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

Bird populations declining fast across North America

emagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 322 posts

Re: Bird populations declining fast across North America

#241

Post by arbitrary_name »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #238
carbonguy wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is probably that, if you believe the biosphere is in crisis NOW, then waiting hundreds of years for human populations to decline is not a solution. There's an odd disconnect in the comments you've been making where you identify this problem of overpopulation, but seem extremely reticent to describe what you think should be done about this problem you've identified. Maybe I've missed it, and I plan to contin…

> The point is probably that, if you believe the biosphere is in crisis NOW, then waiting hundreds of years for human populations to decline is not a solution. I didn't say that waiting for western countries to decline to 5% of their populations was solution. Hope that cleared things up for you. > There's an odd disconnect in the comments you've been making where you identify this problem of overpopulation, but seem…

Hey, i just want to say i really deeply agree with you, and appreciate the time you are taking to share your views.

Re: Bird populations declining fast across North America

#242

Post by throwawaylinux »

benatkin wrote: post #222
throwawaylinux wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This illustrates why it's a terrible shame that the overpopulation topic has effectively been silenced and demonized in science conservationism and environmentalism. I frequently get people becoming wildly irrational and upset at me when I suggest that the current population is not supported by the earth sustainably, let alone a much larger one. They'll angrily insist that the earth's "carrying capacity" is 20, 50, 1…

> I frequently get people becoming wildly irrational and upset at me when I suggest that the current population is not supported by the earth sustainably Irrationality is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Exhibit A

Re: Bird populations declining fast across North America

#243

Post by drran »

digitaltrees wrote: post #122
cmurf wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And make outdoor cats illegal. An unpopular opinion no doubt. But from nature photographers to veterinarians, the outdoor cat is not good for anyone, including the cat.

Our door cats have existed for millennia. Pesticides have not. I don’t think outdoor cats are the problem. Pesticides have killed most of the bug biomass in the last several decades and now birds are being affected.

I cannot understand why DDT is forbidden, but 10000x more powerful insecticides are not forbidden. WTF? Birds are dropping from the sky in Spring, because they have nothing to eat, because bugs are gone while seeds are not ready yet.

Also, air pollution makes them weak. Birds are much more sensitive to air pollution and CO2 level, because they breathe at much higher rate while they have much lower mass than land animals.

Re: Bird populations declining fast across North America

#244

Post by ca01an »

cmurf wrote: post #113
karaterobot wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree with this. According to this article, birds aren't dying off because people choose the almighty dollar, they're dying because they smash into windows or are hunted by cats. The solution isn't to examine our relationship to abstractions versus reality, it's to put a screen on the window so the bird will notice it in time.

And make outdoor cats illegal. An unpopular opinion no doubt. But from nature photographers to veterinarians, the outdoor cat is not good for anyone, including the cat.

Not sure what it is like in the US, but in the UK, the RSPB doesn't seem to think cats are a major cause of bird population decline https://www.rspb.org.uk/birds-and-wildlife/advice/gardening-...

Re: Bird populations declining fast across North America

#245

Post by momenti »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #174
photochemsyn wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what the original paper says. This is why you want to read the actual scientific paper and not the article about it. The researchers, in the article's text, state: > "Steep declines in North American birds parallel patterns of avian declines emerging globally (14, 15, 22, 24). In particular, depletion of native grassland bird populations in North America, driven by habitat loss and more toxic pesticide use…

This illustrates why it's a terrible shame that the overpopulation topic has effectively been silenced and demonized in science conservationism and environmentalism. I frequently get people becoming wildly irrational and upset at me when I suggest that the current population is not supported by the earth sustainably, let alone a much larger one. They'll angrily insist that the earth's "carrying capacity" is 20, 50, 1…

You are not the first "genius" realizing this. Look up Ted Kaczynski. But he was smarter than you because he considered what this reality entails for the ruling classes: Namely the decision whether they shouldn't give up on maintaining the masses once technologically feasible. It is for this reason that it is a taboo and has to remain one. Everything else is propaganda and chatter.

Re: Bird populations declining fast across North America

#246

Post by throwawaylinux »

momenti wrote: post #245
throwawaylinux wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This illustrates why it's a terrible shame that the overpopulation topic has effectively been silenced and demonized in science conservationism and environmentalism. I frequently get people becoming wildly irrational and upset at me when I suggest that the current population is not supported by the earth sustainably, let alone a much larger one. They'll angrily insist that the earth's "carrying capacity" is 20, 50, 1…

You are not the first "genius" realizing this. Look up Ted Kaczynski. But he was smarter than you because he considered what this reality entails for the ruling classes: Namely the decision whether they shouldn't give up on maintaining the masses once technologically feasible. It is for this reason that it is a taboo and has to remain one. Everything else is propaganda and chatter.

> You are not the first "genius" realizing this.

Found another one.

Re: Bird populations declining fast across North America

#247

Post by hunterb123 »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #69
hunterb123 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alright, can we get numbers going then, let's work through this. That's the most substantive response yet, let's source it and drill down solutions for each. Windmills are the most recent change I can think of to explain this trend. Cats, cars, and pollution have been killing birds, but maybe it's ramped up.

…it’s a 50 year trend

Pollution, windows, and cats appeared in 1971?

1975 is when the first commercial wind farm went up, maybe you got something :p

If it was all pollution we'd see improvements as we decrease emissions. (we have been since 2005)

Re: Bird populations declining fast across North America

#248

Post by idiocrat »

OtomotO wrote: post #230
throwawaylinux wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This illustrates why it's a terrible shame that the overpopulation topic has effectively been silenced and demonized in science conservationism and environmentalism. I frequently get people becoming wildly irrational and upset at me when I suggest that the current population is not supported by the earth sustainably, let alone a much larger one. They'll angrily insist that the earth's "carrying capacity" is 20, 50, 1…

Antinatalism is a thing, yes. You're not alone and it doesn't matter if something is popular. Apart from the adoption rate (no pun intended)

Please be aware there is also the "The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement". https://www.vhemt.org/

It is led by Les Knight.

Here is quick explanation, from their site:

''' VHEMT (pronounced vehement) is a movement not an organization. It’s a movement advanced by people who care about life on planet Earth. We’re not just a bunch of misanthropes and anti-social, Malthusian misfits, taking morbid delight whenever disaster strikes humans. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Voluntary human extinction is the humanitarian alternative to human disasters.

We don’t carry on about how the human race has shown itself to be a greedy, amoral parasite on the once-healthy face of this planet. That type of negativity offers no solution to the inexorable horrors which human activity is causing.

Rather, The Movement presents an encouraging alternative to the callous exploitation and wholesale destruction of Earth’s ecology.

As VHEMT Volunteers know, the hopeful alternative to the extinction of millions of species of plants and animals is the voluntary extinction of one species: Homo sapiens... us. '''

I certainly like the promotional video, "Thank You For Not Breeding".

http://vimeo.com/7652051

Re: Bird populations declining fast across North America

#249

Post by Gravityloss »

There's the concept of cultural landscape. It's not wild nature, but it's not industrialized farming either.

There is agriculture, but wild animals can live alongside and even within it. For example there are hedges alongside fields where birds can make nests. There is no toxin accumulation in predators because pesticides or herbicides are not used.

Farm animals can graze outside. There is a whole ecosystem around that with birds eating flies etc. There is no massive eutrophication because synthetic fertilizers are not used. It's kind of a steady state. Everything is designed so it can be run for centuries.

It's of course way more expensive and laborious to farm like this than industrial farming. But maybe technology like robotics could advance sufficiently that we could go back towards more like this. Of course not exactly the same, but taking some ideas.

Weeds could be zapped with lasers. Smaller tractors can be autonomous. Synthetic fertilizers could be used but injected underground so they don't run off or evaporate / create N2O. Etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_landscape

Re: Bird populations declining fast across North America

#250

Post by AussieWog93 »

jwmhjwmh wrote: post #81
selestify wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But isn't the problem that these abstractions exist precisely to help coordinate real things? The economy (and by extension, to a limited degree, the stock market) directly influences a lot of real things and basic needs.

Yes. However, using modern computing and communication technology, it would be possible to run a complex economy with calculations "in-kind". That is, most calculation could be done using the inputs and outputs of millions of processes. Such an economy could avoid the instability of our current economy with its cyclical booms and busts.

>Such an economy could avoid the instability of our current economy with its cyclical booms and busts.

From what I understand (not an economist, but quoting what I've heard from them), much of the boom-bust cycle can be dampened by limiting debt.

Post reply on HN