Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Mps Criticise Bbc Over Climate Change Reporting


snowflux

Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441
  • Replies 161
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1
HOLA442

If it's insects you have mind their record of evolutionary change over the last couple of million years of climate variation is not exactly enthusiastic.

Without wanting to open up another front on this thread, I'd suggest that what might usually happen is that organisms that are already with us are hanging around waiting for their particular ecological niche to expand or move.

it is odd that there are no new species...i had in mind more simple life forms...bacteria and suchlike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2
HOLA443

I used to think that but technology has a habit of innovating new ways at getting to previously consider as uneconomical to exploit.

Shale gas and coal seam gasification being two notable examples.

that may be so, but it is running out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3
HOLA444

it is odd that there are no new species...

If you were to be so inclined you could search for something like 'coleoptera quaternary stasis' and fill your boots.

eg: THE QUATERNARY RECORD FOR EXTINCTION AND SPECIATION IN THE COLEOPTERA

One of the great paradoxes of the Quaternary fossil record is that the Coleoptera, the most diverse of all living organisms, are represented by exceptionally low levels of extinction and speciation. In North America, only two species of dung beetles, Copris pristinus Pierce and Onthophagous everestae Pierce from the Rancho La Brea deposits, are reported to have become extinct. The extinction of megafauna and reduction in dung were considered to be contributing factors. The only record for speciation is that the weevil species, Lepidophorus lineaticollis Kirby, might have evolved during the early Pleistocene.

Beetles are ectotherms and are dependent on environmental temperatures for lifespan duration, diapause, dispersal, mortality, and genetic adaptation. Theoretically, the fragmentation and isolation of populations resulting during Quaternary climatic changes should have resulted in elevated rates of extinction and speciation. Why then are there so few examples of extinction and speciation compared to other invertebrates and vertebrates. Is it possible that new and extinct species go undetected? The fossil record represents only a small percentage of the fauna and preservation favors certain ecological types, especially those of mesic habitats. Even so, a large number of species have been reported as fossils and under representation does not explain why some percentage of those should not be extinct or new species.

Coope addressed part of the paradox by suggesting that the lack of speciation might be linked to the instability of environments. He suggested that the ‘migrations’ of species caused by climate change did not allow time for genetic differentiation to develop. This would suggest that levels of genetic differentiation in modern populations might be relatively low. This is not the observation, however, and for the ground beetle, Amara alpina, genetically differentiated populations maintained morphological stasis through at least one glacial-interglacial cycle. Fossil evidence indicates species survived climatic changes by ‘migration’, sometimes involving continental-scale movements. The reasons for the lack of speciation and extinction remain unknown but some combination of population dynamics and ease of dispersal are more likely to be involved than a mechanism involving genetic flux.

They're so stable their fossils are used as indicators of past climates, based on living specimens' current habitats.

It is interesting impo and I'm in the habit of raising the subject of migration because, like you say, climate can and has changed a heck of a lot faster than animals can (theoretically) adapt to it. Deviant thoughts on the subject of speciation are way off topic for this particular thread though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4
HOLA445

maybe i wasnt clear...I was trying to say that changes in the environment occur much faster than evolution can change for us mammals...but change we will.

However, other forms of life can evolve very quickly indeed, f CO2 is rising, something will come along to take advantage.

We may change, but if it's not fast enough to adapt to the changing conditions (and that includes adapting to the ecological consequences of changes among other species upon which we depend (and that's all kingdoms), such as uncoupling of food webs and cycles, we may go extinct. Of course, to anything other than 'us' that won't matter too much and could be considered in a few millenias time as all part of 'Gaia' - if you subscribe to that.

The Earth will survive climate change and there will most likely still be lifeforms. The life may just be different. Do we want to hasten that time, that is the question ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5
HOLA446

We may change, but if it's not fast enough to adapt to the changing conditions (and that includes adapting to the ecological consequences of changes among other species upon which we depend (and that's all kingdoms), such as uncoupling of food webs and cycles, we may go extinct. Of course, to anything other than 'us' that won't matter too much and could be considered in a few millenias time as all part of 'Gaia' - if you subscribe to that.

The Earth will survive climate change and there will most likely still be lifeforms. The life may just be different. Do we want to hasten that time, that is the question ?

The future MrPin maybe a rodent or a reptile! I've been called both! :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6
HOLA447

Seems to go further - this is effectively gagging. Political pressure to keep a one sided slant to "climate change".

Some people seem to confuse science with propanganda and what we are being fed is more propaganda than science.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/01/telegraph-and-mail-concede-on-climate-change

Telegraph and Mail concede on climate change

Newspapers critical of climate change science tell MPs global warming is happening and humans play a role in it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7
HOLA448

Seems to go further - this is effectively gagging. Political pressure to keep a one sided slant to "climate change".

Some people seem to confuse science with propanganda and what we are being fed is more propaganda than science.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/01/telegraph-and-mail-concede-on-climate-change

Telegraph and Mail concede on climate change

Newspapers critical of climate change science tell MPs global warming is happening and humans play a role in it

You may be surprised how high the bar is set by academics for publishing new evidence on climate change. Papers providing follow up studies confirming new results, less so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8
HOLA449

If you were to be so inclined you could search for something like 'coleoptera quaternary stasis' and fill your boots.

eg: THE QUATERNARY RECORD FOR EXTINCTION AND SPECIATION IN THE COLEOPTERA

They're so stable their fossils are used as indicators of past climates, based on living specimens' current habitats.

It is interesting impo and I'm in the habit of raising the subject of migration because, like you say, climate can and has changed a heck of a lot faster than animals can (theoretically) adapt to it. Deviant thoughts on the subject of speciation are way off topic for this particular thread though.

of course, if we all come from the original unique spark of life, then actually, the extinction of humans is just a survival technique for the spark itself. indeed, as the World has changed over the Eons, the spark has survived...we are just one iteration,and today there are millions of options for just about any change that can occur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9
HOLA4410
10
HOLA4411

Seems to go further - this is effectively gagging. Political pressure to keep a one sided slant to "climate change".

Some people seem to confuse science with propanganda and what we are being fed is more propaganda than science.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/01/telegraph-and-mail-concede-on-climate-change

Telegraph and Mail concede on climate change

Newspapers critical of climate change science tell MPs global warming is happening and humans play a role in it

From yesterday's telegraph:

This latest report has aroused markedly less excitement than did its hysterical predecessor in 2007. They have cried wolf once too often. The only people still being wholly taken in, it seems – apart from the usual suspects in the media – are all those mindless politicians still babbling on about how in Paris next year they are finally going to get that great global agreement which, if only we put up enough wind farms and taxes, will somehow enable us to stop the climate changing.

They can dream on. But alas, the rest of us must still pay the price for their dreams.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10746497/How-did-the-IPCCs-alarmism-take-everyone-in-for-so-long.html

Yup sounds really gagged doesn't it? Or perhaps privately they know they are wrong but pander to their readers prejudices?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...
11
HOLA4412

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information