I agree Amy. The trouble right now is we have experts in different fields attempting to estimate rates of change, timelines and so forth, based only on data from their own field. I know the opinions of the climatologists are important, but I believe that the findings of biologists, marine biologists, botanists, agricultural people and others have equal value in evaluating these things. Looking at weather data only can only give a partial (and therefor inaccurate) estimate of those things. Your analogy of the canaries in mines is a good one!
We have extinctions at the rate of 3/hour, higher than ever known. We have large scale migrations of entire species. Many times these seem to me to be areas they once inhabited in the distant past. The polar bears are easy enough to understand, others aren't. We have species looked upon as rare, extinct, or even mythical appearing suddenly in new locations. Something drastic to the animals but so far unnoticeable to ourselves is causing this. Look at the Humboldt squid, for example.
Correlating this type of data, with the data on changes in crops, forests, and other flora together with the weather data on a global basis might give us an inkling of what is in store for us.
2007-09-10 05:59:00
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I find its the little guy out in the Field taking water samples .Doing Bio counts taking Bat temperatures and so on. Not Daddy Warbucks. Have you ever heard follow the Money? The money isn't the little guy. You and I can cry ,insist ,debate lead by example, tell the truth till the cows come home. I will hear you and you might hear me. Everyone else is following the Money. You have ask a lot of really good questions .Ask How can we change as a people from Godzilla consumers to Green Peace Flower People. let me know the serous responses.
Do You Cave?
2007-09-10 10:52:52
·
answer #2
·
answered by Carroll 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Of course there are animals we protect that are losing their ability to adapt to the unnatural geographic change. Deforestation, carbon emissions, and poaching are not one hundred percent natural especially at the rate we do them. As well as the fact that now a lot more chemicals go into deforestation and carbon emissions and that just deteriorates the environment more. Almost every animal we're breeding in captivity due to inability to breed into the wild is based on them not being able to survive in what was once their natural habitat.
2016-04-04 00:22:23
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The whole planet is going through changes , possibly as a result of humans interacting with the eco-system in increasing numbers.
2007-09-10 11:50:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Scientist are. But watching and trying to figure out how to fix it are two different things.
We've learned a lot of things to avance, but still haven't had time to figure out the cause and affect. We're learning some things now, like global warming and what caused it, but there's other things that hasn't happened yet.
I hope we've got the time and the intellegence to undo the things we do.
2007-09-10 06:04:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by Amy Beware 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
not a frog in site either here the in heartland of America - and salamander population is down
2007-09-10 05:29:12
·
answer #6
·
answered by dr311 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I see no changes. Every year the birds migrate around the same time to feed at the bird feeder. The bluebirds nest and give birth around the same time every year, and they leave, migrating north every year.
By tracking the birds, you would see no difference in their behavioral patterns
2007-09-10 05:57:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by Dr Jello 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
Are we to presume that there is some one that thinks things NEVER change.
2007-09-10 05:47:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋