Penguin Disaster

[The Magic Pudding..]

Too sad.

A catastrophic die-off of emperor penguin chicks has been observed in the Antarctic, with up to 10,000 young birds estimated to have been killed.

The sea-ice underneath the chicks melted and broke apart before they could develop the waterproof feathers needed to swim in the ocean.

[Asmodean]

Casualties of the changing climate, one must suppose.

[Tank]

Niche environments are always the first effected by climate change.
 

[Asmodean]

Indeed, although some insects have been in a bit of dire straits for a while now.

I suppose generations from now, the world will be quite a different place. Would have loved to see how the biosphere adapts. Alas, being short-lived as humans are... No such luck - or lack thereof.

[billy rubin]

i used to own a lot of books.

a  lot  of  books.

one of them was this

https://www.amazon.com/After-Man-Expanded-40Th-Anniversary/dp/1911081179

[The Magic Pudding..]

Niche environments are always the first effected by climate change.
 

Hmm, an observation almost Marcusian in its insight. [strokes non existent beard emoji]
Some niche environments would be the first effected, others the last or not at all.
Is there such a thing as a non niche environment? some are obviously narrower.

Historically, Antarctic sea ice has extended to about 19 million square kilometers (7 million square miles) in winter and retreated to about 3 million square kilometers (1 million square miles) in summer.

Probably felt like a good solid niche until it turned into a slushy.

[Asmodean]

...Not to mention that one man's slushy is another man's brand new niche.

There is a validity to referring to those environments thusly though. They are "outliers," in a way. A desert may get hotter and drier, and it's still a desert. Now, an oasis, which may be described as a niche environment within the desert - if that dries up, then it's gone. A boreal forest in similar situation may start sprouting more leaves than needles. Probably a benefit for various leaf eaters, but then equally a detriment to something else. Now ice... Ice just melts.

[The Magic Pudding..]

...Not to mention that one man's slushy is another man's brand new niche.

Agreed

There is a validity to referring to those environments thusly though. They are "outliers," in a way. A desert may get hotter and drier, and it's still a desert.

How are we defining, is a desert still an environment if nothing now lives in it?

A boreal forest in similar situation may start sprouting more leaves than needles. Probably a benefit for various leaf eaters, but then equally a detriment to something else. Now ice... Ice just melts.

OK, I can't say a forest just burns, but they do burn.  The new climate, the new more leafy less needly greenery, with new critters, I'd define that as a new niche.  Baby penguins required solid ice and died, baby something elses required something of the old forest and died.

[Tank]

The environment is changing in an evolutionary blink of an eye. If the environment stabilises for a sufficient period of time then selection pressures will shape organisms into that new environment. But that won't stop mass extinctions as it has done on numerous occasions in the past.

[Bluenose]

OK, I can't say a forest just burns, but they do burn. ...

True, especially the dry sclerophyll forests of south-east Aus.  Burning is one of the things they do best...

[Asmodean]

But that won't stop mass extinctions as it has done on numerous occasions in the past.

Point of ambiguity. Are you talking about the five-or-so Great Extinctions that weren't stopped, or other extinctions that were? in the latter case, I'd like to read, watch and/or otherwise cons00m more about it.

I'd define that as a new niche.

Yes, indeed. A new biome, even.

I think an important question that has to be answered before many "mainstream" concerns is, "do we want to stop it. To preserve the existing biomes? Or do we ride the Sixth (7th..? Lost count) Great Extinction to whatever end?"

[The Magic Pudding..]

I think an important question that has to be answered before many "mainstream" concerns is, "do we want to stop it. To preserve the existing biomes? Or do we ride the Sixth (7th..? Lost count) Great Extinction to whatever end?"

`

I'd like to preserve them because I value them, I don't need a super yacht, a a kayak and some nice water with turtles in it is enough.  "Or do we ride" That may be more of an option in Norway, though Canada doesn't seem to be enjoying the ride.  Some waves you don't ride, they just fuck you up.

[Tank]

@Asmo

There have been many mass extinctions which is why the Big 5 are the Big 5. It is often the case that different geological eras are bounded by changes in the fossil record caused by mass extinction. Billy will know the details.

[Asmodean]

@Asmo

There have been many mass extinctions which is why the Big 5 are the Big 5. It is often the case that different geological eras are bounded by changes in the fossil record caused by mass extinction. Billy will know the details.

Yes, I'd be especially interested in prevented mass extinctions, if such are a thing. Maybe how they... Failed to make the Five, I suppose?

I'd like to preserve them because I value them, I don't need a super yacht, a a kayak and some nice water with turtles in it is enough.  "Or do we ride" That may be more of an option in Norway, though Canada doesn't seem to be enjoying the ride.  Some waves you don't ride, they just fuck you up.

That's perfectly valid, although you can ride a wave to your doom just as well as you can to fun and profit, hence my reference "to whatever end," and even then the doom of mankind is a bit of a hyperbolic scenario. Humans are a pretty adaptable lot, if mostly through tech, so it stands to reason that "Day Zero, Year Zero" will still have people in it. What kind of quality of life they'll have and whether or not we should care... You make the argument one way. There are arguments to be made for the others. Hey, maybe it will be like Ark (The video game, not that Christian thing... Although...) with them dinos making a comeback and letting a enterprising The Asmo from the future ride them. Now there's a thought... (Yes, yes, I know - just using hyperbole to illustrate that life did actually thrive on a much hotter Earth back in them good old days and, given enough time to adapt, it may well do so again)

Practically though, "we" don't have much of a chance when it comes to artificially controlling the population increase, so barring some serious wars and famines, that trend will continue until the wars and the famines caused by it. Maybe - probably - even beyond that point. Nor can we stick the greenhouse gas backlog somewhere safe in an economically palatable way, so that's likely out of the picture also. Oh, the six-or-so million Norwegians may try, as may some tens of million Americans, Chinese and so forth... It's not enough and too late besides. Even if we cut our emissions to zero today, we are still on the road to a completely different planet than the one our great-great-grandfathers knew.

Am I proposing that "we" do our best to adapt rather than mitigate..? Perhaps. I honestly don't know. I just don't see doing "anything" as beneficial to other than one's own sense of self-righteousness, and doing "something right..." Now  therein lie the questions, don't they?

[Tank]

List of mass extinctions