Quote:
Originally posted by old salty
Not hard to understand at all, it's just not very believable. The scientific evidence for the last five mass extinction periods all point to things dying off very quickly. This is why they refer to these periods as mass extinctions. Nobody is really sure why they occurred, just that they certainly did. Since no humans were around to record the data, stating that they never occurred at the same rate as today is not scientifically valid. Not everything that lives then dies becomes fossilized. There is absolutely no way science can give any accurate data about the rate of extinction of animals in any thousand year period that occurred 25 million years ago. I do not reject science, I tend to embrace it. I also know that it has it's limitations. When we reach these limitations, we must interject our own theories in order to fill in the blanks. These theories are always changing based upon new evidence and discoveries. Theories are not facts, so I do not regard them as such.
Greenbean,
I have no idea of the imminent threats of rainforests and reefs due to climate. From the looks of things, the rain forests are in more of a danger from being cut down rather than climatic destruction.
|
do you knwo how long it took the dinasours to die off after the meteorite? hundreds of thousands of years i think.
anway we are talking about global warming. got nothing to do with mass extinctions.......YET.
I really had to laugh when you say to embrace science. hahaha
And yes rainforests are under a big threat from GW. The interior of the amazon basin is currently near its critical resiliencey threshold. with just a small degree of warming the interior of the amazon basin becomes essentially void of vegetation. the problem is the the trees in some parts of the forest are responsible for 74% of local rainfall. less rain less trees. vitious circle. global warming feedback and the amazon is well documented,please read up on it.