Worth bringing up that the only known mass extinction of insects so far was in the Permian Triassic extinction. For those not acquainted, that was the worst mass extinction in the planet's...
Worth bringing up that the only known mass extinction of insects so far was in the Permian Triassic extinction. For those not acquainted, that was the worst mass extinction in the planet's history, with a loss of over 80% of extant species, including some 96% of marine species. Its causes are disputed, but one candidate happens to be a runway greenhouse effect prompted by the release of massive quantities of CO2 by the eruption of the Siberian traps.
I do wonder if this is similar to CFC's and the ozone layer where a sudden cessation of pesticides, or at least a drastic reduction, would result in a quick recovery of the insect population.
I do wonder if this is similar to CFC's and the ozone layer where a sudden cessation of pesticides, or at least a drastic reduction, would result in a quick recovery of the insect population.
I'd be curious to know all of the effects once the mass extinction has happened, how much of the animal and plant kingdom would survive? A "new normal" without insects or any biodiversity.
I'd be curious to know all of the effects once the mass extinction has happened, how much of the animal and plant kingdom would survive? A "new normal" without insects or any biodiversity.
I would also say that 1. many people are willing to act but don't know how and 2. many people are willing to act but don't want to give up their quality of life. I'd personally change my...
I feel like a lot of people recognize the dangers of climate change on an intellectual level, but it rarely seems to translate into action.
I would also say that 1. many people are willing to act but don't know how and 2. many people are willing to act but don't want to give up their quality of life.
I'd personally change my lifestyle, but it's difficult because nobody around me would change and my actions wouldn't even dent the problem. It feels useless to act. I think most people just expect the government/companies to take action, but that's an assumption.
In terms of catastrophical climate change and biosphere collapse we've been talking about for decades is now "finally" starting to show it's effects on a more noticeable level. I think it's far too late already, but hopefully this will pressure all parties involved to act fast and effectively. I don't have high hopes for that, though.
I used to feel like this, and then I read Surviving the Economic Collapse. Written by a guy who went through a real full-on collapse in Argentina in 2001. He had a few pretty choice insights about...
I used to feel like this, and then I read Surviving the Economic Collapse. Written by a guy who went through a real full-on collapse in Argentina in 2001. He had a few pretty choice insights about rural living when everything's gone to shit.
Sorry about the slow reply. The author of the book lived in a major metropolitan area and during the crisis it was bad enough where he was (and the book goes into detail about this), but the rural...
Sorry about the slow reply. The author of the book lived in a major metropolitan area and during the crisis it was bad enough where he was (and the book goes into detail about this), but the rural areas were, the way he tells it, much worse. Here is an excerpt (FYI: SHTF = "Shit Hits The Fan"):
CITY OR COUNTRY: WHERE TO LIVE?
If you've been into survivalism for some time you've probably heard it too. "Don't you know? Cities will burn, burn to the ground I tell you! They'll become death traps, people will loot and burn everything, and the cops won't be able to do a thing!"
Unlike most of these fear mongers, I've been through enough riots and roadblocks and I've seen enough looting up to the point that it became a boring pain in the ass. "Honey, I'l be late for dinner. Those assholes are road-blocking the bridge again. All this is in a country where police and emegency services are not nearly as effective as they are in first-world countries.
Being in a supermarket that was about to get looted only meant you wasted your time and had to go somewhere else, or come back in a couple days when they fixed things up and cleaned after the looters left. You think I'm exaggerating or kidding? Look it up. A government doesn't declare martial law and curfews just because there's nothing to watch on HBO, they do it because they've lost control of things and need the green light to start busting caps and shooting looters.
During 2001 we had days of pure anarchy, and that lawlessness lasted for weeks in most places. Some places in the capital city were secured faster, but there are others where even today cops just try to keep a minimum illusion of security. This mostly happens in the suburbs, and not that much in the capital downtown district.
I can tell you this: cities and towns exist for a reason. And no, cities around the world won't go up in flames and everyone will not move to the countryside living as settlers. It won't happen, ok? It's just BS. Of course there are advantages to living in the country. Who wouldn't like to live surrounded by nature? But you know what? When the SHTF things change a lot, and if there's something you can learn from similar events around the world it's that people out of the cities in the countryside get hit hard. Even during "good" times, many survivalists have accepted that their "off grid retreat dreams left them bankrupt, and well known survivalist author Mel Tappan accepted that he could live on his ranch the way he did thanks only to his wife's family fortune.
Security? There's little or no police presence at all, what do you expect? Street robberies are of course something that doesn't happen that much because of the low population, but the kind of home invasions people living in the country have suffered here in Argentina are the stuff of nightmares. The same tranquility that people like so much works in the bad guys' favor. You can scream all you want, but no one will hear you. They can spend days in your house raping and torturing, without worry if a neighbor saw them go in or detected some other suspicious movement.
"You're kidding! Life is much better in the country," a guy from work told me. "I come from a little farming town, everything is so quiet. Well...except for what happened to Mr. Gonzales. Somehow bad guys learned that he had sold a few acres, and they tortured him to death to make sure that he hadn't any more money buried somewhere."
People are like that. Everything is fine and dandy... except for that brutal little home invasion murder.
It goes on like that. Ultimately, his conclusion is that city living is preferable to rural living in a real collapse, and small city living is preferable to big city living.
Well, I actually hope you're right because I have a place in the country. I didn't buy it because I'm a prepper, I bought it to get out of the city and have a nice place to relax and do outdoorsy...
Well, I actually hope you're right because I have a place in the country. I didn't buy it because I'm a prepper, I bought it to get out of the city and have a nice place to relax and do outdoorsy stuff - but hey, can't hurt to have a place out of the city, right? Then I read this book and it made me think twice about that second part. I think you're probably right, at least in part. I've got guns, everybody up here has guns and yeah, it's America, so... guns. One thing they are right about though, there's no law, relatively speaking - and in a crisis, there would likely be less. Where I am, there are few people around in the Winter, more in the Summer, but still mostly on weekends. There's not many people around to band together with, although the population would probably increase during a crisis. Your chances of an altercation would increase dramatically though, if nothing else.
Worth bringing up that the only known mass extinction of insects so far was in the Permian Triassic extinction. For those not acquainted, that was the worst mass extinction in the planet's history, with a loss of over 80% of extant species, including some 96% of marine species. Its causes are disputed, but one candidate happens to be a runway greenhouse effect prompted by the release of massive quantities of CO2 by the eruption of the Siberian traps.
I do wonder if this is similar to CFC's and the ozone layer where a sudden cessation of pesticides, or at least a drastic reduction, would result in a quick recovery of the insect population.
I'd be curious to know all of the effects once the mass extinction has happened, how much of the animal and plant kingdom would survive? A "new normal" without insects or any biodiversity.
Paging eo wilson.
I would also say that 1. many people are willing to act but don't know how and 2. many people are willing to act but don't want to give up their quality of life.
I'd personally change my lifestyle, but it's difficult because nobody around me would change and my actions wouldn't even dent the problem. It feels useless to act. I think most people just expect the government/companies to take action, but that's an assumption.
In terms of catastrophical climate change and biosphere collapse we've been talking about for decades is now "finally" starting to show it's effects on a more noticeable level. I think it's far too late already, but hopefully this will pressure all parties involved to act fast and effectively. I don't have high hopes for that, though.
I used to feel like this, and then I read Surviving the Economic Collapse. Written by a guy who went through a real full-on collapse in Argentina in 2001. He had a few pretty choice insights about rural living when everything's gone to shit.
Sorry about the slow reply. The author of the book lived in a major metropolitan area and during the crisis it was bad enough where he was (and the book goes into detail about this), but the rural areas were, the way he tells it, much worse. Here is an excerpt (FYI: SHTF = "Shit Hits The Fan"):
It goes on like that. Ultimately, his conclusion is that city living is preferable to rural living in a real collapse, and small city living is preferable to big city living.
Well, I actually hope you're right because I have a place in the country. I didn't buy it because I'm a prepper, I bought it to get out of the city and have a nice place to relax and do outdoorsy stuff - but hey, can't hurt to have a place out of the city, right? Then I read this book and it made me think twice about that second part. I think you're probably right, at least in part. I've got guns, everybody up here has guns and yeah, it's America, so... guns. One thing they are right about though, there's no law, relatively speaking - and in a crisis, there would likely be less. Where I am, there are few people around in the Winter, more in the Summer, but still mostly on weekends. There's not many people around to band together with, although the population would probably increase during a crisis. Your chances of an altercation would increase dramatically though, if nothing else.
Also pesticides.