On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 07:45:14PM -0600, Steve Smith wrote:
Nope... not including *invertebrates* was his point. Also not
including fish (nor oceangoing invertebrates)
Sorry - I missed that he was only talking about one phylum. The way it
was phrased mislead me.
I'm still a little surprised
Russell -
I agree that it is a surprisingly large number. I've been looking for
a way to validate or repudiate it myself.
I suspect the numbers are significantly inverted in relatively wild
places like the American West, Canada, Australia and the Russian Steppes.
- Steve
On Sat, Nov 02,
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Steve Smith sasm...@swcp.com wrote:
https://phonebloks.com
I think this is an interesting development... I think it will be most
important in the DIY world for allowing semi-custom development of mobile
tools... I think it also may catch on in the larger
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 10:01:11AM -0600, Steve Smith wrote:
FWIW, Daniel Dennett recently claimed that 10,000 years ago humans
and their domesticated animals comprised less than 1% of the mass of
animal (not including invertebrates or ocean dwellers) of the earth
but today we, along with
Wikipedia has an interesting summary of various species' contribution to
terrestrial biomass
(linkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomass_(ecology)#Global_biomass).
The following species are each individually responsible for 30% of
terrestrial biomass:
1. humans
2. cattle
3. sheep and goats
I think they're saying that the dry biomass of terrestrial species is 30%
of the fresh biomass. Especially since the global dry biomass in million
tonnes / global wet (fresh) biomass in million tonnes = 0.3 for all
those rows in the table.
-- rec --
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Robert
Russel -
FWIW, Daniel Dennett recently claimed that 10,000 years ago humans
and their domesticated animals comprised less than 1% of the mass of
animal (not including invertebrates or ocean dwellers) of the earth
but today we, along with our livestock and pets comprise 98%... I
can't even image
Would Dennett be more trying to make a point about how we're in the
anthropocene now as opposed to our throw weight in the holocene? I
haven't been following his writings so I don't know.
And in any case we farm fish, or otherwise manipulate their populations,
so they should count as much as
That does seem really nifty. The market is too small for a smart flip-phone
with a 3d camera, a weather station, and super bright light, but this would
allow someone to make one easily. However, I agree that it might be to
before it's time.
Cody Smith
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Steve
That does seem really nifty. The market is too
small for a smart flip-phone with a 3d camera, a weather
station, and super bright light, but this would allow someone to
make one easily. However, I agree that it might be to before
it's
https://phonebloks.com
I think this is an interesting development... I think it will be most
important in the DIY world for allowing semi-custom development of
mobile tools... I think it also may catch on in the larger popular
culture in the same way that body modification and accessorizing
11 matches
Mail list logo
