• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Oct 25, 2017
1,071
Two-thirds of global populations of mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles and fish have been lost on average since 1970, according to a new report from WWF.


The conservation organisation says that environmental destruction - caused by deforestation, unsustainable agriculture and the illegal wildlife trade, is a leading factor in the decline.

Published today, the Living Planet 2020 report is a comprehensive look at the state of our natural world. It tracks how well global wildlife is doing based on information from 125 experts around the world. Almost 21,000 populations of more than 4,000 species were tracked between 1970 and 2016.

Wildlife populations in freshwater habitats, such as lakes and rivers, were found to have suffered the biggest decline with an 84 per cent drop. Overall, global populations of the species tracked were found to have dropped by 68 per cent in just less than half a century.

Pioneering computer modelling included in the report predicts that if we maintain "business as usual" irreversible losses to biodiversity will continue. It could put the ecosystems that we all rely on to live in danger.

"The Living Planet Report 2020 underlines how humanity's increasing destruction of nature is having catastrophic impacts not only on wildlife populations but also on human health and all aspects of our lives," said Marco Lambertini, Director General of WWF.



"We can't ignore the evidence – these serious declines in wildlife species populations are an indicator that nature is unravelling and that our planet is flashing red warning signs of systems failure."

www.euronews.com

Two-thirds of the world’s wildlife has been lost since 1970

WWF has proposed a plan to ‘fundamentally change the way that we deal with the loss of nature’
 

Eblo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,643
Let this be a lesson to any other species that dares to oppose humans, the apex predator.
 

Chivalry

Chicken Chaser
Banned
Nov 22, 2018
3,894
And people are still optimistic about our chances of surviving this century?
 

Mattakuevan

Self requested ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
765
Damn, so logically... Will we effectively see the extinction of almost all species not directly beneficial to us in the next 50? (Or sooner)

The earth is going to look a lot different very soon
 

Musubi

Unshakable Resolve - Prophet of Truth
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
23,611
Jesus.

What can we do?

At this point Im not sure we can do much at all. Climate change is progressing at a very rapid rate. We would need extremely severe action taken immediately to have any chance of curbing the effects. Like in the next 5 years soon. And I don't see that happening myself.
 

Mekanos

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 17, 2018
44,114
considering much of the world is still developing, basically there is nothing we can do but accept the doom that is our species

The developing countries don't do as much damage to the climate as the developed ones though.

We have to build a sustainable society, which is impossible under capitalism where the goal is to expand infinitely.
 

Deleted member 18400

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,585
Does this article mean 2/3's of species have been knocked out or that we literally thinned the number of animals on Earth by 2/3?

Cuz that seems pretty drastic and like something we would have noticed in just our daily lives by now.
 

FliX

Master of the Reality Stone
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
9,863
Metro Detroit
No doubt in my mind.
Does this article mean 2/3's of species have been knocked out or that we literally thinned the number of animals on Earth by 2/3?

Cuz that seems pretty drastic and like something we would have noticed in just our daily lives by now.

I clearly remember when we went on road-trips back when I was younger the front of that car was always filled with splatted insects... Hasn't been the case for many years now... If we want to look we would see the effects in our daily lives too.
 

Frank

Member
Oct 25, 2017
735
giphy.gif
 

Mattakuevan

Self requested ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
765
No doubt in my mind.


I clearly remember when we went on road-trips back when I was younger the front of that car was always filled with splatted insects... Hasn't been the case for many years now... If we want to look we would see the effects in our daily lives too.

Yep, I went on a roadtrip earlier this year (before covid) up the entire west coast. We could count the number of bugs squashed on our windshield on two hands. Its disconcerting
 

Poppy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,268
richmond, va
The developing countries don't do as much damage to the climate as the developed ones though.

We have to build a sustainable society, which is impossible under capitalism where the goal is to expand infinitely.
yeah totally, they will develop into more all consuming capitalist superpowers

basically to turn around now and stomp on progress towards that selfsame goal will just be big hypocrisy that no one would accept
 

Deleted member 18400

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,585
I clearly remember when we went on road-trips back when I was younger the front of that car was always filled with splatted insects... Hasn't been the case for many years now... If we want to look we would see the effects in our daily lives too.

Yeah I guess, I just never hear any hunters or fishers complaining that there are 1/3 the number of animals out there. And I don't feel like I see less squirrels and mice and that sort of thing.

I live in Colorado and go hiking occasionally and it seems like I see just as many animals as ever.

I'm not saying these scientists are lying or anything it just seems like with a drop of that magnitude we would see more evidence of it. 2/3 is a big fucking number.
 

Toxi

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
17,547
The scary part is, this is just looking at vertebrates.

Now consider how many invertebrates are dying off. Especially insects.

Does this article mean 2/3's of species have been knocked out or that we literally thinned the number of animals on Earth by 2/3?

Cuz that seems pretty drastic and like something we would have noticed in just our daily lives by now.
Number of animals. 2/3rds of vertebrate species would be catastrophic. That's a mass extinction event.
 

Deleted member 44129

User requested account closure
Banned
May 29, 2018
7,690
2020: "Two thirds of the wildlife has been lost"
2021: "Trump swears in for second term"
2022: "The ice caps are melting."
2023: "Super-Cancer has become airborne and contagious"
2024: "Where has all the water gone? It was here yesterday. Loads of the stuff."
2025: "Is it just me or is the Sun getting bigger?"
 

WedgeX

Member
Oct 27, 2017
13,166
No doubt in my mind.


I clearly remember when we went on road-trips back when I was younger the front of that car was always filled with splatted insects... Hasn't been the case for many years now... If we want to look we would see the effects in our daily lives too.

Yeah the significantly lower number of insects is so noticeable.
 

Mekanos

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 17, 2018
44,114
Deforestation and overfishing mostly happen in developing regions. I mean from the report South America is the region that has seen the biggest fall in wildlife since 1970s (94%)

I understand that. I was using that poster's post to springboard into something else, the discussion of whether or not we are doomed.
 

Deleted member 18400

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,585
The scary part is, this is just looking at vertebrates.

Now consider how many invertebrates are dying off. Especially insects.


Number of animals. 2/3rds of vertebrate species would be catastrophic. That's a mass extinction event.

Yeah I finished the article and it's hard to believe shit has fallen that much. I guess it's hard to see in our daily lives when you factor in things like ocean fishing and all that. I guess I just never noticed there were so fewer birds these days.
 

Aaronrules380

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
22,427
I understand that. I was using that poster's post to springboard into something else, the discussion of whether or not we are doomed.
Nah, my point is that a lot of the issues of habitat loss are being driven by developing countries (mostly because developed nations have already kind of done the damage in that regard a long time ago)
 

Parch

Member
Nov 6, 2017
7,980
Climate change. Pollution. Habitat destroyed.
Meat eaters are part of the problem but at least there is some attempt to raise and produce meat. It's the people who hunt or fish a species to the point of extinction that bothers me. If all they are doing is taking from nature, they're not helping.
 

DiipuSurotu

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
53,148
Yeah I guess, I just never hear any hunters or fishers complaining that there are 1/3 the number of animals out there. And I don't feel like I see less squirrels and mice and that sort of thing.

I live in Colorado and go hiking occasionally and it seems like I see just as many animals as ever.

I'm not saying these scientists are lying or anything it just seems like with a drop of that magnitude we would see more evidence of it. 2/3 is a big fucking number.
since 1970 though. Young people likely wouldn't notice as much as very old people.
 

Kenai

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,182
Yeah I guess, I just never hear any hunters or fishers complaining that there are 1/3 the number of animals out there. And I don't feel like I see less squirrels and mice and that sort of thing.

I live in Colorado and go hiking occasionally and it seems like I see just as many animals as ever.

I'm not saying these scientists are lying or anything it just seems like with a drop of that magnitude we would see more evidence of it. 2/3 is a big fucking number.

Can't personally verify the number cause can't read it atm, but a lot of loss wouldn't necessarily take place near/in places that have already been urbanized. Think about things like rainforest destruction (home to many, many, many undocumented species), coral reef loss, permafrost melting, and other habitat loss. Even former open fields and woodlands/grasslands that might not have been preserved or turned into a nature reserve or park. Eg when I was in Indiana a ton of wetlands have been paved over in the 20+ years I was there, and they haven't been replaced by anything but urban blight
 

Curler

Member
Oct 26, 2017
15,594
The biggest part of the problem is habitat destruction -- which raising meat is admittedly a major part of.

A part of... but not the only reason. There are A LOT more variables: dams also have destroyed environments downstream, palm oils also destroy entire jungles to plant the trees.... just to name a couple.



It's kind of hard when you say, aren't living in Brasil and don't have a say at what happens with the Amazon :/


I've been talking about it recently, but I recommend watching Our Planet on Netflix. Beautiful BBC-quality footage, but also shows just HOW connected these environments are with the planet, and how things like over fishing can even lead to changes in weather around the world.
 

Toxi

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
17,547
Yeah I finished the article and it's hard to believe shit has fallen that much. I guess it's hard to see in our daily lives when you factor in things like ocean fishing and all that. I guess I just never noticed there were so fewer birds these days.
The most obvious example for me is fireflies. A couple decades ago, I would see hundreds of lights flitting about every summer night. Now? Lucky to see even one.
 

Lausebub

Member
Nov 4, 2017
3,151
The only sensible thing to do seems like not getting kids. There are already enough of us.
 

Landford

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,678
Wildlife around the Chernobyl power plant thrived after the disaster since nobody lives there anymore. Which means human interference is literally worse to the planet than a fucking nuclear meltdown thats not gonna be reversed for thousands of years.

Think about that.
 

KillerMan91

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,354
Nah, my point is that a lot of the issues of habitat loss are being driven by developing countries (mostly because developed nations have already kind of done the damage in that regard a long time ago)

To be fair in some issues we have managed to turn the tide. For example in EU the total forest area has been growing for several decades already. Also local fish populations are more healthy than during the worst times.
 

Curler

Member
Oct 26, 2017
15,594
The most obvious example for me is fireflies. A couple decades ago, I would see hundreds of lights flitting about every summer night. Now? Lucky to see even one.

Bees, butterflies, and even some fish getting smaller (probably all get caught as they were ready to breed) from what I noticed since I was a kid.
 

Deleted member 77016

User requested account closure
Banned
Aug 4, 2020
244
It's kind of mind-boggling to think about the fact we're living through a mass extinction that's on course to beat out the one that killed the dinosaurs.
 

Dehnus

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
1,900
Of course, as the owning class successfully turned the concept of eco friendly... This was bound to happen. We are an awful species. But don't posts guillotine...you might upset a centrist.

Sorry this one just hurt.
 

leder

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,111
To be fair in some issues we have managed to turn the tide. For example in EU the total forest area has been growing for several decades already. Also local fish populations are more healthy than during the worst times.
This is because the EU (and US, other developed countries) have just outsourced the most ecologically damaging industries to developing nations and import the goods.
 

Conal

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
2,868
"not much we can do"

shut the fuck up there are hundreds of things we can do the help the environment, this sort of defeatist rhetoric is really just laziness dressed up as wokeness.