What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
124 Comments
- basye, on 10/06/2008, -2/+34How could you tell a face like that to go away??
- acmaurer, on 10/06/2008, -4/+33This is really tragic - I wish we could use some of the money we've used to bailout Wall Street and help these little (and big) guys
- GDigger25, on 10/06/2008, -7/+22hmm... off shore drilling will prob not help here...
- PacificChef, on 10/06/2008, -6/+20"But we could sue the federal government to get these species off the endangered list. Then the list would get shorter!" -- Sarah Palin
- inactive, on 10/06/2008, -2/+14Well i know this trick with a club,I could show ya.
- ratexla, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1125% of mammals is indeed a lot, but we don't want to lose ANY species. It would not only be a damn shame in itself, but we cannot accurately predict the consequences of changes (such as extinctions) in the ecosystem - important consequences could come about, consequences that suck even for people who think they don't care. Oh, and many products that we need originally come from other species, yet we have only explored a small fraction this area. Spread the word. :)
- lucy22, on 10/06/2008, -3/+13This is terrible news. 25% is alot of mammals.
- shrewd1983, on 10/06/2008, -1/+8Does anyone have a link to the actual report?
- Flummoxer, on 10/06/2008, -1/+8New mammals don't just evolve out of the blue like pokemon...
- gn0stik, on 10/06/2008, -2/+8king: I... can't believe you got dugg 4 times. I'm no fan of McCain, to be sure but I couldn't help but notice that your claims are all either exaggerations of the truth, extreme simplifications, or exclude crucial details.
This is a horrific article, and alarming to say the least, but to blame the whole of this article on a single group of people is ridiculously ignorant, and pathetically partisan.
- HarryRag, on 10/06/2008, -0/+5"Things die."
Wow, more incredible wisdom from Digg. I guess this is the reason why I read this place. Things die, man. They just die. - disraeligears54, on 10/06/2008, -3/+8Palin should probably stop shooting wolves from helicopters.
- kingofinternet, on 10/06/2008, -10/+14our current administration denies that global warming has human causes.
our current vice president was 'hunting' caged quail when he shot a man in the face.
the platform of one party is literally 'drill baby drill'
the next possible vice president sued the epa to get polar bears off the endangered species list and made shooting wolves from aircraft legal.
in short, fluffy is going bye bye. - chaoswings, on 10/06/2008, -1/+5Given the frequency diggers go outside for all you know it spits acid to defend itself.
- ratexla, on 10/06/2008, -2/+6It's only going 1000 times faster now.
- jacksons98, on 10/06/2008, -1/+5Does anybody else feel like I feel? I would love to do something, just don't know what....
- riolio11, on 10/06/2008, -0/+4We're ***** screwed
- sdcritter, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3Perhaps it is evolution. But evolution gave us the power to rationalize, to create and unfortunately to destroy. If we can use our brain to extend the lives of humans why not consider using that intelligence to help extend the life of our planet. If the choices we make can benefit not only the animals that share this world with us, but also benefit us in the long run, why would we do otherwise? Simply because we feel superior? That motto leads us to a bad place. Humans are biggest beneficiaries of conservation because we would be able to enjoy the outdoors, we would be able to enjoy the fresh air and the ability to grow crops. We would live rather than just exist.
- ratexla, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3Read this to find out why YOU PROBABLY REALLY WANT TO save biodiversity...
http://www.amazon.com/Future-Life-Edward-O-Wilson/ ...
And pass it on to your friends. - Acglaphotis, on 10/07/2008, -0/+3roxgod666:Yeah, according to you, maybe. If you're so eager to see humans die why don't you kill yourself first, maybe we'll follow ya.
- inactive, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3i hate hearing news like this :(
- frozensnake, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3reptiles had there chance and so did mammals.
now its time for jelly fish to inherent the earth! - heymabes, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3Amphibians are at great risk too. :'0(
- DforSpiD, on 10/07/2008, -0/+3Well wouldn't it be a waste to only kill yourself then?
By your logic a good old fashioned rampage would be much more productive! - TheMachine1, on 10/06/2008, -1/+4In a long enough time interval 100% of life everywhere in the Universe might be dead. The problem is in a relatively few years after the industrial revolution we have rapidly accelerated extinction rates.
- greentimes, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3Here's a link to an overview of the report itself.
http://www.iucnredlist.org/static/programme
Seems pretty bad since the mammals are the at the top of the foodchain in most cases. This may be less than ideal when considering the future of biodiversity on the planet.
But at least there will be a huge load of insects. - Qaqortoq, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3How astute.
- twinklyJesus, on 10/06/2008, -6/+9Sensationalist *****! 99% of all species that ever existed on this planet are extinct. It's a fact of life. We can't stop or change it. All we can do is change species from independent existence to a dependent one, relying on us for food, care and space. Effectively turning them into zoo animals or circus acts. Animals that will never be able to forage for food for themselves again.
Total waste of time and money. - Kenzan, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3~Try a billion times faster.
- ratexla, on 10/06/2008, -1/+4Thanks! Educate yourself about the topic to see what you can do, support WWF ( http://www.wwf.org ), vote for the greenest candidates, volunteer maybe...
A great book = The future of life by E.O. Wilson. :) - ratexla, on 10/06/2008, -1/+4As I said somewhere up there:
There are also more species now than ever. BUT extinction rates are 1000 times higher than normal and we CAN stop it. So, if you would please read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodiversity#Human_Be ...
We are highly dependent on other species (and we have only a vague idea of which ones, exactly).
The extinction of any one species may be very bad news since we know so little about the ultimate consequences! - ratexla, on 10/06/2008, -0/+3Surely. I might get shot tomorrow. I think I'll just kill myself right now.
- ratexla, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2Why wipe it out for our unnecessary reasons, though? And we may want to keep things the way they are, since we are adapted to (and enjoy) this ecosystem, not whatever will come after if we ***** it up. :/
- ratexla, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2We will have no species and no future... but we will have poetry, man!
- ratexla, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2In this case though, we are responsible and we are powerful:
http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/what_we_do/species/ ...
Humans have actually been referred to as the sixth mass extinction - not that we would have to be.
Last time I checked, to sustain our present consumption rates we would need 1.5 planets... - Greenergrass, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2At least, we must save what remains of biodiversity!
If you want to read more, interesting link here, these few words resume this high crisis:
"It has been estimated that the current species extinction rate is between 1,000 and 10,000 times higher than it would naturally be".
http://iucn.org/about/work/programmes/species/red_ ... - twinklyJesus, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2So, we don't know which species we are dependent on. We don't know why we're dependent, therefore, it follows that we don't really KNOW that we're dependent or we would know the answer to the first two questions.
- bobbknight, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2The report's authors said the current concern with financial matters must not be allowed to obstruct the decline in the Earth's natural systems.
Yes we want money so we can have bloated staffs and large offices, and spend it like a drunk sailor on liberty. - sdcritter, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2Support conservation organizations. If you don't recycle start. Subscribe to electronic bills so that you don't receive every bill in paper in the mail. Purchase products made by sustainable products. Carry reusable bags to the grocery store. Change your light bulbs to energy efficient ones. It doesn't have to be political or extreme it can be as simple as walking to the store that's only a couple of blocks away. Right now its in to use a metal bottle for water, don't do it because it's in do it because that's one less plastic bottle in the trash. Use cloth napkins occasionally rather than paper napkins daily at home. There are many things we can do. Do one today and you've helped.
- TheMachine1, on 10/06/2008, -2/+4No we are taking the animals "food, care and space" to feed humans. Humans are like a cancer or virus.
- inactive, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2OH NOES
BOLT THE DOORS
shut up sheep - lornali, on 10/07/2008, -0/+2NO!! It's time we acted to avoid this
- twinklyJesus, on 10/09/2008, -0/+2No, it helps, but you are still violating your own logic. You must kill yourself now.
- Acglaphotis, on 10/07/2008, -0/+2follow the sources on wikipedia, maybe?
- sdcritter, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2Perhaps 99 percent of animals have gone extinct, this may be survival of the fittest. The problem is that the animals that are on the endangered list aren't threatened by nature. They're threatened by actions that humans can correct. We can't simply blame evolution for the loss of all of these animals. As the species with the largest use of our brains and the species that has caused most damage to the environment we shouldn't say oh well. If we can help, as stewards of this world we should. If anything turn off your lights when not in use. Recycle. You don't have to donate your money but you can help.
- inactive, on 10/07/2008, -0/+2@TxAggie08
I think the point is that
1) No matter how "careful" you are there is always an impact that cannot be undone
2) Humans make mistakes (ex: exxon valdez, 3 mile island)
3) To build the massive infrastructure needed to drill in these places (think of the wiring diagram for one of these things alone) would take several years and billions of dollars
and
4) Even if we did build and start production "asap" it would only be enough for maybe a year's oil.
Given all that I do not see how it is ok to drill.
Als / ps - the oil companies are multinationals and could care less about the USA; the oil would go to the highest bidder which may in fact be India or somewhere else by the time all that infrastructure got up and running.
Basically, the oil industry is asking for $$$ and saying it will help the USA - nothing more. - ratexla, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2HUMAN BENEFITS of biodiversity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodiversity#Human_Be ... - LBWayward, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2The meat industry in ravaging bio-diversity. Don't eat meat.
- wunksta, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2just because things happened in the past doesnt give us an excuse to exacerbate problems now
the main problem is that this is an indication of our affect on the worlds ecosystem. "so what?" you might say, but there is a balance and when that balance is disrupted it creates feedback loops. consider when we dump tons of nutrients into the ocean and how this leads to red tide and subsequent destruction of fisheries etc - malex, on 10/07/2008, -0/+2Or, if you eat meat, get it from local producers who practice sustainable agriculture.
Read "The Omnivore's Dilemma" for more info. -
Show 51 - 100 of 127 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is