URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Sober Thinking
  HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Catastrophic Climate Change
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 5--------------------------------------------------
       Species Population Biomass effects on the Biosphere
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: March 13, 2022, 6:30 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-191017143841.jpegWelcome<br
       />to the Sober Thinking Forum.
  HTML https://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301014181908.gif
       This is the continuation of the Renewable Revolution Forum
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/index.php,
       with the
       same categories and boards arrangement. In order to provide
       topic thread continuity, this post will be duplicated in
       frequently viewed topic threads along with selected posts from
       that topic
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/climate-change/species-population-biomass-effects-on-the-biosphere/<br
       />at the Renewable Revolution Forum
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/index.php.
       I will
       gradually, as time permits, copy pertinent articles posted
       there, update them, and post them here for your convenience.
       I have no intention of closing the Renewable Revolution Forum
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/index.php,
       so any
       links you have to posts, articles and graphics there are valid
       for the time being. Nevertheless, I advise you to &#129417; copy
       and save any posts, articles and graphics that you wish to
       preserve for posting somewhere else on the internet. I am 75
       years old. As long as my spirit hasn't permanently left my body,
       the Sober Thinking Forum will be kept open.
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418202709.png<br
       />
       Although guests are encouraged to post and become members, this
       forum is mostly a library reference of important historical
       information and timeless articles that you are encouraged to
       pass on, with or without attribution.
       In addition, relevant recent news will be posted almost daily,
       so be sure to &#129488; stop by often.
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250817121424.gif<br
       />
       I have changed the title and the front page background graphic
       for two reasons:
       1. My purpose, nearly a decade ago, of convincing most reality
       based people everywhere that human civilization, in order to
       stop and reverse (i.e getting back to 350 PPM of atmospheric
       Carbon Dioxide is sine qua non) the multiple extinctions causing
       biosphere degradation (i.e. the Sixth Mass Extinction Event now
       upon us), must VERY rapidly transition away from Hydrocarbon
       Energy Sources to Renewable Energy Sources, has been largely
       achieved. I have been one small voice among many that have made
       it clear  that clean energy must be made available to everyone,
       not just the wealthy, if we are to survive Catastrophic Climate
       Change.
       2. Celebrated social theorist and geographer David Harvey asked,
       "Is there a way to capture what (to the detriment of human
       civilization) is going on now"?
       My answer: YES.
       It's the SOCIAL DARWINISM, stupid!
       No matter how much progress we make in cleaning up the
       biosphere, as long as the egocentric, morally bankrupt, empathy
       deficit disordered, Social Darwinist Ideology continues to be
       embraced by TPTB, we do not have a snowball's chance in Hell of
       surviving our Existential Crisis.
       Social Darwinists believe that ethics based principles are
       'limitations pretending to be virtues'. To them, ethics are
       'feel good illusions' that humans invented to pretend our
       species has empathy. To Social Darwinists, empathy is
       irrefutable evidence of inexcusable weakness. To them, all who
       are guided by ethics are deluded fools that should be eliminated
       from the human 'apex predator' gene pool for the "good" of our
       species.
       The ideology of the Social Darwinist is indistinguishable from
       the despicable ideology of NAZI Germany, clearly exemplified in
       their brutally enforced morally bankrupt concentration camp law:
       “Eat your own bread, and if you can, that of your neighbor.”
       Social Darwinism is actually based, not on "survival of the
       fittest", but on fear of tomorrow, a morally bankrupt excuse for
       rejecting altruism and empathy and embracing a selfish greed
       dominated hoarding modus vivendi.
       [center]
       --- Quote ---
       > Every prudent man acts with knowledge, But a fool lays open
       his folly. --  Proverbs 13:16
       --- End Quote ---
       [/center]
       [center]
  HTML https://i.pinimg.com/236x/5d/52/92/5d5292e6d6d45b36832561f6a2b466d3--proverbs--jpg.jpg[/center]
       --- Quote ---
       > "One who fears tomorrow does not offer his bread to others.
       But one who is willing to divide his food with a stranger has
       already shown himself capable of fellowship and faith, the two
       things from which hope is born." -- Primo Levi, author of
       Survival in Auschwitz
       --- End Quote ---
       Social Darwinism is the world view that spawned the profit over
       people and planet neoliberal ideology. Neoliberal intellectuals
       like Friedrich von Hayek, Ludwig von Mises and Milton Friedman
       were all Social Darwinists long before they renamed
       laissez-faire liberalism (that had been thoroughly discredited
       by the Great Depression) with the catchy title of
       "Neoliberalism".
       
       The celebrated social theorist and geographer David Harvey
       explains that neoliberal ideology serves the following
       principle:
       "There shall be no serious challenge to the absolute power of
       money to rule absolutely. And that power is to be exercised with
       one objective: Those possessed of money shall not only be
       privileged to accumulate wealth endlessly at will, but they
       shall have the right to inherit the earth, taking either direct
       or indirect dominion, not only of the land and all the resources
       and productive capacities that reside therein, but also assume
       absolute command, directly or indirectly, over the labor and
       creative capacities of all those others it needs. The rest of
       humanity shall be deemed disposable."
       "In human society, the amount of inequity is directly
       proportional to the amount of iniquity." -- A. G. Gelbert
       Sober Thinking requires that we all recognize the fact that a
       society that is founded on altruism, not the "invisible hand" of
       greed, is not optional if we wish to avoid exctinction.
       Capitalism's "invisible hand" modus operandi is rooted in the
       ideology of Social Darwinism.
       --- Quote ---
       > “Capitalism is the astounding belief, that the most wickedest
       of men, will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest
       good of everyone.” — John Maynard Keynes
       --- End Quote ---
       [center]
  HTML https://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-080814213147.png[/center]
       The main purpose of the Sober Thinking Forum is to convince you,
       regardless of your religious beliefs or lack of them, to soberly
       think about these two quotes, embrace altruism, reject greed,
       and convince as many people as you can that altruism is not
       optional for human society:
       --- Quote ---
       > "Look at our world, our country, our interactions with each
       other……… this is not the mark of a healthy society, and if these
       are the self-appointed leaders of this flaming meteor…..it’s
       time to move on to new ideas and new people. Let’s relegate
       these fools to history. They perpetuate a narrative that it is
       right to behave in a strictly selfish, exploitative manner
       towards all. We simply can’t survive it any longer. Things will
       change because they have to." -- Kathleen Wallace
       --- End Quote ---
       "Technical knowledge of Carrying Capacity will not save us; Only
       a Massive Increase in Caring Capacity will." -- A. G. Gelbert
       [move]
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-221021140122.pnghttps://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-270317142022.pnghttps://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-251117174622.jpeg[/move]
       #Post#: 6--------------------------------------------------
       &#128226; Why Sterilizing the Poorest 50% of Homo Sap Won't
       Solve ANYTHING!
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: March 13, 2022, 6:35 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       October 06, 2015
       [center]Human Population Growth: The Truth About How Human
       Activity Threatens The Conditio Sine Qua Non For Our Survival
       [/center]
       What Is the Greatest Number of Children Born to One Woman?
       As of 2014, the greatest number of children born to one woman
       was 69. Birth records from the 1700s show that the wife of a
       Russian peasant named Feodor Vassilyev gave birth 27 times — to
       four sets of quadruplets, seven sets of triplets and 16 pairs of
       twins. It was reported that 67 of the 69 children survived past
       infancy. Vassilyev’s second wife reportedly gave birth to 18
       children, which would make him the father of 87 children, with
       all but three surviving infancy. It has not been proved that the
       records are true, and some people believe that the numbers might
       be inaccurate.
       More about child birth rates:
       Niger is the country with the most births per woman, at an
       average of 6.16, with more than half of all Nigerian mothers
       giving birth before age 18.
       The greatest number of surviving children born to one woman at
       one time was eight in 2009 in the United States.
       The United Kingdom has the highest rate of childless women older
       than 45, at more than 20%.
       [center]Why Sterilizing the Poorest 50% of Homo Sap Won't Solve
       ANYTHING!  [/center]
       Brainwashed Propaganda Victims and Fossil Fuelers'  REACTION to
       the ABOVE: &#129300;
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-250718211017.gif
       
       The "Human Population Must Be Reduced" Propaganda Myth. Why it
       is a divide and conquer tactic and why it has absolutely no
       basis in scientific fact.
       --- Quote ---
       >
       > "The total biomass of all the ants on Earth is roughly equal
       to the total biomass of all the people on Earth.
       >
       > How can this be?! Ants are so tiny, and we are so big! But
       scientists estimate there are at least 1.5 million ants on the
       planet for every human being. Over 12,000 species of ants are
       known to exist, on every continent except Antarctica. Most live
       in tropical regions. A single acre of Amazon rainforest may
       house 3.5 million ants."
       --- End Quote ---
  HTML http://insects.about.com/od/antsbeeswasps/a/10-cool-facts-about-ants.htm
       The Human biomass is tiny compared with thousands of species
       from insects to spiders to rodents, along with many marine
       creatures.
  HTML http://www.coh2.org/images/Smileys/huhsign.gif
       See for yourself &#129488; the Evidence:
       I will provide for you a couple of links for you to research but
       let me give you a brief introduction to earth's biomass pyramid.
       You have different trophic levels (life forms that eat other
       life forms to survive).
       The lower you are on the pyramid, the more collective mass you
       have as a segment of the biosphere. What does that mean?
       Here's a quote so you can see where I'm going with this:
       --- Quote ---
       > "An ecological pyramid is a graphical representation that
       shows, for a given ecosystem, the relationship between biomass
       or biological productivity and trophic levels.
       >
       > A biomass pyramid shows the amount of biomass at each trophic
       level.
       >
       > A productivity pyramid shows the production or turn-over in
       biomass at each trophic level.
       >
       > An ecological pyramid provides a snapshot in time of an
       ecological community.
       >
       > The bottom of the pyramid represents the primary producers
       (autotrophs). The primary producers take energy from the
       environment in the form of sunlight or inorganic chemicals and
       use it to create energy-rich molecules such as carbohydrates.
       This mechanism is called primary production. The pyramid then
       proceeds through the various trophic levels to the apex
       predators at the top.
       >
       > When energy is transferred from one trophic level to the next,
       typically only ten percent is used to build new biomass. The
       remaining ninety percent goes to metabolic processes or is
       dissipated as heat. This energy loss means that productivity
       pyramids are never inverted, and generally limits food chains to
       about six levels. However, in oceans, biomass pyramids can be
       wholly or partially inverted, with more biomass at higher
       levels."
       >
       >
       [img]
  HTML http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Ecological_pyramid.svg[/img]
       >
       --- End Quote ---
  HTML http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomass_(ecology)
       Take insects as one example of the Laws of Thermodynamics as
       applied to life forms in the Biosphere trophic (food chain)
       pyramids.
       In order for insects to BE food for spiders as well as many
       other creatures, the biomass of insects has to be much, much
       greater because of the heat energy losses in transferring energy
       from the insect to the spider (about 90% is lost in heat). The
       predators (that's what we are, by the way) are at the top of the
       pyramid and have the least total biomass of all the life forms.
       Lions, tigers, sharks, whales, bears, wolves, etc. have a tiny
       planetary biosphere biomass in comparison with ants, earthworms,
       rodents, and krill (those tiny shrimp like creatures that whales
       eat). And the krill eat tiny nearly microscopic phytoplankton
       (that has more biomass than the ubiquitous krill).
       Mollusks, as well as ants and several thousand other species
       have a larger biomass than humans. I bring up the mollusks
       because they have a HUGE biomass. I studied them in depth in
       college Zoology.
       The phylum Mollusca:
       --- Quote ---
       > "The phylum Mollusca is the second most diverse phylum after
       Arthropoda with over 110,000 described species. Mollusks may be
       primitively segmented, but all but the monoplacophorans
       characteristically lack segmentation and have bodies that are to
       some degree spirally twisted (e.g. torsion).
       >
       > The Phylum Mollusca consist of 8 classes:
       >
       > 1. the Monoplacophora discovered in 1977;
       > 2. the worm-like Aplacophora or solenogasters of the deep sea;
       > 3. the also worm-like Caudofoveata;
       > 4. the Polyplacophora, or chitons;
       > 5. the Pelecypoda or bivalves;
       > 6. the Gastropoda or snails;
       > 7. the Scaphopoda, or tusk shells; and
       > 8. the Cephalopoda that include among others squid and the
       octopus."
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Agelbert Note: The biomass pyramid in the oceans in regard to
       mollusks and fish is NOT inverted. The oceanic "confusion" is
       due to the fact that some mollusks are apex predators like giant
       squid and the smaller mollusk predators like Octopodes that eat
       fish. Most mollusks are small to very small and are food for
       fish. They are the ones (bivalves near Fukushima) that
       concentrate radionuclides in their tissues that then get in the
       fish that eat them.  :( :P
       The smaller mollusks (most of them are less than a foot long)
       are FOOD for fish. That means there HAS TO BE much more of them
       than there are fish. And I'm sure you don't believe the human
       biomass is greater than that of all the fish species, right?  ;D
       .
       Now for some biomass weights:
       Human population = 335,000,000,000 kg.
       --- Quote ---
       > "Human population = 335,000,000,000 kg. This figure is based
       on an average human weight of more than 100lbs, though (50kg, to
       be exact).  I don't know how accurate this estimate is,
       especially considering that about 1/3 of us are children.  There
       are supposedly around 1.3 billion cattle in the world, and, put
       together, they may weigh almost twice as much as our species."
       >
       > Antarctic krill, [I]Euphausia superba[/I] =  379,000,000,000
       kg.
       > There are more ants than krill. Also, metabolism plays a role
       along with biomass. A "million ruby-throated hummingbirds will
       consume much more food than one African Elephant, even though
       both have about the same biomass (3,000kg, or 3.3 US tons).
       >
       > Thus, ants, as a group, may actually consume more resources
       per year than antarctic krill, even though both may have roughly
       the same biomass, because ants tend to be smaller, and live in
       warmer environments. Although there may be about 10-15 times the
       biomass of termites than cows in the world, studies have
       suggested that termites might produce almost 30,000 times as
       much methane per year because of their faster metabolism."
       >
       --- End Quote ---
  HTML http://www.antweb.org/antblog/2010/10/do-ants-really-have-the-largest-biomass-of-all-species-on-earth-laurie-usa.html
       [b]So how come nobody is hollering about reducing the termite
       population?[/b]
  HTML https://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png<br
       />
       As the article in the quotes above points out, humans are a huge
       problem, not because of our biomass, but because of our carbon
       footprint (I.E. the use of fossil fuels!).   And guess what
       portion of our population does over 80% of the Fossil Fuel
       consumption? You guessed it! The upper 20%!
       Who Done it?
  HTML http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2013/10/one-percents-planetary-assets-equals-80-responsibility-for-funding-a-100-renewable-energy-world<br
       />
       [center]
  HTML https://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-260214201233.png[/center]
       The Global Compact: 20% using 80% of the Resources
  HTML http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/other/DTIx0601xPA/docs/en/Module2%20-%20Session1.ppt
       To ACTUALLY address, confront and STOP the biosphere damage that
       Homo Sap is doing, we must face the scientifically confirmed
       REALITY that  if you get rid of the bottom 50% of the human
       population (the most poor among us) you will, I'm sorry to say,
       not even dent the pollution and biosphere destruction.
       AS pointed out in the biomass numbers, the amount of people
       eating and defecating is not the problem, CARBON FOOTPRINT is
       the threat to a viable biosphere. We must attack that problem by
       reducing the carbon footprint of the most powerful people on
       this planet.
       NOTHING ELSE WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM. The solution, in addition
       to a 100% transition to Renewable energy, involves eliminating
       corporate energy welfare queen subsidies for both fossil fuels
       and nuclear poison.
       Democracy and a viable biosphere requires it from all of us.
       The "let's reduce the human population"
  HTML https://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-141113183729.png<br
       />baloney  is a divide and conquer tactic to avoid billing the
       top
       &#128061; human pigs for the damage they do while attempting to
       give the rest of us a totally unwarranted with ZERO empirical
       basis ( but VERY clever
  HTML http://drphilyerboots.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/cherry-picking.jpghttp://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9HT4xZyDmh4/TOHhxzA0wLI/AAAAAAAAEUk/oeHDS2cfxWQ/s200/Smiley_Angel_Wings_Halo.jpg<br
       />
  HTML https://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png<br
       />) guilt trip.  It's a lie. Don't buy it.
       What we need to do is transition to 100% renewable energy as
       soon as possible. That will give our future generations a chance
       to live in a viable biosphere.
       If you agree please pass it on. Also, feel free to visit my
       forum and post on any subject you wish. Thank you.
       Renewable revolution
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/index.php?action=forum<br
       />
       [center]
  HTML https://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-160614020633.gif[/center]
       #Post#: 7--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Species Population Biomass effects on the Biosphere
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: March 13, 2022, 6:38 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]The predator survives – but the ecosystem
       crashes[/center]
       Date:October 6, 2015  Source: Linköping Universitet
       The killer whales' main prey used to be newborn whale calves.
       When whale populations fell dramatically due to intensive
       hunting, they began to hunt seal instead. Then when the seal
       population was quickly eradicated, the killer whales moved on to
       sea otters. This reduced the pressure on sea urchins, the
       preferred diet of the sea otters. As a result, the sea urchins
       grazed down the kelp beds that have served as nurseries for many
       different fish species and small marine animals.  :(
       What do killer whales, polar bears and humans have in common?
       They are adaptable predators with the ability to select new prey
       when their favourite food is in low supply. But this change can
       disrupt entire ecosystems.
       "If the predator is efficient at killing its prey, such a change
       can lead to negative effects in the long term, for the entire
       food web, even if in the short term it benefits the predator's
       survival," says David Gilljam, doctoral student in theoretical
       biology, who joined with Professor Bo Ebenman and PhD Alva
       Curtsdotter to publish a new model-based study in Nature
       Communications.
       By working with both natural and computer-generated food webs,
       the researchers can show how the overexploitation of resources
       caused by predators changing their prey can, in the worst case,
       lead to an extinction cascade, where species after species is
       wiped out in a domino effect.
       A dramatic example of this is the killer whale, whose main prey
       was newborn whale calves. When whale populations fell
       dramatically due to intensive hunting, they began to hunt seal
       instead. Then when the seal population was quickly eradicated,
       the killer whales moved on to sea otters. This reduced the
       pressure on sea urchins, the preferred diet of the sea otters.
       As a result, the sea urchins grazed down the kelp beds that have
       served as nurseries for many different fish species and small
       marine animals.
       "Think of a rope that's made of a number of twisted fibres. When
       force is applied to the rope, the force is spread across all the
       fibres. If one fibre breaks, the remaining fibres take all the
       force, with more force on each individual fibre. If more break,
       eventually the whole rope will fail," says Prof Ebenman.
       [center]A few examples from the real world:[/center]
       •As the ice in the Arctic melts, it gets more and more difficult
       for the polar bears to hunt seal -- their natural prey. Instead
       they have started to venture onto the land, to feed on the eggs
       and young of ground-nesting birds, which are already the prey of
       other predators such as arctic foxes. The risk is that the
       predatory pressure on these birds will be too great.
       •West-African fishermen are abandoning their fishing grounds in
       times of poor supply -- which is caused by industrial-scale
       fishing. Instead they are hunting on nature reserves, which
       leads to drastic reductions to the populations of prey animals
       there. Humans are an extremely flexible, efficient predator, who
       have massive impact on ecosystems.
       The theoretical simulations presented by the LiU biologists
       completely contradict what we previously believed took place,
       when a predator loses its favourite prey.
       --- Quote ---
       >
       > "The belief was that an extinction cascade would be avoided if
       the predator is adaptable and can shift to another prey. Our new
       results indicate that the opposite can occur, and the
       consequences can be even worse. A change in prey is a
       double-edged sword -- in the short term it can help a flexible
       predator survive, but long term it can negatively affect the
       entire existence of the food web," says Prof Ebenman.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Story Source:
       The above post is reprinted from materials provided by Linköping
       Universitet. Note: Materials may be edited for content and
       length.
       
       Journal Reference:
       1.David Gilljam, Alva Curtsdotter, Bo Ebenman. Adaptive rewiring
       aggravates the effects of species loss in ecosystems. Nature
       Communications, 2015; 6: 8412 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9412
       #Post#: 8--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Species Population Biomass effects on the Biosphere
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: March 13, 2022, 6:40 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [move]Ninety percent of predatory fish gone from Caribbean coral
       reefs due to overfishing[/move]
       March 1, 2017
       Researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
       have found that up to 90 percent of predatory fish are gone from
       Caribbean coral reefs, straining the ocean ecosystem and coastal
       economy. The good news? They identified reefs, known as
       supersites, which can support large numbers of predator fishes
       that if reintroduced, can help restore the environmental and
       economic setback inflicted by overfishing.
       The work, led by former UNC-Chapel Hill graduate student Abel
       Valdivia working with John Bruno, a marine biologist at UNC
       College of Arts & Sciences, suggests that these supersites -
       reefs with many nooks and crannies on its surface that act as
       hiding places for prey (and attract predators) - should be
       prioritized for protection and could serve as regional models
       showcasing the value of biodiversity for tourism and other uses.
       Other features that make a supersite are amount of available
       food, size of reef and proximity to mangroves.
       "On land, a supersite would be a national park like Yellowstone,
       which naturally supports an abundance of varied wildlife and has
       been protected by the federal government," said Bruno, whose
       work appears in the March 1 issue of Science Advances.
       The team surveyed 39 reefs across the Bahamas, Cuba, Florida,
       Mexico and Belize, both inside and outside marine reserves, to
       determine how much fish had been lost by comparing fish biomass
       on pristine sites to fish biomass on a typical reef. They
       estimated the biomass in each location and found that 90 percent
       of predatory fish were gone due to overfishing.
       [center]
  HTML https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/newman/gfx/news/hires/2017/1-ninetypercen.png[/center]
       [center]An illustration of the relative fish biomass on reefs
       varying in fishing intensity and natural capacity to support
       large predatory fishes. Credit: Adi Khen [/center]
       What they didn't expect to find was a ray of hope—a small number
       of reef locations that if protected could substantially
       contribute to the recovery of predatory fish populations and
       help restore depleted species.
       "Some features have a surprisingly large effect on how many
       predators a reef can support," said Courtney Ellen Cox, a
       coauthor and former UNC-Chapel Hill doctoral student now at the
       National Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C. For
       example, researchers believe that the Columbia Reef within the
       fisheries closures of Cozumel, Mexico, could support an average
       10 times the current level of predatory fish if protected.
       Not long ago, large fishes were plentiful on coral reefs, but
       are now largely absent due to targeted fishing. Today, predators
       are larger and more abundant within the marine reserves than on
       unprotected, overfished reefs. But even some of the marine
       reserves have seen striking declines, largely due to lack of
       enforcement of fishing regulations.
       The bottom line is protection of predatory fish is a win-win
       from both an environmental and an economical perspective,
       explained Bruno.
       "A live shark is worth over a million dollars in tourism revenue
       over its lifespan because sharks live for decades and thousands
       of people will travel and dive just to see them up close," said
       Valdivia, now at the Center for Biological Diversity in Oakland,
       Calif. "There is a massive economic incentive to restore and
       protect sharks and other top predators on coral reefs."
  HTML https://phys.org/news/2017-03-percent-predatory-fish-caribbean-coral.html#jCp
       Agelbert NOTE: The Climate change Elephant in the room of the
       above study is the FACT that Ocean Acidification is destroying
       the reefs! So, that "ray of hope" for the "supersites" is
       contingent on STOPPING the burning of fossil fuels. Do YOU see
       that happening any time soon? Certainly NOT with fossil fuel
       TOOLS like Trump, Pruitt, Tillerson, etc. et al in charge of US
       energy policy.
       [move]Tomorrow is Yesterday...[/move]
       [center]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-210316151047.png[/center]
       #Post#: 9--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Species Population Biomass effects on the Biosphere
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: March 13, 2022, 6:53 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-030317114213.jpeg[/center]
       [center]Threatened species in the biosphere[/center]
       [center]
  HTML http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2016/160823/ncomms12558/images_article/ncomms12558-f1.jpg[/center]
       "Wealthy countries have a much higher per-capita footprint, so
       each person there is consuming a lot more than those in poorer
       nations."
  HTML http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TzWpwHzCvCI/T_sBEnhCCpI/AAAAAAAAME8/IsLpuU8HYxc/s1600/nooo-way-smiley.gif
       What these scientists are ERRONEOUSLY doing is ASSUMING the SAME
       AGENCY (i.e. biosphere damaging ability) to each and every human
       that is alive. That is TYPICAL broad brush fragmentation of
       agency (i.e. share of responsibility for the damage) that
       absolves the major polluters of the massive pollution they are
       responsible for.
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714183337.bmp
       The biosphere math facts clearly state that less than 17% of the
       human population, MOSTLY concentrated in wealthy countries, is
       DOING over 80% of the damage by consuming over 80% of the
       resources. Only about half (or less) of the MILITARY budgets
       alone of the wealthy countries could pay for bio-remediating the
       most impacted areas, stop the exploitation and care for and
       educate the high population growth poor there so they become
       good stewards instead of biosphere destroyers.
       Since, according to the U.N., the richest 20% of the world's
       population uses 80% of the resources, the 'Fragmentation of
       Agency' pie chart for the damage done to the biosphere should
       look like this:
       [center]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-240915212016.jpeg[/center]
       The fossil fuel industry, and almost half of the world’s 100
       largest companies, want that 'Fragmentation of Agency' pie chart
       to look like is as follows:
       [center]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-240915212425.png[/center]
       The REAL bottom line is that less than 17% of the human
       population is an existential threat to the ALL of the human
       population AND a large part of macroscopic species in the
       biosphere.
       [center]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-140515152155.png[/center]
       --- Quote ---
       > "Capitalist ideology claims that the world is perfectly
       ordered and everybody is in their place (i..e. everybody gets
       what they deserve). This self legitmating aspect of Capitalism
       is Socially Catastrophic. This is the Victorian view of the
       world." Rob Urie - Author " Zen Economics"
       --- End Quote ---
       #Post#: 10--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Species Population Biomass effects on the Biosphere
   DIR By: AGelbert
       Date: March 13, 2022, 6:55 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML https://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/mistyfjords_LeePrince_shutterstock_0.jpg
       [center]Mist hangs over the Tongass temperate rain forest in
       Alaska. The Bush administration
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013200859.png<br
       />tried to undermine the Roadless Rule by exempting the Tongass
       National Forest from the rule. LEEPRINCE / SHUTTERSTOCK[/center]
       [center]EARTHJUSTICE
  HTML http://www.pic4ever.com/images/earthhug.gifWINS
       16-YEAR-LONG
       BATTLE TO PROTECT 50 MILLION ACRES OF FORESTS
  HTML https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ad7348746accf6d16849add7323f1955a0eaecaa5bec53a13fda2698463f8d3b.gif[/center]
       By Jessica A. Knoblauch | Thursday, September 28, 2017
       [img
       width=640]
  HTML https://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/styles/image_800x600/public/141110Tom_Waldo34_0.jpg?itok=XMhrxtsZ[/img]
       [center]Tom Waldo, one of the legal architects of Earthjustice's
       Roadless Rule strategy, walks through a field of fireweed near
       Juneau, Alaska. MICHAEL PENN FOR EARTHJUSTICE[/center]
       SNIPPET:
       A decades-long fight over a landmark rule protecting wild
       forests nationwide took another successful–and possibly
       final–turn last week after a U.S. district court threw out a
       last-ditch attack by the state of Alaska against the Roadless
       Rule.
       Adopted in the closing days of the Clinton administration, the
       Roadless Rule prohibits most logging and road construction in
       roadless areas of national forests. These lands, today equaling
       about 50 million acres or about the size of Nebraska, are some
       of the wildest places left in America.
       Upon its passage, the rule was overwhelmingly popular with the
       American people, including those who like to hike, camp, fish
       and recreate among the trees in wild, unmarred areas. The Forest
       Service also liked the rule, since, at the time, the agency had
       a multibillion-dollar backlog on maintenance for more than
       400,000 miles of existing roads, and it wasn’t eager to add even
       more to its workload.
       Yet, despite its popularity, state political leaders with ties
       to the logging and timber industries hated the new rule. Even
       before President Clinton left office, they began their attack.
       The Bush administration
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013200859.png,<br
       />which took office just eight days later, failed to come to the
       rule’s defense.
       “It created this vacuum,” says Earthjustice attorney Tom Waldo,
       one of the legal architects of the organization’s Roadless Rule
       strategy. “So Earthjustice stepped in.”
  HTML https://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/Blue%20Ridge%20Mountains_roadless_MarkVanDyke.jpg
       [center]A roadless area in the North Carolina National Forest.
       MARK VAN DYKE[/center]
       Full story:
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818184310-1635923.gif<br
       />
  HTML https://earthjustice.org/blog/2017-september/earthjustice-wins-16-year-long-battle-to-protect-forests-the-size-of-nebraska
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1