| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - How nature was destroyed in Asia and Europe
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


How nature was destroyed in Asia and Europe

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 234
Author
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2011 at 01:05
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Biodiversity again, Carcha? You don't have idea what is it and for what is worth. Nature hates diversity. That's what natural selection and evolution is all about: destroying diversity.
 
But still there is an enormous diversity and variation in nature. We are still discovering new species every year in all sorts of environments.
 
Evolution and adaptation also give rise to biodiversity (else we would not have such diversity as we have).
 
If you want to know anything of biodiversity you can read Edward O Wilsons book Biodiversity.


Edited by Carcharodon - 03 Mar 2011 at 01:13
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2011 at 01:15
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

It also increases the number of possibilities of us running into an epidemic disaster like AIDS, which is a good example of an increase in biodiversity. Another one is the use of gene manipulation to increase biodiversity, thereby introducing the possibility of harming food sources. Reducing biodiversity reduces our vulnerability to disease. Not only that it positively feeds us, by allowing us to grow useful plants rather than permit the biosphere to become a wasteland of weeds, as you would like.  

 

Actully it is many times so that a reduced biodiversity and disturbed ecological systems give rise to more diseases and also increases the susceptibility to pests and vermin.

No it isn't. You're just making this stuff up. Otherwise you'd be able to give instances. Give me a case where eliminating a species for instance increased vulnerability to a disease. Every increase in biodiversity puts more strain on the human immune system and increases the possibility of its breakdown. Cases where increasing biodiversity cause tragedy are pretty numerous, including AIDS, the 'Spanish' flu of 1918 and the regular mutations therafter, the changing varieties of plague, whereas decreasing it through the use of antibiotics and antisepsis only save lives.
Quote
A high biodiversity and a rich variety reduces vulnerability in ecological systems and our own vulnerability against unwanted ecological problems.

 

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

There must be an introductory book or two to logical analysis around for you to read also. Try Weldon's Vocabulary of Politics, for instance. Old, but sensible.  

 

We were talking about biodiversity and ecology, just study some books about that so you can learn something. It seems that you just like to discuss for the sake of discussion itself, without knowing anything about the subject at hand.

Bit you are the one who knows nothing about the subject in hand, even on your own side of the argument. If you did you could come up with evidence and examples instead of a continuing string of the empty non-falsifiable metaphysical statements of your creed.
 
You haven't given one single example of how increasing biodiversity helps people: just pointless assertions that it does. In fact it's fairly easy to find examples of it doing so - developing antbiotics for instance: but even there the result of continual development of antibiotics is the increase of resistant varieties of infectious agent.
 
The truth of the matter is that increase or decreasing biodiversity, either of them, can be helpful or harmful or completely irrelevant: everything depends on the specific case at issue. However, ease of control usually benefits from reduction in diversity: as he cyberneticists have it, control systems must have requisite variety to be effective: i.e. as the diversity of what you need to control goes up, so does the difficulty of controlling it.  

 

Quote

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Please study something on the use and abuse of language before you think. And then think before you write. And maybe we could discuss something on a sensible and rational basis instead of one of religious dogmatism.   

 

Well, since it seemed that Penguin did not have any clue about ecology I just encouraged him to study the subject before writing a lot of meaningless rubbish.

Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2011 at 01:19
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

 
Evolution and adaptation also give rise to biodiversity (else we would not have such diversity as we have).
Genetic mutation increases biodiversity. Natural selection decreases it. Evolution depends on both.
 
That the complexity of the organism has increased during history and prehistory does not mean that there is greater diversity of organisms. We don't have any count of types of organism to tell us one way or the other.
 
 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2011 at 01:52

 

Actully it is many times so that a reduced biodiversity and disturbed ecological systems give rise to more diseases and also increases the susceptibility to pests and vermin.

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

No it isn't. You're just making this stuff up. Otherwise you'd be able to give instances. Give me a case where eliminating a species for instance increased vulnerability to a disease.

 

Why do you so stubbornly comment about a topic you know nothing about? Biodiversity is indeed important in protecting us from increased exposure for pathogens and pests.

Reduced biodiversity and disturbed ecological systems give rise to more diseases and also increases the susceptibility to pests and vermin.

Just some introduction:

Plant and animal extinctions are detrimental to your health. That's the conclusion of a paper published in the journal Nature by scientists who studied the link between biodiversity and infectious diseases.

Species loss in ecosystems such as forests and fields results in increases in pathogens, or disease-causing organisms, the researchers found.

Felicia Keesing et al ,2010. "Impacts of biodiversity on the emergence and transmission of infectious diseases". Nature, 2010; 468

 

As species disappear, infectious diseases rise in humans and throughout the animal kingdom, so extinctions directly affect our health and chances for survival as a species.

 

Platt, John, 2010: "Humans are more at risk from diseases as biodiversity disappears." Scientific American dec  2010

 

 

About pests:

 

Pest control is another key ecosystem service underpinned by biodiversity; it is greatly determined by the abundance of natural enemies of the pest species involved. Improved pest control is dependent on a diversity of natural enemies of pests, and non-crop habitats are fundamental for the presence and survival of these biological control agents (predators, parasitoids).

 

With the loss of biodiversity in both natural and agricultural systems comes the loss of other ecosystem services. In addition to food, fibre and water provisioning, regulating services such as air, water and climate regulation, water purification, pollination and pest control, as well as providing resilience against natural hazards and disasters and environmental change, are among the numerous examples of ecosystem services being lost under increasing intensification and expansion of agriculture.

Information From UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme)

Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2011 at 01:52
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

... 
But still there is an enormous diversity and variation in nature. We are still discovering new species every year in all sorts of environments.
 
Evolution and adaptation also give rise to biodiversity (else we would not have such diversity as we have).
 
If you want to know anything of biodiversity you can read Edward O Wilsons book Biodiversity.


Who cares about biodiversity. It seems your objective is to preserve planet earth for animals.
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2011 at 01:56
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

That the complexity of the organism has increased during history and prehistory does not mean that there is greater diversity of organisms. We don't have any count of types of organism to tell us one way or the other. 
 
Seen in a longer perspective diversity has increased (at least to a certain point) because the amount of suitable niches have increased. New organisms and their transformations of the environment (together with different abiotic factors) can lead to new habitats and new ways to exploit them.


Edited by Carcharodon - 03 Mar 2011 at 02:00
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2011 at 05:57
IN regard to that list of quotes, it's pointless just to repeat other people saying the same thing you're saying. Non-falsifiable - metaphysical - statements are non-falsifiable statements no matter how often they are repeated.
 
I don't expect you to believe in the Christian God just because there are loads of Christians around. Why should I believe in your God just because there are many of his followers around recently (it being a nice fashionable 'I'm better than you are' kind of bandwaggon to jump on).
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2011 at 23:09
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

IN regard to that list of quotes, it's pointless just to repeat other people saying the same thing you're saying. Non-falsifiable - metaphysical - statements are non-falsifiable statements no matter how often they are repeated.
 
I don't expect you to believe in the Christian God just because there are loads of Christians around. Why should I believe in your God just because there are many of his followers around recently (it being a nice fashionable 'I'm better than you are' kind of bandwaggon to jump on).
 
Well, its always easy to dismiss research and knowledge from a point of ignorance.
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2011 at 01:21
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

Well, its always easy to dismiss research and knowledge from a point of ignorance.
 
Why is it so difficult for your grasp the fact Carcharadon that in terms of true science, an ecosystem is a descriptive neutral term that has neither an ideal setting nor demands stasis (a concept that contradicts all scientific understandings). For one thing even an elementary grasp of a nebulosity such as Nature demands the recognition that it will always be in some state of flux. Stockholm is as much an ecosystem as the Serengeti Plain, hence your deliriums over speciation within those ambits becomes nonsensical with just a minimal understanding that Nature (your it) is in itself the grand catalyst for extinctions. As I mentioned before, Conservation has little to do with your yammer over obscure insects or even mammals that have "specialized" themselves to a particular environment that on its own will become transformative with respect to climate and planetary happenstances. If one is frankly honest, one has to admit that if there is a consistent theme to Nature such a theme involves accepting that natural processes are in and of their own inimical to such clap-trap as biodiversity. One can not escape the fact that of all the distinct species that have existed through the moments in time of the terrestrial orb, 99% of them are already extinct, most long before Homo ever made an appearance. Would Man be doomed if through his instrumentalities the Norwegian rat disappeared from the scene? I highly doubt so given the fact that this species might be considered a parasite in an urban ecosystem. I surmise that perhaps you are not too fond of Felix domesticus; however, even it "understands" there is no such thing as stasis in Nature and has adapted to as well as manipulated its environment quite adequately so as to achieve survival.


Edited by drgonzaga - 05 Mar 2011 at 00:35
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Mar 2011 at 10:42
Cosign.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 234
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.