http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/earth-is-in-the-early-stages-of-a-sixth-mass-extinction-says-the-journal-science/story-fnjww1so-1227005464142

EARTH’S sixth great extinction event has already begun. Now science is calling for urgent action to prevent life as we know it going the way of the dinosaurs.
The first five “events” destroyed more than 75 per cent of this planet’s life.

Animals. Plants. Entire ecosystems. The fossil record reveals all were smashed by natural disasters such as asteroids.

It’s happening again: But this time the experts say we are the cause.

Life on Earth is dying at an unprecedented rate.

The journal Science reports more than 320 animal and bird species alone have vanished since the 1500s. Most other animal populations from among the more than five million species on our planet have declined by an average 28 per cent.

One third of all life on Earth is now threatened or endangered.

Remember how we always predicted bugs would inherit the world?

That now looks to be wrong: Studies show these humble creepy-crawlies are among the worst affected with losses representing as much as 45 per cent of their populations in the past 35 years.

Only humanity has thrived: Our population has doubled in the same time frame.

Doomsday looms — without the comet.

What’s causing it?

Eating the planet … a fisherman drying salted fish at Kerumutan protected tropical rainforest, which is the Sumatran tiger habitat in Sumatra, Indonesia. Indonesia lost 840,000 hectares of natural forest in 2012 compared to 460,000 hectares in Brazil. Source: Getty Images

Wars. Pollution. Hunting. Fishing. Farming.

And climate-change induced natural disasters.

The new all-of-science review by international biologists and palaeoecologists warns all are seriously undermining the ecological health of the planet.

And our struggling ecosystems will increasingly start to hurt humans.

Already the effects are increasingly obvious: The current Ebola outbreak is just one example.

Out of Africa … Bats evicted from their natural habitat are believed to be behind the worst outbreak of the devastating Ebola virus currently being experienced in western Africa. Source: AFP

WHAT’S HAPPENING NOW?

Bats. Birds. Monkeys. Even mice.

All are among species being forced out of their habitats and into ever-expanding human territory.

Some even thrive amid the rubbish or under the eaves of our sprawling suburbs.

With them come previously unencountered — or at least rare — forms of disease.

Beetles. Butterflies. Worms.

All are vital for the health — and reproduction — of plants.

Not just a food source … caterpillars for sale in a street market in the Ngaba district of Kinshasa — crushed, boiled or fried. It’s easy to overlook their importance in maintaining the food chain. Source: AFP

Insects are responsible for the pollination of 75 per cent of the world’s food crops — yet they are the target of intense insecticide spraying and habitat-changing activities.

The loss of such small creatures is having a trickle-up effect.

EARTH 2.0: Astronomers say we’ll find it within 20 years

It’s not just the fertilisation of next year’s wheat, barley, corn and apple crops: There’s also the vital nutrient recycling and composting roles which keep soils productive.

Balanced invertebrate ecosystems are also a strong natural source of pest control. Without them, US farmers would have to spend an extra $5 billion each year on eradication programs, the study says.

Resource wars … A Japanese fishing boat, bottom, a small Japanese pleasure boat, top centre, Japan Coast Guard vessels, third and fourth from bottom and top left, sail along with a Chinese surveillance ship near disputed islands called Senkaku in Japan and Diaoyu in China in the East China Sea. Source: AP

Then there are the wars.

As fish stocks vanish in one area, fleets need to move to another. This is already the source of increasing tensions in the South and West China Seas.

Unhealthy habitats also can unsettle streams from their paths — if they’re not already dammed.

Justin Brashares warns in Science that declines in wildlife have been linked to economic and social stresses which lead to exploitative child labour practices and the proliferation of terrorism.

“Leadership must move beyond superficial reactions to elephant and rhino poaching and consider the complicated fate of the billions of people who rely on our planet’s rapidly disappearing wildlife for food and income,” his study concludes.

Leftovers … The skeleton of a mammoth (Mammutus columbi) which lived in America over a million years ago exhibited in a museum. Source: AFP

SIGNS OF THE SIXTH MASS EXTINCTION

This extinction event differs from others in the long history of our planet in one major way: It’s been brought about by the loss of major predators and herbivores through human interaction.

Scientists have a term for it: Anthropocene defaunation.

All previous extinctions have been driven by cataclysmic events (such as asteroid collisions or super volcanoes) or natural transformations (such as the impact of world-spanning ice ages).

The impact of this one — which is already affecting up to 33 per cent of all animals — will be equally severe.

“Where human density is high, you get high rates of defaunation, high incidence of rodents, and thus high levels of pathogens, which increases the risks of disease transmission,” said Stanford University Biology Professor Rodolfo Dirzo who helped produce the review for the journal Science.

The demise of the megafauna — such as giant kangaroos, woolly mammoths and giant sloths — as recently as some 20,000 years ago may just have been the start. Many anthropologists believe such beasts were easy meals to the newly organised and armed homo sapiens (us).

Then there’s the fate of the Tasmanian tiger and the passenger pigeon. One of the most recent additions to the extinct-at-human-hands list is the baiji freshwater dolphin of China.

More than 1000 species have been killed off in the past 200,000 years. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature keeps records of 20,000 more plants and animals classified as endangered.

Large animals remain at the forefront of decline: Now, it’s the ever-present tale of rhinos and elephants being slaughtered for their horns, lions and leopards killed for the thrill (and dried testicles), and whales hunted for the sake of tradition.

But the greatest threat comes from loss of habitat: Less space to roam means fewer offspring, which in turn results in less viable populations.

The loss of such large animals is having a trickle-down effect.

Revitalisation … a Zebra bolting out of an enclosure after a herd was translocated from Soysambu conservancy in the Kenyan Rift Valley in an effort to restock Kenya’s famous Amboseli game reserve where indigenous species of large herbivore, particularly zebra and wilderbeast were decimated by a severe dought in 2009. Source: AFP

Kenya is cited as a case-study: After the kill-off of most of its zebras, giraffes and elephants — the nation has become overwhelmed by rodents gorging on the ungrazed terrain.

Professor Dirzo states this loss of animal diversity will most likely have a very harmful future impact.

“We tend to think about extinction as loss of a species from the face of Earth, and that’s very important, but there’s a loss of critical ecosystem functioning in which animals play a central role that we need to pay attention to as well,” Dirzo said.

Some 3.5 billion years of evolutionary experimentation is under threat and with it much of the knowledge which could improve our own futures.

After all, we still striving to unravel the secrets of spider webs, gecko toes and pigeon homing.

Uncertain future … Two 3-month old female Cheetah cubs at the Nairobi Orphanage in Nairobi, Kenya. The two Cheetah cubs were abandoned by their mother due to shortages in prey. Source: AP

IS IT TOO LATE?

It can be done, they say. If we have the will.

Scientific American cites the example of the black-footed ferret. Merely seven of these little animals were still alive little more than a decade ago. Now they’re back from the brink. Similar stories can be found for critically endangered animals ranging from condors to salamanders.

Philip Seddon reports in the journal Science that human efforts have saved 424 species of plants — mostly through careful cultivation and moving them to new areas away from human activity.

We’ve also seen — in the abandoned landscape around Chernobyl and the deliberate attempts to reforest the US eastern seaboard — that woodlands return (along with all their associated life) when farms and towns are abandoned.

Urgent action required … Dr Mark Eldridge a Senior Research Scientist in Terrestrial Vertebrates at the Australian Museum with a preserved Eastern Quoll. The Eastern Quoll soon could be extinct. Source: News Corp Australia

But it remains a task requiring willpower from among general populations, government and industry.

There is no point saving animals without preserving the habitats within which they would live, the study says.

Reintroducing animals to unbalanced habitats is one tactic the study supports. Whether through introducing new predators to fill a vacated niche, or through genetically rebuilding lost animals, such stability has a cascade effect on the survival of other local animals, plants and trees.

How long do we have?

A study published by Nature in 2011 says we have just a century to change our ways before the “tipping point” is reached that will guarantee mass extinction.

> It’s happening again: But this time the experts say we are the cause. Life on Earth is dying at an unprecedented rate.

We used to be the cause. First it was the massive expansion of agriculture in the 18th century and earlier. These days with high yield crops the situation is not nearly as bad.

Later there were times of uncontrolled logging, draining of swamps/wetlands, and massive spraying of insecticides. That was in the 1950s and 1960s.

With people abandoning farms throughout Europe, Russia and other places, together with protection of endangered vertebrates and plants, and the reduction in uncontrolled pesticide use, the situation is now much better.

mollwollfumble said:

> It’s happening again: But this time the experts say we are the cause. Life on Earth is dying at an unprecedented rate.

We used to be the cause. First it was the massive expansion of agriculture in the 18th century and earlier. These days with high yield crops the situation is not nearly as bad.

Later there were times of uncontrolled logging, draining of swamps/wetlands, and massive spraying of insecticides. That was in the 1950s and 1960s.

With people abandoning farms throughout Europe, Russia and other places, together with protection of endangered vertebrates and plants, and the reduction in uncontrolled pesticide use, the situation is now much better.

No the situation is far worse. An aspect not listed above is our introduction of species into foreign environments, of which they do very well and drive the local flora and fauna to extinction. These introductions literally eat their way to dominance and do it 24/7 and 365 days a year, doing so year after year, after year. It is their continued impact that makes them as bad as anything we do to the environment, and the main reason many species have gone extinct and why so many others are just hanging on.

The lengthy article above shows an environmentalists rage over what is happening to our world, then you get those who are so ignorant that they the audacity to say ‘things have never been better.’ This blindness and couldn’t care attitude is what will cause so much destruction, pain and death. Unfortunately there are far too many blind, greedy, fools in this world that the future looks very bleak.

from the link

What’s causing it?

1. Wars.
2. Pollution.
3. Hunting.
4. Fishing.
5. Farming.

so apparently, just by humans existing we are extinguishing the rest of nature.

Seems the answer’s simple then. Good-bye all. :(

And of course we can’t have any alarmist diatribe without including the usual rhetoric -

6. And climate-change induced natural disasters

This just completes the crap nicely.

Oh, how I long for the days before human induced global warming when natural disasters & extreme weather didn’t exist.

:)

The_observer said:

from the link

What’s causing it?

1. Wars.
2. Pollution.
3. Hunting.
4. Fishing.
5. Farming.

so apparently, just by humans existing we are extinguishing the rest of nature.

Seems the answer’s simple then. Good-bye all. :(

And of course we can’t have any alarmist diatribe without including the usual rhetoric -

6. And climate-change induced natural disasters

This just completes the crap nicely.

Oh, how I long for the days before human induced global warming when natural disasters & extreme weather didn’t exist.

:)

The human race does need to be more responsible, less greedy and short-sighted.
Those with the power and means to change human behaviour large scale don’t care as they will most likely be dead by the time the shit hits the fan

>>Oh, how I long for the days before human induced global warming when natural disasters & extreme weather didn’t exist.<<

What you don’t understand Observer, is we by our actions in many areas, ARE the current natural disaster and we did it all by ourselves.

Cymek said:

The human race does need to be more responsible, less greedy and short-sighted.
Those with the power and means to change human behaviour large scale don’t care as they will most likely be dead by the time the shit hits the fan

What’s causing it?

1. Wars.
2. Pollution.
3. Hunting.
4. Fishing.
5. Farming.

Lets start by banning the last three to begin with.

PermeateFree said:

>>Oh, how I long for the days before human induced global warming when natural disasters & extreme weather didn’t exist.<<

What you don’t understand Observer, is we by our actions in many areas, ARE the current natural disaster and we did it all by ourselves.

Oh, no, I understand very well… environmentalists hate humans

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

The human race does need to be more responsible, less greedy and short-sighted.
Those with the power and means to change human behaviour large scale don’t care as they will most likely be dead by the time the shit hits the fan

What’s causing it?

1. Wars.
2. Pollution.
3. Hunting.
4. Fishing.
5. Farming.

Lets start by banning the last three to begin with.

3,4,5 can be done more responsibly, so you don’t 3 and 4 a species to extinction.

The_observer said:

Oh, no, I understand very well… environmentalists hate humans

You two really should get a room…

• 3,4,5 can be done more responsibly, so you don’t 3 and 4 a species to extinction.

3 and 4 can mostly be replaced by 5…

Witty Rejoinder said:

The_observer said:

Oh, no, I understand very well… environmentalists hate humans

You two really should get a room…

this is our room

furious said:

• 3,4,5 can be done more responsibly, so you don’t 3 and 4 a species to extinction.

3 and 4 can mostly be replaced by 5…

5 is one of the causes

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

The human race does need to be more responsible, less greedy and short-sighted.
Those with the power and means to change human behaviour large scale don’t care as they will most likely be dead by the time the shit hits the fan

What’s causing it?

1. Wars.
2. Pollution.
3. Hunting.
4. Fishing.
5. Farming.

Lets start by banning the last three to begin with.

Observer, there are simply too many of us and thereby placing immense stress on the environment and unless people like you begin to realise this and assist, then there is little future for civilisation and many life forms on this planet.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

The human race does need to be more responsible, less greedy and short-sighted.
Those with the power and means to change human behaviour large scale don’t care as they will most likely be dead by the time the shit hits the fan

What’s causing it?

1. Wars.
2. Pollution.
3. Hunting.
4. Fishing.
5. Farming.

Lets start by banning the last three to begin with.

Observer, there are simply too many of us and thereby placing immense stress on the environment and unless people like you begin to realise this and assist, then there is little future for civilisation and many life forms on this planet.

Especially if third world and developing nations decide they want a lifestyle first world nations already have

Cymek said:

Observer, there are simply too many of us and thereby placing immense stress on the environment and unless people like you begin to realise this and assist, then there is little future for civilisation and many life forms on this planet.
=============

Especially if third world and developing nations decide they want a lifestyle first world nations already have

here we go

so cymek, what do you propose?

Keep the third world in a life of miserable poverty and force us into the same situation?

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Observer, there are simply too many of us and thereby placing immense stress on the environment and unless people like you begin to realise this and assist, then there is little future for civilisation and many life forms on this planet.
=============

Especially if third world and developing nations decide they want a lifestyle first world nations already have

here we go

so cymek, what do you propose?

Keep the third world in a life of miserable poverty and force us into the same situation?

I’d encourage them to take on crippling loans

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Observer, there are simply too many of us and thereby placing immense stress on the environment and unless people like you begin to realise this and assist, then there is little future for civilisation and many life forms on this planet.
=============

Especially if third world and developing nations decide they want a lifestyle first world nations already have

here we go

so cymek, what do you propose?

Keep the third world in a life of miserable poverty and force us into the same situation?

So you don’t see a problem Observer?

wookiemeister said:

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Observer, there are simply too many of us and thereby placing immense stress on the environment and unless people like you begin to realise this and assist, then there is little future for civilisation and many life forms on this planet.
=============

Especially if third world and developing nations decide they want a lifestyle first world nations already have

here we go

so cymek, what do you propose?

Keep the third world in a life of miserable poverty and force us into the same situation?

I’d encourage them to take on crippling loans

Most decent people care more about poor humans living in poverty & would like to see them have electricity, clean water & a better standard of hygene for starters.

The_observer said:

from the link

What’s causing it?

1. Wars.
2. Pollution.
3. Hunting.
4. Fishing.
5. Farming.

so apparently, just by humans existing we are extinguishing the rest of nature.

Seems the answer’s simple then. Good-bye all. :(

And of course we can’t have any alarmist diatribe without including the usual rhetoric -

6. And climate-change induced natural disasters

This just completes the crap nicely.

Oh, how I long for the days before human induced global warming when natural disasters & extreme weather didn’t exist.

:)

How’s your biased observing going?

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Observer, there are simply too many of us and thereby placing immense stress on the environment and unless people like you begin to realise this and assist, then there is little future for civilisation and many life forms on this planet.
=============

Especially if third world and developing nations decide they want a lifestyle first world nations already have

here we go

so cymek, what do you propose?

Keep the third world in a life of miserable poverty and force us into the same situation?

Don’t repeat the mistakes of the past, we don’t need to pollute rivers and oceans, its the lazy way out. How much could have been avoided if humans didn’t take the easy option. Third world nations shouldn’t live in miserable poverty, but I also do think our planet could cope with them having an lifestyle many first world nations population enjoy. Maybe we all need to downgrade our lifestyles, especially the filthy rich.

I’m no hippy, I am proud of many of humanities technological achievements, but you have to admit we are a flawed species if we cause our own extinction through greed and short term thinking.

CrazyNeutrino said:

The_observer said:

from the link

What’s causing it?

1. Wars.
2. Pollution.
3. Hunting.
4. Fishing.
5. Farming.

so apparently, just by humans existing we are extinguishing the rest of nature.

Seems the answer’s simple then. Good-bye all. :(

And of course we can’t have any alarmist diatribe without including the usual rhetoric -

6. And climate-change induced natural disasters

This just completes the crap nicely.

Oh, how I long for the days before human induced global warming when natural disasters & extreme weather didn’t exist.

:)

How’s your biased observing going?

Hows your drug problem going?

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Observer, there are simply too many of us and thereby placing immense stress on the environment and unless people like you begin to realise this and assist, then there is little future for civilisation and many life forms on this planet.
=============

Especially if third world and developing nations decide they want a lifestyle first world nations already have

here we go

so cymek, what do you propose?

Keep the third world in a life of miserable poverty and force us into the same situation?

So you don’t see a problem Observer?

I see an environmentalist scientist who proposes there to be a problem of catastrophic proportions, that is again, by his reasoning, caused simply by humans going about their existence, which means that there is no solution.

Other than humans existing in unrealisticly small numbers, or not at all.

The_observer

Do you think humanity is on the right path to utopia or are we at risk of extinction due to many of the factors mentioned in the article

Cymek said:

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Observer, there are simply too many of us and thereby placing immense stress on the environment and unless people like you begin to realise this and assist, then there is little future for civilisation and many life forms on this planet.
=============

Especially if third world and developing nations decide they want a lifestyle first world nations already have

here we go

so cymek, what do you propose?

Keep the third world in a life of miserable poverty and force us into the same situation?

Don’t repeat the mistakes of the past, we don’t need to pollute rivers and oceans, its the lazy way out. How much could have been avoided if humans didn’t take the easy option. Third world nations shouldn’t live in miserable poverty, but I also do think our planet could cope with them having an lifestyle many first world nations population enjoy. Maybe we all need to downgrade our lifestyles, especially the filthy rich.

go check the environment of third world nations & compare them to the environments of first world nations.

I know which I would rather live in>

Once life on earth and the universe is gone what purpose is there to the universe now that there is nothing to know it even exists.

Cymek said:

The_observer

Do you think humanity is on the right path to utopia or are we at risk of extinction due to many of the factors mentioned in the article

as stated prior, the environments in first world countries are far better than the environments in third world nations.

The better things are for humans, the better things are for everything else on the planet>

Peak Warming Man said:

Once life on earth and the universe is gone what purpose is there to the universe now that there is nothing to know it even exists.

Good point. The earth’s life isn’t infinite to begin with. we’ve only got a couple of billion years left,if that.

Personally I don’t believe the earth will end as the result of a dying sun. I believe all life will perish due to a lack of atmospheric CO2.
Yes, you heard it here first .

Less than 150 ppmv ,,, so long sucker.

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

The_observer

Do you think humanity is on the right path to utopia or are we at risk of extinction due to many of the factors mentioned in the article

as stated prior, the environments in first world countries are far better than the environments in third world nations.

The better things are for humans, the better things are for everything else on the planet>

You seem to count gross results in an anthropomorphic fashion. You only need to look at various natural guages to approximate our effects on the environment and where things are at. Species like frogs are great guage of the health of the environment. So is the GBR. It amazes me how much damage can be done to the GBR without Australians putting their foot down in a big way. If we lose the reef we would have to estimate that our beaches might also become less attractive and the results to our reliance on tourism would likely be fatal(let alone the effects to the rest of the ecosystem).

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

here we go

so cymek, what do you propose?

Keep the third world in a life of miserable poverty and force us into the same situation?

So you don’t see a problem Observer?

I see an environmentalist scientist who proposes there to be a problem of catastrophic proportions, that is again, by his reasoning, caused simply by humans going about their existence, which means that there is no solution.

Other than humans existing in unrealisticly small numbers, or not at all.

That opinion is your problem Observer and it is also the World’s problem. You don’t seem to realise you are rushing with undue haste towards the cliff’s edge, with your fingers in your ears going la la la la la etc. You are really a complete fool and know not what you do.

>>> If we lose the reef <<<

In 1997 the area of the world’s coral reefs was estimated to be 255,000km2.
Reference. http://www.springerlink.com/content/ccxb165016ma8792/

In 2011 the global area of coral reef is estimated to be 249,713km2.
Reference. http://pdf.wri.org/factsheets/factsheet_reefs_main.pdf

This amounts to a change from 1997 figures of -2.1%.
Given the unreported uncertainties & margin of error, there has essentially been no change in global reef area over that time
& no reason to believe that the GBR is under any threat of extinction or otherwise by human existence.

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

The_observer

Do you think humanity is on the right path to utopia or are we at risk of extinction due to many of the factors mentioned in the article

as stated prior, the environments in first world countries are far better than the environments in third world nations.

The better things are for humans, the better things are for everything else on the planet>

Interesting comment Observer, are you just a religious nutcase of which nobody cares what you think?

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

So you don’t see a problem Observer?

I see an environmentalist scientist who proposes there to be a problem of catastrophic proportions, that is again, by his reasoning, caused simply by humans going about their existence, which means that there is no solution.

Other than humans existing in unrealisticly small numbers, or not at all.

That opinion is your problem Observer and it is also the World’s problem. You don’t seem to realise you are rushing with undue haste towards the cliff’s edge, with your fingers in your ears going la la la la la etc. You are really a complete fool and know not what you do.

alarmism is your only opinion & I place no more pressure on nature than you do.

Sitting on your fat arse in your ‘big arm chair’, in front of your computer winging & insulting me may make you feel good & superior,
but your misplaced self righteousness does nothing positive.

Go take some action if that makes you feel better about yourself!

The_observer said:

>>> If we lose the reef <<<

In 1997 the area of the world’s coral reefs was estimated to be 255,000km2.
Reference. http://www.springerlink.com/content/ccxb165016ma8792/

In 2011 the global area of coral reef is estimated to be 249,713km2.
Reference. http://pdf.wri.org/factsheets/factsheet_reefs_main.pdf

This amounts to a change from 1997 figures of -2.1%.
Given the unreported uncertainties & margin of error, there has essentially been no change in global reef area over that time
& no reason to believe that the GBR is under any threat of extinction or otherwise by human existence.

You base this opinion on those statistics? Do you understand how much that 2.1% change(over only 14 years) represents in practical terms? Does it occur to you that we may have reached a point already where that rate is not only increasing but is irreversible? I’m starting to agree with PF in that you don’t seem to have an understanding of how annual statistics mount up to exponential realities.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

The_observer

Do you think humanity is on the right path to utopia or are we at risk of extinction due to many of the factors mentioned in the article

as stated prior, the environments in first world countries are far better than the environments in third world nations.

The better things are for humans, the better things are for everything else on the planet>

Interesting comment Observer, are you just a religious nutcase of which nobody cares what you think?

I have no religion, unlike you, who worships at the alter of environmentalism, where there is always another human caused catastrophe around the corner waiting to happen

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

>>> If we lose the reef <<<

In 1997 the area of the world’s coral reefs was estimated to be 255,000km2.
Reference. http://www.springerlink.com/content/ccxb165016ma8792/

In 2011 the global area of coral reef is estimated to be 249,713km2.
Reference. http://pdf.wri.org/factsheets/factsheet_reefs_main.pdf

This amounts to a change from 1997 figures of -2.1%.
Given the unreported uncertainties & margin of error, there has essentially been no change in global reef area over that time
& no reason to believe that the GBR is under any threat of extinction or otherwise by human existence.

You base this opinion on those statistics? Do you understand how much that 2.1% change(over only 14 years) represents in practical terms?

“unreported uncertainties & margin of error”

it is possible that reefs have not decreased in that time at all, but if thy have, for argument sake, there is every possibility that it natural variation.

That happens all the time, naturally,,, except in your’s & perv world,,then it got to be worse than we thought Jim, bloody humans

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

>>> If we lose the reef <<<

In 1997 the area of the world’s coral reefs was estimated to be 255,000km2.
Reference. http://www.springerlink.com/content/ccxb165016ma8792/

In 2011 the global area of coral reef is estimated to be 249,713km2.
Reference. http://pdf.wri.org/factsheets/factsheet_reefs_main.pdf

This amounts to a change from 1997 figures of -2.1%.
Given the unreported uncertainties & margin of error, there has essentially been no change in global reef area over that time
& no reason to believe that the GBR is under any threat of extinction or otherwise by human existence.

You base this opinion on those statistics? Do you understand how much that 2.1% change(over only 14 years) represents in practical terms?

“unreported uncertainties & margin of error”

it is possible that reefs have not decreased in that time at all, but if thy have, for argument sake, there is every possibility that it natural variation.

That happens all the time, naturally,,, except in your’s & perv world,,then it got to be worse than we thought Jim, bloody humans

hhhhmmm, yes. everyone elses experience and recollection is as limited as yours appears to be? I’m barely forty and my memory goes back well before 1997 let alone what I have learnt through investigation. But I won’t be further arguing the point with you.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

I see an environmentalist scientist who proposes there to be a problem of catastrophic proportions, that is again, by his reasoning, caused simply by humans going about their existence, which means that there is no solution.

Other than humans existing in unrealisticly small numbers, or not at all.

That opinion is your problem Observer and it is also the World’s problem. You don’t seem to realise you are rushing with undue haste towards the cliff’s edge, with your fingers in your ears going la la la la la etc. You are really a complete fool and know not what you do.

alarmism is your only opinion & I place no more pressure on nature than you do.

Sitting on your fat arse in your ‘big arm chair’, in front of your computer winging & insulting me may make you feel good & superior,
but your misplaced self righteousness does nothing positive.

Go take some action if that makes you feel better about yourself!

No it is not up to me, it is a global problem and the population of the world must fix it and be prepared to make adjustments, but alas I think the human mind on a mass scale, is incapable of reacting sensibly to this situation.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

as stated prior, the environments in first world countries are far better than the environments in third world nations.

The better things are for humans, the better things are for everything else on the planet>

Interesting comment Observer, are you just a religious nutcase of which nobody cares what you think?

I have no religion, unlike you, who worships at the alter of environmentalism, where there is always another human caused catastrophe around the corner waiting to happen

Sorry, but I don’t think this catastrophe will be overtopped.

I’ll have to leave you for now.

We’re having (my 5 wives & 35 children) some Reef n Beef I hunted down myself, for dinner.

Probably washed down with a red or ten. Maybe some cheese n bikkies with that, in front of roaring gas log fire,
in my mansion (60 bathrooms & four guest houses on a reclaimed rain forest), on the edge of what use to be a coral reef.

ahhh, this is the life

The_observer said:

I’ll have to leave you for now.

We’re having (my 5 wives & 35 children) some Reef n Beef I hunted down myself, for dinner.

Probably washed down with a red or ten. Maybe some cheese n bikkies with that, in front of roaring gas log fire,
in my mansion (60 bathrooms & four guest houses on a reclaimed rain forest), on the edge of what use to be a coral reef.

ahhh, this is the life

words of a troll……………..

The_observer said:

I’ll have to leave you for now.

We’re having (my 5 wives & 35 children) some Reef n Beef I hunted down myself, for dinner.

Probably washed down with a red or ten. Maybe some cheese n bikkies with that, in front of roaring gas log fire,
in my mansion (60 bathrooms & four guest houses on a reclaimed rain forest), on the edge of what use to be a coral reef.

ahhh, this is the life

Observer, you just don’t get it.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

That opinion is your problem Observer and it is also the World’s problem. You don’t seem to realise you are rushing with undue haste towards the cliff’s edge, with your fingers in your ears going la la la la la etc. You are really a complete fool and know not what you do.

alarmism is your only opinion & I place no more pressure on nature than you do.

Sitting on your fat arse in your ‘big arm chair’, in front of your computer winging & insulting me may make you feel good & superior,
but your misplaced self righteousness does nothing positive.

Go take some action if that makes you feel better about yourself!

No it is not up to me, it is a global problem and the population of the world must fix it and be prepared to make adjustments, but alas I think the human mind on a mass scale, is incapable of reacting sensibly to this situation.

There is a point to be made in that area

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

I’ll have to leave you for now.

We’re having (my 5 wives & 35 children) some Reef n Beef I hunted down myself, for dinner.

Probably washed down with a red or ten. Maybe some cheese n bikkies with that, in front of roaring gas log fire,
in my mansion (60 bathrooms & four guest houses on a reclaimed rain forest), on the edge of what use to be a coral reef.

ahhh, this is the life

words of a troll……………..

get fucked,,, & always look on the bright side of life, do do , do do do do do do do

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

I’ll have to leave you for now.

We’re having (my 5 wives & 35 children) some Reef n Beef I hunted down myself, for dinner.

Probably washed down with a red or ten. Maybe some cheese n bikkies with that, in front of roaring gas log fire,
in my mansion (60 bathrooms & four guest houses on a reclaimed rain forest), on the edge of what use to be a coral reef.

ahhh, this is the life

words of a troll……………..

get fucked,,, & always look on the bright side of life, do do , do do do do do do do

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

I’ll have to leave you for now.

We’re having (my 5 wives & 35 children) some Reef n Beef I hunted down myself, for dinner.

Probably washed down with a red or ten. Maybe some cheese n bikkies with that, in front of roaring gas log fire,
in my mansion (60 bathrooms & four guest houses on a reclaimed rain forest), on the edge of what use to be a coral reef.

ahhh, this is the life

words of a troll……………..

get fucked,,, & always look on the bright side of life, do do , do do do do do do do

Get with it, Brian didn’t know WTF was going on.

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

I’ll have to leave you for now.

We’re having (my 5 wives & 35 children) some Reef n Beef I hunted down myself, for dinner.

Probably washed down with a red or ten. Maybe some cheese n bikkies with that, in front of roaring gas log fire,
in my mansion (60 bathrooms & four guest houses on a reclaimed rain forest), on the edge of what use to be a coral reef.

ahhh, this is the life

words of a troll……………..

get fucked,,, & always look on the bright side of life, do do , do do do do do do do

you over reach in your assumptions also………….

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

I’ll have to leave you for now.

We’re having (my 5 wives & 35 children) some Reef n Beef I hunted down myself, for dinner.

Probably washed down with a red or ten. Maybe some cheese n bikkies with that, in front of roaring gas log fire,
in my mansion (60 bathrooms & four guest houses on a reclaimed rain forest), on the edge of what use to be a coral reef.

ahhh, this is the life

words of a troll……………..

get fucked,,, & always look on the bright side of life, do do , do do do do do do do

What do they about Ignorance …………………….. something about bliss.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

words of a troll……………..

get fucked,,, & always look on the bright side of life, do do , do do do do do do do

What do they about Ignorance …………………….. something about bliss.

what do they say?

all talk & no ???

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

get fucked,,, & always look on the bright side of life, do do , do do do do do do do

What do they about Ignorance …………………….. something about bliss.

what do they say?

all talk & no ???

I do quite a lot Observer and have done for most of my life. But with your level of ignorance you must live in a hole.

In a very short galactic time interval (snaps thumb and index finger) there will be no earthly environment to speak of, there will be no oceans, no forests, no tides, no moon to shine on a non existent beach, no flowers, no animals and no snow capped or otherwise mountains and no tree shaded fertile river valleys or otherwise, it will be all vaporised matey.
So in the big picture it doesn’t matter a fuck if the hairy nosed greater gibber polisher survives or not.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

What do they about Ignorance …………………….. something about bliss.

what do they say?

all talk & no ???

I do quite a lot Observer and have done for most of my life.

what’s that,,,insult all & sundry who disagree with any opinion you have, Yes, I can imagine.

Peak Warming Man said:

In a very short galactic time interval (snaps thumb and index finger) there will be no earthly environment to speak of, there will be no oceans, no forests, no tides, no moon to shine on a non existent beach, no flowers, no animals and no snow capped or otherwise mountains and no tree shaded fertile river valleys or otherwise, it will be all vaporised matey.
So in the big picture it doesn’t matter a fuck if the hairy nosed greater gibber polisher survives or not.

and no religious environmental extremists.

Oh, the thought of no nature must make them so anxious

Peak Warming Man said:

In a very short galactic time interval (snaps thumb and index finger) there will be no earthly environment to speak of, there will be no oceans, no forests, no tides, no moon to shine on a non existent beach, no flowers, no animals and no snow capped or otherwise mountains and no tree shaded fertile river valleys or otherwise, it will be all vaporised matey.
So in the big picture it doesn’t matter a fuck if the hairy nosed greater gibber polisher survives or not.

this might be so

the sun might be replaced by another sun and the hairy nosed whatever might live another day

Wildlife carers say there are an increasing number of bow and arrow attacks on native animals, prompting calls for the weapons to be prohibited.

But bow hunters say their sport is being tarnished by the actions of a few reckless amateurs.

Wildlife rescue organisation WIRES says it is seeing an increase in the number of native animals being shot with arrows, with devastating consequences.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-29/native-animals-being-hunted-with-bow-and-arrows/5632024

In 2012, a man was practising with his compound bow in his backyard at Macquarie Park when the arrow flew onto the street and hit a pedestrian in the neck. A court heard the archer bought the compound bow at Parklea Markets.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-16/man-accused-of-crossbow-attack-on-ex-wifes-husband/5602004

wookiemeister said:

In 2012, a man was practising with his compound bow in his backyard at Macquarie Park when the arrow flew onto the street and hit a pedestrian in the neck. A court heard the archer bought the compound bow at Parklea Markets.

there should be laws for BnAs just like guns

Peak Warming Man said:

In a very short galactic time interval (snaps thumb and index finger) there will be no earthly environment to speak of, there will be no oceans, no forests, no tides, no moon to shine on a non existent beach, no flowers, no animals and no snow capped or otherwise mountains and no tree shaded fertile river valleys or otherwise, it will be all vaporised matey.
So in the big picture it doesn’t matter a fuck if the hairy nosed greater gibber polisher survives or not.

……….. dick…………. head……………

Peak Warming Man said:

In a very short galactic time interval (snaps thumb and index finger) there will be no earthly environment to speak of, there will be no oceans, no forests, no tides, no moon to shine on a non existent beach, no flowers, no animals and no snow capped or otherwise mountains and no tree shaded fertile river valleys or otherwise, it will be all vaporised matey.
So in the big picture it doesn’t matter a fuck if the hairy nosed greater gibber polisher survives or not.

We currently have diverse life on this planet that is very rich and has been around for a long time and will hopefully be around for much longer. I don’t think the prospect of being vaporised enters into a meaningful picture in anyway shape or form.

Postpocelipse said:

Peak Warming Man said:

In a very short galactic time interval (snaps thumb and index finger) there will be no earthly environment to speak of, there will be no oceans, no forests, no tides, no moon to shine on a non existent beach, no flowers, no animals and no snow capped or otherwise mountains and no tree shaded fertile river valleys or otherwise, it will be all vaporised matey.
So in the big picture it doesn’t matter a fuck if the hairy nosed greater gibber polisher survives or not.

……….. dick…………. head……………

you ought to practice what you preach post prick & stop being one yourself

PermeateFree said:

Peak Warming Man said:

In a very short galactic time interval (snaps thumb and index finger) there will be no earthly environment to speak of, there will be no oceans, no forests, no tides, no moon to shine on a non existent beach, no flowers, no animals and no snow capped or otherwise mountains and no tree shaded fertile river valleys or otherwise, it will be all vaporised matey.
So in the big picture it doesn’t matter a fuck if the hairy nosed greater gibber polisher survives or not.

We currently have diverse life on this planet that is very rich and has been around for a long time and will hopefully be around for much longer. I don’t think the prospect of being vaporised enters into a meaningful picture in anyway shape or form.

pfft. We’re one big rock away from extinction with no defence.

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

Peak Warming Man said:

In a very short galactic time interval (snaps thumb and index finger) there will be no earthly environment to speak of, there will be no oceans, no forests, no tides, no moon to shine on a non existent beach, no flowers, no animals and no snow capped or otherwise mountains and no tree shaded fertile river valleys or otherwise, it will be all vaporised matey.
So in the big picture it doesn’t matter a fuck if the hairy nosed greater gibber polisher survives or not.

……….. dick…………. head……………

you ought to practice what you preach post prick & stop being one yourself

pffft!!! You should stop assuming you know what I do with my time. I’m approaching this discussion with humor to begin with. My dig at PWM has nothing to do with you and you should stay out of other peoples interactions unless your invited.

jjjust moi said:

PermeateFree said:

Peak Warming Man said:

In a very short galactic time interval (snaps thumb and index finger) there will be no earthly environment to speak of, there will be no oceans, no forests, no tides, no moon to shine on a non existent beach, no flowers, no animals and no snow capped or otherwise mountains and no tree shaded fertile river valleys or otherwise, it will be all vaporised matey.
So in the big picture it doesn’t matter a fuck if the hairy nosed greater gibber polisher survives or not.

We currently have diverse life on this planet that is very rich and has been around for a long time and will hopefully be around for much longer. I don’t think the prospect of being vaporised enters into a meaningful picture in anyway shape or form.

pfft. We’re one big rock away from extinction with no defence.

I wonder if they’d let on if they discovered a big big one was going to hit, in say 6 months time.

Could they keep it a secret?

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

……….. dick…………. head……………

you ought to practice what you preach post prick & stop being one yourself

pffft!!! You should stop assuming you know what I do with my time. I’m approaching this discussion with humor to begin with. My dig at PWM has nothing to do with you and you should stay out of other peoples interactions unless your invited.

that politeness ended when you called me a troll, dick…..head…..!

The_observer said:

you ought to practice what you preach post prick & stop being one yourself

You don’t think that statement is childishly stompy and decidedly schoolyard? How old are you?

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

you ought to practice what you preach post prick & stop being one yourself

pffft!!! You should stop assuming you know what I do with my time. I’m approaching this discussion with humor to begin with. My dig at PWM has nothing to do with you and you should stay out of other peoples interactions unless your invited.

that politeness ended when you called me a troll, dick…..head…..!

Oh, that’s right, you’re only joking

The_observer said:

jjjust moi said:

PermeateFree said:

We currently have diverse life on this planet that is very rich and has been around for a long time and will hopefully be around for much longer. I don’t think the prospect of being vaporised enters into a meaningful picture in anyway shape or form.

pfft. We’re one big rock away from extinction with no defence.

I wonder if they’d let on if they discovered a big big one was going to hit, in say 6 months time.

Could they keep it a secret?

It will hit the week after I win lotto.

The_observer said:

jjjust moi said:

PermeateFree said:

We currently have diverse life on this planet that is very rich and has been around for a long time and will hopefully be around for much longer. I don’t think the prospect of being vaporised enters into a meaningful picture in anyway shape or form.

pfft. We’re one big rock away from extinction with no defence.

I wonder if they’d let on if they discovered a big big one was going to hit, in say 6 months time.

Could they keep it a secret?

they’d start building something to destroy it (I’d hope), that or pass a law to force that rock to pay tax to it, then they’d declare it illegal, then the lawyers would bring a class action to stop them making the rock illegal and then demand that rock be brought to Australian shores under a protection visa

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

you ought to practice what you preach post prick & stop being one yourself

pffft!!! You should stop assuming you know what I do with my time. I’m approaching this discussion with humor to begin with. My dig at PWM has nothing to do with you and you should stay out of other peoples interactions unless your invited.

that politeness ended when you called me a troll, dick…..head…..!

Geez Observer, as a human you are so unbelievable.

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

you ought to practice what you preach post prick & stop being one yourself

You don’t think that statement is childishly stompy and decidedly schoolyard? How old are you?

you lectured me about being rude to people…..dick…..head….!

jjjust moi said:

The_observer said:

jjjust moi said:

pfft. We’re one big rock away from extinction with no defence.

I wonder if they’d let on if they discovered a big big one was going to hit, in say 6 months time.

Could they keep it a secret?

It will hit the week after I win lotto.

or a week after they find a cure for Alzheimer’s

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

you ought to practice what you preach post prick & stop being one yourself

You don’t think that statement is childishly stompy and decidedly schoolyard? How old are you?

you lectured me about being rude to people…..dick…..head….!

Unbelievable.

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

you ought to practice what you preach post prick & stop being one yourself

pffft!!! You should stop assuming you know what I do with my time. I’m approaching this discussion with humor to begin with. My dig at PWM has nothing to do with you and you should stay out of other peoples interactions unless your invited.

that politeness ended when you called me a troll, dick…..head…..!

I called you a troll because you made a statement obviously designed to stir PF’s emotions, which is the action of a troll. Just a tip. If you are going to approach a discussion by stirring your protagonist up and then picking apart their less thought out arguments you ought to avoid being stirred yourself.

no, they couldn’t keep it secret as there are a lot of amateurs astronomers out there that would see it and work out its orbit.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

pffft!!! You should stop assuming you know what I do with my time. I’m approaching this discussion with humor to begin with. My dig at PWM has nothing to do with you and you should stay out of other peoples interactions unless your invited.

that politeness ended when you called me a troll, dick…..head…..!

Geez Observer, as a human you are so unbelievable.

I just don’t get the part where you think you have done something special that entitles you to judge others?

The_observer said:

jjjust moi said:

The_observer said:

I wonder if they’d let on if they discovered a big big one was going to hit, in say 6 months time.

Could they keep it a secret?

It will hit the week after I win lotto.

or a week after they find a cure for Alzheimer’s

Could use that cure with some on here.

They tend to forget their past abuse and record of trolling.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

You don’t think that statement is childishly stompy and decidedly schoolyard? How old are you?

you lectured me about being rude to people…..dick…..head….!

Unbelievable.

you remind me of a fuckwit perm

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

that politeness ended when you called me a troll, dick…..head…..!

Geez Observer, as a human you are so unbelievable.

I just don’t get the part where you think you have done something special that entitles you to judge others?

Quite unbelievable.

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

pffft!!! You should stop assuming you know what I do with my time. I’m approaching this discussion with humor to begin with. My dig at PWM has nothing to do with you and you should stay out of other peoples interactions unless your invited.

that politeness ended when you called me a troll, dick…..head…..!

I called you a troll because you made a statement obviously designed to stir PF’s emotions, which is the action of a troll. Just a tip. If you are going to approach a discussion by stirring your protagonist up and then picking apart their less thought out arguments you ought to avoid being stirred yourself.

and of course if you weren’t so hypocritical you would have made that point to perm many a time

ChrispenEvan said:

no, they couldn’t keep it secret as there are a lot of amateurs astronomers out there that would see it and work out its orbit.

that’s what I was thinking

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

pffft!!! You should stop assuming you know what I do with my time. I’m approaching this discussion with humor to begin with. My dig at PWM has nothing to do with you and you should stay out of other peoples interactions unless your invited.

that politeness ended when you called me a troll, dick…..head…..!

I called you a troll because you made a statement obviously designed to stir PF’s emotions, which is the action of a troll. Just a tip. If you are going to approach a discussion by stirring your protagonist up and then picking apart their less thought out arguments you ought to avoid being stirred yourself.

You really don’t know what a protagonist is do you?

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

you lectured me about being rude to people…..dick…..head….!

Unbelievable.

you remind me of a fuckwit perm

Truly unbelievable.

The_observer said:

ChrispenEvan said:

no, they couldn’t keep it secret as there are a lot of amateurs astronomers out there that would see it and work out its orbit.

that’s what I was thinking

Now that is really unbelievable.

also we wouldn’t be able to do anything. blowing it up wouldn’t change its orbit much and just result in a lot of smaller bits hitting us.

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

pffft!!! You should stop assuming you know what I do with my time. I’m approaching this discussion with humor to begin with. My dig at PWM has nothing to do with you and you should stay out of other peoples interactions unless your invited.

that politeness ended when you called me a troll, dick…..head…..!

I called you a troll because you made a statement obviously designed to stir PF’s emotions, which is the action of a troll. Just a tip. If you are going to approach a discussion by stirring your protagonist up and then picking apart their less thought out arguments you ought to avoid being stirred yourself.

and Post,,, you should learn to keep out of other peoples interactions,,,hey

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

that politeness ended when you called me a troll, dick…..head…..!

I called you a troll because you made a statement obviously designed to stir PF’s emotions, which is the action of a troll. Just a tip. If you are going to approach a discussion by stirring your protagonist up and then picking apart their less thought out arguments you ought to avoid being stirred yourself.

and of course if you weren’t so hypocritical you would have made that point to perm many a time

Is that so? It is fairly obvious to me that you are entertaining yourself at PF’s expense and PF is more genuinely passionate about his philosophy. Seeing as I tend to agree with the idea of minimising my effects on the environment I fail to find an area to take issue with in PF’s arguments. I could ask him to not take you so seriously but you two have the history, not myself.

ChrispenEvan said:

also we wouldn’t be able to do anything. blowing it up wouldn’t change its orbit much and just result in a lot of smaller bits hitting us.

We explode a couple of dozen thero-nuclear devices to one side of it and blow it off it’s collision course.

ChrispenEvan said:

also we wouldn’t be able to do anything. blowing it up wouldn’t change its orbit much and just result in a lot of smaller bits hitting us.

Don’t think blowing up works in space. One of old isaccs laws I think.

jjjust moi said:

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

that politeness ended when you called me a troll, dick…..head…..!

I called you a troll because you made a statement obviously designed to stir PF’s emotions, which is the action of a troll. Just a tip. If you are going to approach a discussion by stirring your protagonist up and then picking apart their less thought out arguments you ought to avoid being stirred yourself.

You really don’t know what a protagonist is do you?

It would appear that you were right though I have now corrected that assumption. Please substitute ‘antagonist’ as nearest accurate supplement………

we know the orbits of a lot of earth orbit crossing ones so if one of these were to pose a problem we would have years to do something. the biggest threat is from new comets coming in from the outer solar system, ones we haven’t the orbital details of.

ChrispenEvan said:

we know the orbits of a lot of earth orbit crossing ones so if one of these were to pose a problem we would have years to do something. the biggest threat is from new comets coming in from the outer solar system, ones we haven’t the orbital details of.

Yes, and currently we have SFA defense.

you can blow stuff up in space. what pwm says is one possibility. we just don’t have anything at the ready to do it. with years we can gently knudge it way out so that by the time it gets to us it has moved considerably.

ChrispenEvan said:

also we wouldn’t be able to do anything. blowing it up wouldn’t change its orbit much and just result in a lot of smaller bits hitting us.

you’d put a large mirror in orbit and concentrate light on one side of it, it would be no different than using a mirror to focus light onto a heat exchanger over the distance of a few inches

I thought I’d explained how the earth could be saved from destruction like this before ?

ChrispenEvan said:

you can blow stuff up in space. what pwm says is one possibility. we just don’t have anything at the ready to do it. with years we can gently knudge it way out so that by the time it gets to us it has moved considerably.

You would have to drill it as per Bruce Willis, was it.

Air burst explosives don’t work because they have nothing to ‘push’ against.

The_observer said:

Postpocelipse said:

The_observer said:

that politeness ended when you called me a troll, dick…..head…..!

I called you a troll because you made a statement obviously designed to stir PF’s emotions, which is the action of a troll. Just a tip. If you are going to approach a discussion by stirring your protagonist up and then picking apart their less thought out arguments you ought to avoid being stirred yourself.

and Post,,, you should learn to keep out of other peoples interactions,,,hey

You don’t seem to appreciate that what I referred to with that phrase was your taking something I directed at PWM personally. I also entered a public discussion on this topic and you took my views personally. You also seemed to make many assumptions regarding my views and practices which I thought to disillusion you of. As long as you direct comments at me, “we” have an interaction open which you are free to rid yourself of simply by apologising and moving on.

easier just to paint one side white.

Air burst explosives don’t work because they have nothing to ‘push’ against.

neither do rockets….

heat on the side of the rock or comet would cause stuff to evaporate off one side and hence over 6 months we’d be ok

oxford university came closest to nicking my idea once before

we’ll have to wait for another uni to nick my idea before we get the real solution

ChrispenEvan said:

easier just to paint one side white.

you’d have to travel there and start painting

a mirror starts pointing light and heat at it at the speed of light

ever used a magnifying glass to concentrate light and heat onto something

it would be exactly the same even though its over great distance AND the aiming would only be out by the time it takes to get back to earth

ChrispenEvan said:

Air burst explosives don’t work because they have nothing to ‘push’ against.

neither do rockets….

To the best of my memory the atomic bomb type things have been written off as a solution.

a mirror wouldn’t work. the divergence of the beam would render it useless. lasers are better but over the distances we’re talking about, useless as well.

wookiemeister said:

ChrispenEvan said:

easier just to paint one side white.

you’d have to travel there and start painting

a mirror starts pointing light and heat at it at the speed of light

ever used a magnifying glass to concentrate light and heat onto something

it would be exactly the same even though its over great distance AND the aiming would only be out by the time it takes to get back to earth

You would need a bloody big mirror if the thing was 500km in diameter.

jjjust moi said:

wookiemeister said:

ChrispenEvan said:

easier just to paint one side white.

you’d have to travel there and start painting

a mirror starts pointing light and heat at it at the speed of light

ever used a magnifying glass to concentrate light and heat onto something

it would be exactly the same even though its over great distance AND the aiming would only be out by the time it takes to get back to earth

You would need a bloody big mirror if the thing was 500km in diameter.

…… or a great many Grecians with polished shields……..

the laser used in the moon ranging experiments is 6.5km wide when it hits the moon. it is going to be bloody huge at a few au

At the Moon’s surface, the beam is about 6.5 kilometers (four miles) wide and scientists liken the task of aiming the beam to using a rifle to hit a moving dime 3 kilometers (approximately two miles) away. The reflected light is too weak to be seen with the human eye: out of 1017 photons aimed at the reflector, only one will be received back on Earth every few seconds, even under good conditions. They can be identified as originating from the laser because the laser is highly monochromatic. This is one of the most precise distance measurements ever made, and is equivalent in accuracy to determining the distance between Los Angeles and New York to .01 inches (0.25 mm). As of 2002 work is progressing on increasing the accuracy of the Earth-Moon measurements to near millimeter accuracy, though the performance of the reflectors continues to degrade with age.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiment

ChrispenEvan said:

the laser used in the moon ranging experiments is 6.5km wide when it hits the moon. it is going to be bloody huge at a few au

Yeah one of the most useful bits of the moon projects, still used extensively by universities.

ChrispenEvan said:

a mirror wouldn’t work. the divergence of the beam would render it useless. lasers are better but over the distances we’re talking about, useless as well.

but you could do something crazy like have a lens used in conjunction with those mirrors to make a focusable beam

jjjust moi said:

wookiemeister said:

ChrispenEvan said:

easier just to paint one side white.

you’d have to travel there and start painting

a mirror starts pointing light and heat at it at the speed of light

ever used a magnifying glass to concentrate light and heat onto something

it would be exactly the same even though its over great distance AND the aiming would only be out by the time it takes to get back to earth

You would need a bloody big mirror if the thing was 500km in diameter.

put your finger in the focus of a magnifying glass in the sun, see how long you can hold it there

lasers are pretty focused already.

believe it or not – light can be focused to a specific place, school science can tell you that

if you know the distance of the object , can you see how easy it would be to come up with a theoretical focus and then watch it strike the object at great distance

the object in question is moving so not only would you have to track it but be able to change the focal length of the mirror.

I’m of the understanding that Bruce Willis is the solution to this particular problem.

Divine Angel said:

I’m of the understanding that Bruce Willis is the solution to this particular problem.

Blowing up Bruce Willis is always the solution.

ChrispenEvan said:

lasers are pretty focused already.

lasers have light that leaves them moving a roughly parallel way, focused light falls onto a particular place unlike laser .

ChrispenEvan said:

lasers are pretty focused already.

lasers have light that leaves them moving a roughly parallel way, focused light falls onto a particular place unlike laser .

The best way to divert an asteroid from a potentially catastrophic collision course with Earth is to deploy a “swarm” of mirror-bearing satellites to focus a beam of sunlight onto its surface, scientists say.

Researchers compared a series of methods for deflecting asteroids such as ramming them, targeting them with nuclear weapons and pulling them off course using the gravity of a nearby spacecraft.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3309297/Mirror-satellites-could-divert-asteroid.html

looks like someone has nicked my idea after all

ChrispenEvan said:

the object in question is moving so not only would you have to track it but be able to change the focal length of the mirror.

like any modern self focusing camera

OCDC said:

Divine Angel said:

I’m of the understanding that Bruce Willis is the solution to this particular problem.

Blowing up Bruce Willis is always the solution.

Blowing up Bruce Willis using Chuck Norris would eliminate some hazards. Throw in Steven Seagal and you could be onto something……

/* the object in question is moving so not only would you have to track it but be able to change the focal length of the mirror. */

The SECRET is in the SPIN!

wookiemeister said:

The best way to divert an asteroid from a potentially catastrophic collision course with Earth is to deploy a “swarm” of mirror-bearing satellites to focus a beam of sunlight onto its surface, scientists say.

Researchers compared a series of methods for deflecting asteroids such as ramming them, targeting them with nuclear weapons and pulling them off course using the gravity of a nearby spacecraft.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3309297/Mirror-satellites-could-divert-asteroid.html

looks like someone has nicked my idea after all

where they went wrong was trying to get all those mirrors to the asteroid itself – very silly

SCIENCE said:

/* the object in question is moving so not only would you have to track it but be able to change the focal length of the mirror. */

The SECRET is in the SPIN!

yes doctor…..

you’d put a large mirror in orbit and concentrate light on one side of it, it would be no different than using a mirror to focus light onto a heat exchanger over the distance of a few inches

one mirror in orbit is not a swarm so no it isn’t the same as your idea.

so now you are using lenses and a mirror?

ChrispenEvan said:

you’d put a large mirror in orbit and concentrate light on one side of it, it would be no different than using a mirror to focus light onto a heat exchanger over the distance of a few inches

one mirror in orbit is not a swarm so no it isn’t the same as your idea.

that’s why I said they nearly got the right end of the stick

give em a few more years then they’ll get it

in management terms an idea can only ever be adopted if the right person has that idea. I’ve been dealing with that all my life

where they went wrong was trying to get all those mirrors to the asteroid itself – very silly

no, this way they just have to match orbit with the asteroid and have the mirrors pointing correctly. no need to trac and no need to refocus all the time.

ChrispenEvan said:

so now you are using lenses and a mirror?

the mirrors are the meat of the contraption, the lenses focus all that energy on to one spot over great distances, its possible.

wookiemeister said:

I’ve been dealing with that all my life

People will think you have a persecution complex you stupid git…

show us your workings then wookie.

then again witty maybe wookie is just a stupid git.

ChrispenEvan said:

where they went wrong was trying to get all those mirrors to the asteroid itself – very silly

no, this way they just have to match orbit with the asteroid and have the mirrors pointing correctly. no need to trac and no need to refocus all the time.

all they have to do is get to it – its a big risk , if the capsule gets destroyed on route or something goes wrong its a problem

orbiting mirrors around the earth, with close comms and being serviced by spacecraft could easily focus light and heat up the asteroid.

the heat / light won’t be absorbed by much of anything over the great distance

Witty Rejoinder said:

wookiemeister said:

I’ve been dealing with that all my life

People will think you have a persecution complex you stupid git…

tips hat

ChrispenEvan said:

show us your workings then wookie.

go and find a science book from a school – its a no brainer

ChrispenEvan said:

show us your workings then wookie.

Postpocelipse said:

ChrispenEvan said:

show us your workings then wookie.

that’s bruce wayne not bruce willis

oh well, readers of this thread can make up their own minds who is the one talking nonesense.

no you show us the workings.

ChrispenEvan said:

oh well, readers of this thread can make up their own minds who is the one talking nonesense.

provided they’ve filled out the appropriate paperwork and allowed themselves to be fondled by the usual suspects……….

at least i got this thread back to some science instead of shit. so i’ll leave it now before it reverts.

ChrispenEvan said:

no you show us the workings.

no you

¿just one?