Pericles

The points you keep missing:

1. It is not that species haven't become extinct in the past, but the rate of extinction due to human impact on the environment at present.

2. There is no choosing a particular species for survival, when any species is only as vital as the environment which maintains it. This is why frogs are considered "canaries" of environmental health - if they are dying out then an entire eco-system is under threat.

3. I used the word 'specious' in that I found your posts to be more fanciful than serious. Perhaps I have the meaning of the word wrong.

4. Do you understand what is meant by bio-diversity? Have I and others not been clear enough for you?

5. You still haven't answered my question, do we need to take action to protect our remaining resources/environment?

In other words:

Business as Usual?

Yes or NO.

If "no" please justify.

OK, let's try to cut through the smoke and mirrors.

1. TRTL claimed that people cause the extinctions of many animals through logging, pollution and so forth, and that anyone would be dumb to believe otherwise.

2. An example was requested by tragedy in the case of logging.

3. Unless I've missed it, none has been forthcoming.

4. What has come are: insults, attempts to alter the terms (eg. "decline and...", "endangered"), conspiracy theories, assumptions/accusations of vested interests, diversionary questions, difficulties in getting data. That is, variations of the kinds of defenses a 5 year old caught lying would make - "I hate you!", "You hate me!", "No, you broke the vase!" "It's so unfair - you're just out to get me!, "I didn't say I didn't brake the vase! I thought you said..er..the cars!"

5. Please drop the rubbish, provide an example, or acknowledge you haven't.

Let me try to be clear: I am not claiming there haven't been any extinctions due to logging. I am asking for an example to back up the claim that there have been. Contrary to TRTL, I think only the dumb would go through life listening to all and every claim without asking for evidence.

Any response without an example or an ackowledgment will be met with a 'X' from me.

Why is asking for such an example "absolute rubbish" kulu

Thanks Fungo chumley you saved me time trying to summarise as well.

Just for the record, Protagoras says "A page and then some of evidence from experts on the decline and extinction of native species caused by logging". Let's have a closer look.

He/she cites a paper on a study of 6 bird species in northern Jarrah forests as his/her evidence of extiction from logging but in his/her words it talks about changing habitat - not extinction- of 6 bird species. The study is simply a look at a habitat at a certain time. No evidence that the birds are not a pre logging levels some time after the logging. You need to do a bit better than that but nice try.

Then examples of impacts on possums is used from a paper by Burrows but hardly evidence that those species became extinct from logging.

Then the corker is the example of effects of bauxite mining on quokkas on Rottnest Island from a bureacrats report. Please. My request was serious...don't patronise us.

It is a simple request. If you can't back up TLTR's claims that I took to task then simply admit you can't as per Fungochuley's succint summary above instead of wasting our time on attacking me personally.

That's another one of those trick questions, Fractelle.

>>do we need to take action to protect our remaining resources/environment? In other words: Business as Usual? Yes or NO.<<

Much the same structure and intent as "Pericles, have you stopped beating your wife, yes or NO"

Obviously, we should not wantonly destroy the planet upon which we live. That would be stupid. So in the longer term we clearly need to find a more self-sustaining set of methods for energy, food etc.

Though whether we should go about this task in a sane, calm and methodical way, or whether we should rush around in a panic like a bunch of headless chooks seems to be a matter of personal taste. Right at the moment, I'd hazard a guess that there are at least a million people panicking for every one who is actually working on a real solution.

And no, I don't consider a) the Prius b) fluorescent light globes or c) Earth Hour to come under the heading "real solution".

Whatever. But back to the topic, yes, indiscriminate action to "save" every single one of the members of the animal kingdom under the cover-all banner of "we must retain bio-diversity" may make us temporarily warm and fuzzy inside, but strikes me as largely self-indulgent.

Specifically:

>>It is not that species haven't become extinct in the past, but the rate of extinction due to human impact on the environment at present.<<

That doesn't, on its own, strike me as a reason to stop any individual species from dying out.

Also - is it actually true, that we humans have increased the rate of extinction? Surely we're just another historical accident, like that meteor, or a major volcanic eruption.

>>any species is only as vital as the environment which maintains it<<

That's a circular argument. If the environment was different, a different species would be there. Frogs go, snakes come. Dinosaurs die out. Crocodiles survive. Life goes on. For a while.

A learning disorder for the afflicted involves significant impairment of reading accuracy, speed, or comprehension and these slow learners are known for their recurrent unacceptable behavior.

Enter the tragedy of errors and OLO's resident dimwit, fungochumley:

"I hate you!", "You hate me!", "No, you broke the vase!" "It's so unfair - you're just out to get me!, "I didn't say I didn't brake (sic) the vase! I thought you said..er..the cars!"

"as per Fungochuley's (sic) succint (sic) summary." You call that frenzied rave succinct, Tragic? Is that what your berko mutterings were about?

Are the guys in the white coats on call tonight? Bring two straight jackets please.

Rottnest Island is a nature reserve as stated. Comprehend? There has never been any bauxite mining on Rottnest Island. Catch on? The number of quokkas on Rottnest Island were used as a comparison to areas where logging and mining occur - dolt!

Good question you ask Pericles "Have you stopped beating your wife, yes or NO". Me? I haven't even started...yet.

But seriously. You say. "Though whether we should go about this task in a sane, calm and methodical way, or whether we should rush around in a panic...

We need to ask ourselves whether we have TIME to go about the task in a sane??, calm and methodical way. That has been tried since at least the late sixties, early seventies. Results? Negligible if any. The rate of population growth remains at high levels and economic growth (energy and material consumption etc) continues at escalating levels. Ditto biodiversity losses, wild fish stocks collapses and other indicators of increasing environmental stress. Economic and social complexity is also on the increase.

You say... "at least a million people panicking for every one who is actually working on a real solution."

The million people panicking are not for the most part lying around inert, doing nothing. Fractelle, Protagoras, TRTL and others are all doing their bit to educate and activate just by arguing our points on this forum if nothing else. As to panicking, I can't speak for the others but if I were forty years younger I would be panicking.

continued