>There might be enough of some resources left over, but
>with the collapse of civilization, what comfort is it to humans?
We were discussing habitat and biodiversity. If some forests (f.ex.) are left
over, many species could survive in those relatively little places... or so I
thought a few days ago. What you said seems to imply that species are more
sensible to the alteration of "just one more bit" of their territory than I've been
taught.
>If we deplete the plankton, EVERYTHING dies. Yes it
>is better to eat the fishes. �who eat smaller fishes, � who eat plankton �.
>see?
Right, but are we forced to deplete the plankton if we harvest a bit of it? Eating
fish implies eating more plankton through the fishes than eating plankton
directly, right?
>Well you could have started with the Wilson links I sent you on that
>off-list FAQ
>...
Sorry father, don't beat me too hard! That said...
The E.O. Wilson bit you posted looks like an argument for me not for you
(BTW, what's S=CAz?). He doesn't say that "the whole biosphere is vulnerable
to us" like you do. What he says (in 1992) is that we're killing at least 0,27% of
species living in the rainforest each year. You need more than 250 years of
that to get rid of half the species. And what I said is that IF the highly
unsustainable current trends are reversed in a matter of decades (or even
years as Mark argued) and barring a systemic climate breakdown or
something of the sort, we will not have killed most species. In other words,
currently only a small (but significant! I don't challenge that) number of species
are vulnerable to us and the other can hide where we are not planning to go
kill them yet.
I hate to generalize, but when people like you and Mark speak about doom
and how we should look at scientific sources about it, and when I do look at the
sources you point at, it isn't as bad as you say. Of course, it's extremely
serious, but it looks as if you were liking this doom idea and willing to imagine
something worse than your own sources say.
>>However I think that if this
>>was happening, I would see the effects with my own eyes and I don't see
>>them.
>
>You didn't read Mark's post about over-fishing, I take it?
I think I read it but I missed the connection. I was talking about global pollution
(like that ozone layer thing), not overexploitation. Anyway, Mark's post is not
my own eyes.
>Semantics. Not a major point to debate, is it?
No debate here, only poor Julien not understanding something you said
because of the lack of common vocabulary. I swear I tried to understand.
Semantics are clearly unimportant when you talk to yourself but if you talk to
someone with a different background living in another country...
>>I'm curious as to how this concept of natural debt is applied. You have an
>>example or a reference for us?
>
>Okay � let's use the familiar one. What is the production cost of converting
>fresh biomass into oil? Who paid those production costs before using up the
>current supply of converted biomass? Who will invest in converting some
>more biomass into petroleum to supply the market demand for same in
>2035? How much will it cost? Since the capital invested in the original
>biomass conversion operation is not available to us, who finances the � here
>it comes � natural debt �? How will it be financed? What are the terms?
>Reference? www.dieoff.com or the University of Maryland's bioeconomics
>forum.
This looks like one more example of this useless mania of crudely monetizing
everything. There was no actual capital invested in the original biomass
conversion. There is no actual debt. I don't see the use of imagining one. This
would not create more oil nor slow its use. What would is state intervention to
make the oil price higher. But I don't see the advantage in equating the actual
price of oil it with the price of creating new oil (is it even possible?) if that's
what
you mean.
Yes, nature gave us many gifts but how can we pay it for those gifts? Is it even
a sane mentality to try to pay everything?
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
