[dead]
A third of North America’s birds have vanished
691–700 of 901 posts
Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished
#692[dead]
Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished
#693[dead]
Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished
#694[dead]
Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished
#695[dead]
Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished
#696[dead]
Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished
#697Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I had a quick look through the first half dozen citations on the paper, and it is a lot of stuff like this: “The effects of modern climate change are occurring more quickly in grasslands relative to many other ecosystems (Loarie et al. 2009;” This quote doesn’t really use any of the data/methods of the original paper, it just uses the paper to support the fairly obvious idea that climate change has variable effects…
I was referring to citations of the paper (theoretically if these researchers are citing the paper, then they should be using the ideas, model or data from the paper). Have a look here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/40768520_The_veloci... It has 2172!! citations! And in many(most?) cases these citations are pointless. It’s essentially used to pad out other ‘water is wet’ papers and/or hack researchers inde…
I decided to have a deeper look at this during my lunchbreak. I found a bit of a smoking gun: they claim that "probability distribution function of our temperature-based velocities are consistent with those described previously when uncertainty is accounted for (Supplementary Table 2)" If you look at Supplementary Table 2, it looks like their estimates are in line with existing studies (Malcolm 2002).
If you actually look at the source of this comparison table (Table 2 Malcolm 2002), you will find that their estimates do not align well. E.g. for 0-315m/year they estimate 37.6/90/15 % for mean/lower/upper. The equivalent measure in Malcolm 2002 is 71.1 but has uncertainty of only +/-1.23%! So their model is "consistent" with existing models because 71.15 is within their range of 15-90%. Figure S23 looks even worse.
So essentially they have proposed a model which doesn't really match existing literature and can't really be easily compared or used by others. They explain the differences away with assumptions but don't explain why their assumptions are better/worse. They might have produced a worse model but we don't have any data to tell!
But maybe I'm completely wrong and this paper is super-useful to those in this field. I'd still have to see at least 1 paper actually use their model to be convinced.
Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished
#698Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it might have something to do with feral and outdoor cats killing 1.4-3.7 billion birds per year in the US alone. [1] Individuals can do something here I wager, between education and taking responsibility by spaying and neutering. It’s pretty wild to me that cats aren’t mentioned at all in this article since they’re absolutely massacring wild birds. They’re the leading cause of both bird and small mammal deat…
Side issue but this is why arguments against wind turbines "because they kill birds" are never spoken in good faith. Yes, wind turbines kill birds. Collisions with vehicles kill 1000 times more birds than wind turbines do. Collisions with glass buildings kill 3 times more still. And cats kill 4 times more still [0]. Wind turbine bird deaths are deep in the noise as sources of bird deaths. Yes, we should keep trying t…
Yep and both windmill and glass collisions are an easy fix. I believe it was black stripes on the windmill blades and UV stickers on glass.
Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished
#699Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it might have something to do with feral and outdoor cats killing 1.4-3.7 billion birds per year in the US alone. [1] Individuals can do something here I wager, between education and taking responsibility by spaying and neutering. It’s pretty wild to me that cats aren’t mentioned at all in this article since they’re absolutely massacring wild birds. They’re the leading cause of both bird and small mammal deat…
actually, feral cats are what keep mouse, rat, squirrel and chipmunck populations in check and they are on their way to going extinct with the spay and neuter army out there. They do prey on birds when they can catch them but not at any great rate. You state 10%, that is not a massacre when you factor that cats are birds natural predators. Will you be erradicating eagles and falcons because they too prey on birds? Fe…
Er, cats are not native to North America. The 100M of them are descendants of the cats introduced by the colonists. They are an invasive species. They were never before and are not now part of natures balance in the Americas. So are rats in many places, having hitched rides on boats.
Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished
#700Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they only killed mice that would be a fun fact, but they also kill 20 billion small mammals a year, lol. The point was though that cats are killing all the birds, that they help a few people with a mouse problem is tangential at best to the topic at hand. I can accept that mice are a problem and cats are killing all the birds and small mammals at the same time. It’s kind of like saying DDT is fine actually because…
that they help a few people with a mouse problem is tangenti You like to eat, yes? Because I assure you, without cats, or something to replace them that does what cats do, you and I will starve to death. Farmers don't have cats because they're cute. 3They have them to stop rodents from eating silo, seeds, fields bare. What do you plan to do? Spray death chemicals all over the place, as a replacement? And no, trapping…
> Because I assure you, without cats, or something to replace them that does what cats do, you and I will starve to death.
You could have made the same argument about DDT. You have to acknowledge the problem before you can find a different solution.
With enough determination it’s quite feasible. You know as a Canadian that Alberta is the only place in the Americas without rats. They have a very successful management program. [1]
Cats are an invasive species, so are rats. Alternatives exist, please stop being so defensive. Given this topical counterexample it hardly seems like a case of “cats vs food and hentavirus” since Alberta has no rats, plenty of food and no hentavirus without relying on cats.
> There's no way they're the problem, as a result of this, when we're talking about 1/3 of the birds.
… they kill 10% of birds per year. Times 3 years is just about 1/3. Given it occurred over 50 years I’d say we’ve got us a good candidate. Especially since there is documented evidence of them leading to the extinction of entire species. You can see how the math here is within the ballpark yeah?
[1] https://www.alberta.ca/history-of-rat-control-in-alberta.asp...