Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 204 posts

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#71

Post by jsz0 »

mistermann wrote: post #31
erikpukinskis wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mankind is absurdly resilient. We are like rats or cockroaches but a hundred times more adaptable. Billions of people could die. We might lose 99% of species. But human extinction is out of the question. We could live in bubbles of air under the ocean huddled around nuclear reactors if we needed to. Roaches couldn't do that (without our help).

Without a massive population of worker bees, can we maintain the level of technological sophistication we've reached? I suppose governments probably have that fairly well doomsday planned.

> can we maintain the level of technological sophistication we've reached?

Probably not but I doubt we'd regress very much. The world's population of less than 2 billion in the early 20th century was able to produce automobiles, airplanes, radios, etc. With the benefit of all the inventions and knowledge left behind I bet just a billion people could pretty easily maintain at least an early to mid 20th century level of technology. It would be a step backwards for sure but in the context of human progress it would be a minor blip.

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#72

Post by huckyaus »

altstar wrote: post #69
huckyaus wrote: post #60

My cousin Sam[0] runs the environmental side of things at GetUp and is putting a lot of time and effort into raising awareness about the reef. They're currently fundraising[1] for a targeted campaign in 12 Liberal electorates with the aim of encouraging MPs to break their silence and listen to their constituents on the issues surrounding Adani and the GBR. Full disclosure: GetUp is a politically partisan organisation…

Why only Liberal electorates? Queensland government is Labor. Why not target them?

Because the Federal government, not the QLD government, are weighing up a $1bn concessional loan for Adani's Carmichael coal mine. GetUp campaigners clearly feel they can make an impact at the Federal level; it worked during the last election.

That being said, they are equally critical of the QLD government and the corporate entities that are supporting Adani. Have a read of Sam's timeline.

https://twitter.com/samregester/status/849177022085578752

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#73

Post by NamTaf »

nojvek wrote: post #50
jozzas wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The QLD government is doing some good work on water quality - particularly engaging with farmers, reducing pesticide and fertiliser runoffs, and reducing erosion. But it's all underfunded and therefore not coordinated or widespread enough. The federal government has ignored these issues for decades while we've been burning coal for power and digging it up and exporting it to the biggest polluters. It's disgusting, re…

I lived in Australia for 10 years and got a chance to visit great barrier reef multiple times. It's what started my love for water. Its not the same now. If by the time I have kids and they don't get to have the experience of lush underwater life, I will definitely believe we humans are cancer for the planet. Australia is a rich and educated country. If they can't fix the mess they created I don't have much hopes for…

We are a rich and educated country, however our politics is one that promotes extreme toxicity in the major parties towards any 'difficult' issues. Look at how non-committal MPs are about so many issues when interviewed. Never mind how much of a joke parliament is, especially during question time, where it's more important to score petty points against the other side than debate policy. You just have to look at the UK Commons question time footage for a very eye-opening contrast.

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#76

Post by ckastner »

flukus wrote: post #70
ckastner wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just listed two incidents which, on the face of it, support the grandparent's argument.

Being on the right side of a knifes edge event (Toba example) doesn't prove we're resilient, it shows how susceptible we are to forces beyond our control, just as retrospectively guessing a coin toss doesn't mean we can predict the future, that's the anthropic principal at work. The second example shows how susceptible Civilization is. For more examples look at our closest relatives which survived on earth longer tha…

Can you please provide a credible example for such an event.

Regarding your first example, Toba: we have no record of what may or may not have happened to a small population of Neanderthals 75.000 years ago, and your source itself states "Both the link and global winter theories are highly controversial".

Your second example marks the decline of a civilization, but does not even come close to what could be described as an "extinction".

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#77

Post by Baeocystin »

good_vibes wrote: post #57

What can we do? Serious question.

Preserve what we can in aquariums around the world so that we'll have reef seed species available as areas become more habitable again.

Identify areas that are become more hospitable, and work on establishing reefs there.

Expand artificial reef building, to help make up for lost area.

Cut carbon emissions, and work on finding ways to sequester what has already been released.

No one thing will be the fix, but they all have a role to play.

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#78

Post by paulajohnson »

ajmurmann wrote: post #59
erikpukinskis wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need smartphone engineers just repair techs. We already have billions of smartphones, millions of which will last a century with proper care. There are palm pilots that still work today. But also as the world collapses a thousand motivated people could and would relocate a basic computer fab to a safe location. Guaranteed.

There is a great short story with the unfortunate name "The man who came early". It's about a American GI who is stationed at Keflavik during the cold war and somehow gets thrown back in time to the Icelandic saga age. He wants to give people there so kind of technology that's much simpler than a smart phone and it all fails. Even something simple as gun powder doesn't get off the ground. They don't know how to get S…

Also Mark Twain's "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court", which has a similar theme.

Re: Great Barrier Reef at 'terminal stage'

#79

Post by Al-Khwarizmi »

vacri wrote: post #38
catmanjan wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the average Australian cares, at least not enough for it to influence the way they act/vote. Of course if you ask anyone on the street if they are in favor of protecting the reef they'd say yes, but when they see the price tag they would probably lose interest.

It's not so much about the price tag, but more that there are other issues nearer and dearer to their hearts. A strong majority of Australians want gay marriage laws passed, for example, but the two major parties can dodge the issue because other issues are more important to their voters.

Contrary to environmental preservation, a gay marriage law costs nothing. So if a strong majority supports it, why don't they enact it to get a free popularity boost?
Post reply on HN