We're losing a million species in next decades" We heard it 40 years ago: "Civilization facing worldwide disaster"pic.twitter.com/Pk0Np15SAf
Näytä tämä ketju
Be wary: "we're losing a million species in next decades" of 8 million We heard the same story almost 40 years ago: The US official "Global 2000" report from 1980 claimed we'd see up to 2 million species die from 1980-2000 https://www.cartercenter.org/resources/pdfs/pdf-archive/global2000reporttothepresident--enteringthe21stcentury-01011991.pdf …pic.twitter.com/FEugPKP3uD
-
-
-
We're losing a million species in next decades" We heard it 40 years ago: "Grim outlook for world's future"pic.twitter.com/J3By8pCeIc
Näytä tämä ketju -
We're losing a million species in next decades" We heard it 40 years ago: Newsweek warned us of "A Grim Year 2000" August 4, 1980pic.twitter.com/r9jIRyQc93
Näytä tämä ketju -
We're losing a million species in next decades" We heard it 40 years ago: Time Magazine 8/4/1980, Vol. 116, Issue 5pic.twitter.com/M7hHfmbRN9
Näytä tämä ketju -
We're losing a million species in next decades" We heard it 40 years ago: New York Times headlined the findings under "Dead as the proverbial dodo" (July 31, 1980)pic.twitter.com/tFrgZsAChD
Näytä tämä ketju -
We're losing a million species in next decades" We heard it 40 years ago: Associated Press: "Government Study Sees Gloomy Future for World" July 23, 1980pic.twitter.com/ApxMFFKV4E
Näytä tämä ketju -
We're losing a million species in next decades" We heard it 40 years ago: Financial Times "A planet heading for trouble" February 15, 1982pic.twitter.com/BRl41K0eIN
Näytä tämä ketju -
Notice, this does *not* mean that there is no problem with extinction. We have likely pushed up the species extinction rate 100-1000x. But this doesn't translate into 12.5% of species extinct in a couple of decades — rather about 0.7% in 5 decadespic.twitter.com/NsLvQ3RSKO
Näytä tämä ketju -
Tackling extinction is worthwhile, but has to compete with the many other challenges, we face Panic on some issues means neglecting others, often more important issues Here the UN survey of global priorities: education & health before forests http://data.myworld2015.org/ pic.twitter.com/ASRnDqF2N5
Näytä tämä ketju -
And reading back, it is interesting to see the same mechanisms working again: 17 environmental organizations said the Global 2000 report "painted perhaps too bright a picture." Because it is always worse than you think (from Time Magazine, 8/4/1980pic.twitter.com/sYbzHZQcRe
Näytä tämä ketju -
The report was wrong about species loss. We didn't lose 2 million species. We have till 2010 lost 872 documented species (this is certainly an underestimate, but not anywhere close to even 1% of the Global 2000 claim) https://www.iucnredlist.org/search pic.twitter.com/xRGJTcDv2Z
Näytä tämä ketju -
The report was wrong about species loss. It was also wrong on a lot of other points, like an impending oil crisis in the 1990spic.twitter.com/zoG9isKHyJ
Näytä tämä ketju -
And Global 2000 expected food prices to double by 2000 They instead declined by 67%...pic.twitter.com/gxLMxiHVvX
Näytä tämä ketju
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.