't do well in potholes. I'm getting too old and broken for serious mountain bike trail riding, which is sad considering the trails I have available.

I'm intrigued by the sand swap idea, but also concerned about the introduction of invasive species that may be living in that sand. Just a thought if you make the trip.

BSR said:

Again, SHE'S NOT A PRO! She doesn't take anything away from the pros but also gives them a chance to break her record. (If they got the guts)

Unrelated, this is me back in 2011 making a 2,500 mile bike trip which I did in 3 months. It was something I did to see if I actually wanted to bike across country. From Cape Canaveral beach to Vandenberg Air Force Base. I would carry a sample of sand from the east and then dump it on the beach in the west.

Due to circumstances beyond my control I still haven't been able to make that trip. But I loved every minute of the trip I did.

https://imgur.com/4LjMuiP

David Attenborough on how to save the planet

newtboy says...

"In the next few decades"?! More like "a few decades ago".
Perhaps if we had started population control in the 80's with the goal of cutting global population in half by 2000 AND did the rest of what he suggests we might have a chance...we did not.

By the time we understood there was a problem there were less than a few decades left to solve it...that was around 40 years ago, and we've done everything possible to accelerate the damage we do on every front since then.

Ocean acidification is happening today, it's getting worse, it's slow to react to change so will continue to get worse even if humans disappeared tomorrow, it has built in feedback loops that have been triggered like melting methanehydrates and sequestered CO2 that are being released faster every single day, and we are increasing the man made causes every year. There is a point where it reaches critical acidification, the point where diatoms can't form their skeletons, and then the entire ocean system dies. That's far worse than the apocalypse it sounds like, not just because 50-60% of our oxygen comes from the ocean, but also because the rotting biomass creates huge amounts of not just more methane, compounding the greenhouse problem and further acidifying the oceans, but also immense amounts of hydrogen sulfide, which spread as huge poisonous clouds around the globe.
We are on our way to a man made Permian extinction, when >95% of all species went extinct and near 99% of all biomass was lost. We will not survive it as a species....and we don't deserve to.

Why Sea Cucumbers Are So Expensive | So Expensive (S2 E2)

This Is Your Brain On Stale Air

lucky760 says...

Can't be.

He must be a lying, left-wing nutjob.

Our president says these kinds of ideas are all lies, and has even done society and humanity a favor by stripping away environmental protections.

Who knows more about science and cares more about the continuity of our species than Donald Trump?

Kurzgesagt - Is Organic Food Really Better or is It a Scam?

transmorpher says...

It's a shame that they didn't mention the negative effects of pesticides on the soil and environment.

For example there are pesticides that damage the soil and earthworms so badly that the soil becomes infertile.

I really want to see a serious commitment from developed nations on vertical farming though. You can eliminate so many issues, from water use, land use, and most of the transport problems - the office building next door could be a farm....and of course you don't need pesticides if you are growing things in a controlled environment.

We could give so much land back to mother nature. And perhaps we would stop losing 200 species of plants/animals each day.

At least they acknowledged that eating plants of any kind is more environmental than eating animal products. That's something we can all strive for ourselves. But it will require some government intervention or some really good start ups to start vertical farming. Where are my Tesla potato farms? :-)

Are The Bees Ok Now?

transmorpher says...

lol Hank Green makes yet another video to tell us he doesn't know about *insert topic* I'm starting to think it's his way of telling himself he doesn't have to do anything to help.

We know exactly why CCD happens https://youtu.be/lKKVznGTni0?t=35

TL:DW

Commericalized bee operations (to sell honey/bees wax etc) ends up affecting pollinating species of bees in the wild. As per usual, industrialized animal farming screws up the environment.

Even local bee farming displaces and infects the wild populations, so all honey is bad.


Leave the honey to Winnie the Pooh, and swap your honey out for maple syrup or agave nectar or rice syrup etc, and this whole thing stops.

Or make your own date paste. Bit of water, bit of dates, blend the crap out of it. It's delicious on anything. Particularly with peanut butter.

hula hoop of 5.2 meters diameter

Woman Freaks Out Over Encounter With Whales, Calls 911

SFOGuy says...

It's a violation of Federal law, to my memory, to harass a protected species. Not sure which type of whale this is, but if this was in the setting of a protected marine reserve, they should have not gotten that close under power (if they swim under you, that's ok; if you chase them...not kosher)...

Living on Earth 66 Million Years Ago must've really sucked



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon