"Half The Forms Of Life On Earth Will Be Gone By 2050" Biologist Warns Of "Climate Instability"

Tyler Durden's picture

Humanity should start saving nature and switch to 80 percent renewables by 2030, otherwise the Earth will keep losing species, and within 33 years around 800,000 forms of life will be gone, conservation biologist Reese Halter told RT’s News with Ed.

Humans have changed the Earth so much that some scientists think we have entered a new geological age.

According to a report in the Science Magazine, the Earth is now in the anthropocene epoch. Millions of years from now our impact on Earth will be found in rocks just like we see fossils of plants and animals which lived years ago – except this time scientists of the future will find radioactive elements from nuclear bombs and fossilized plastic.

RT: Tell us about this new age.

Reese Halter: Yes. There are three things that come to mind.

First of all, imagine you’re back on the football field. Each year in America - America alone - we throw away the equivalent of one football field, a 100 miles deep. That is the first thing.

 

The second thing, we’ve entered the age of climate instability. That means from burning subsidized climate altering fossil fuels our food security is in jeopardy.

 

The third thing that is striking is we’re losing species a thousand times faster than in the last 65 million years. At this rate within 33 years, by midcentury – that means 800,000 forms of life, or half of everything we know will be gone. The only way we can reverse this is to two things: save nature now, our life support system, and we do this by switching to 80 per cent renewables by 2030. It is a WWIII mentality. In America we have the technology; we have the blueprint. We lack the political will just right now. But in the next short while we will, because it is a matter of survival.

RT: We’ve just gone through the hottest month on record. There is plenty of data out there to suggest that we truly are entering something our world has never seen in our lifetime. To brand it as a new geological age, what impact is that going to have?

RH: It’s got the impact that humans are here. As I said earlier, we’re talking a 160 percent more than mother Earth can sustain 7.4 billion people. The way to do it is to pull it back to 90 percent. If we were a big bathtub the ring will read: toxicity, toxicity, toxicity. We’ve got to peal that back, because what we do to the Earth, we do to ourselves.

*  *  *

Truly a greater threat than ISIS, or debt loads, or Zika.

On the bright side, if warmonger Hillary is elected, many of the world's species will no longer exist anyway.

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tallest Skil's picture

Complete bullshit, and so I'll repost my earlier on the subject.

Yes, climate changes. But there is absolutely no evidence that humans are having any impact on the climate whatsoever. In order to establish an actual human impact in a statistically significant way, you must show a modern trend that deviates from a baseline of appropriate duration. Because geologic processes spanning millions of years are responsible for tremendous amounts of variation in global temperatures, an appropriate baseline must necessarily include millions of years of data to account for this variation. Not only are we not in a period of “record high temperatures,” we are in one of the coldest periods in the past 65 million years.

https://i.imgur.com/YlOkst2.png

There is absolutely no evidence that current temperatures are outside the trend of totally natural variation, and all attempts to make it appear that way are misleading you by truncating the data to a sample of statistically insignificant size. And then they apply their misleading, exponential curve-fits and smoothing effects for dramatic purposes.

The earth had had ice caps for maybe about half of the time over the past 500 million years. The picture shows rapid periods of melting and re-glaciation over periods of a few thousand years. There is nothing abnormal about current melting rates.

https://i.imgur.com/4xFmquA.png

The sea level has been rising at a very steady and predictable rate over the past 8-10,000 years since the emergence from the last major glacial period with no deviation at all from this trend even as humans began industrializing. When environmentalists show you graphs going back 50-100 years of rising sea level data, they omit the fact that this is both on-trend and completely expected.

https://i.imgur.com/I5WxjkS.png

We have no actual data that indicates that climate is in any way behaving abnormally, much less due to human impact. The only thing we have is a hypothesis that CO2 affects climate in a meaningful way, which is what climatologists attempt to model. But those models make terrible predictions.

https://i.imgur.com/TxiUXz4.png

If your hypothesis consistently churns out inaccurate predictions–no matter how many times you tweak the knobs and change little fudge-factors here and there–then your hypothesis is shit and must be discarded. Morons who believe in this garbage have no understanding of basic epistemology, let alone science–and that goes for the so-called “scientists” peddling this mystical bullshit. 

CO2 is only hypothesized to have the impact on global climate that the alarmists claim. But this has failed to be demonstrated in two major (but related) ways. First, carbon dioxide levels are currently being measured at several hundred ppm higher than measured from ice core samples. Now, it must also be cautioned that you can’t necessarily compare these two sets of data because they represent two different methods of measurement, and have other potential biases. However, even assuming that its true that CO2 levels are much higher–and that they’re caused by human activity–current temperatures are not deviating from the normal historical trends in line with CO2.

A doubling of preindustrial CO2, absent any feedbacks, would result in a maximum forcing of +1.2 ºC. Everyone agrees on this point because it’s a simple computation given the physical characteristics of CO2 which is well mixed in the atmosphere.

Actual warming, again absent feedbacks, would likely be much less due to bandwidth overlap between CO2 and H2O, something that we understand but find difficult to model (H2O levels vary dramatically day to day and even hour to hour with regional weather).

https://i.imgur.com/bkn5jHf.jpg

The General Circulation Models, and the IPCC, predict 2-8 ºC of warming because AGW theory assumes a positive H2O feedback. They assume that if CO2 causes a little warming, the atmosphere will hold more water vapor which will lead to a lot of warming until a new equilibrium point is reached.

The warming predictions cover such a large range because everyone assumes a different average feedback rate. Again, modeling H2O in the atmosphere is extremely difficult because it varies so much with weather.

Every GCM based on this assumption has failed to model temperatures for the past 15 years. They are all trending too high. In the late 1990s, the modelers themselves stated that if they missed their predictions for more then a decade that would falsify AGW theory.

There is no data to suggest a positive H2O feedback either now or in Earth’s past. Indeed, we cannot model some periods in Earth’s history with an assumed positive H2O feedback. It would appear that Earth’s atmosphere is remarkably adept at dampening forcings from either direction and does not amplify them.

If there is no positive H2O feedback, we literally have nothing to worry about. The average climate change believer knows none of this. Politicians, citizens, activists, and surprisingly even a lot of scientists are literally ignorant of the theory and the math. In their mind, it’s simply “CO2 = bad” and “experts say we’re warming faster then ever.” The more you know.

https://i.imgur.com/AY2FMws.png

Not only are current temperatures not outside the normal trend, we are in one of the coldest periods in the past 65 million years. Also, current temperatures (at the peak of the current 100ky cycle) are actually lower than past 100ky cycles, meaning that we are expected to either warm further just by way of natural variation or we are in an unusually cold peak period.

Second, climate models that use CO2 as a major driver for global temperatures are not producing accurate predictions for global temperatures. This is at least good initial evidence that the alarmist stance on the CO2/climate hypothesis is false. Notice that current temperatures are in no way deviating from normal trends. and that the two “scary red dots” are not observed data, but “predictions.” But, as we already know, the observed data is wildly lower than the predictions. These people are completely full of shit.

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

As long as humans are one of those forms who will be gone by 2050, it's all good for the remaining life forms.

Maybe Space Aliens and AIs will make better stewards of the planet than we monkey-men, Robber Barons and Crony Capitalists have.

 

bleu's picture

Completely agree. More examples when Scientists LIE => http://wp.me/p4OZ4v-2M

Butter-Cup's picture
Butter-Cup (not verified) bleu Sep 3, 2016 10:23 PM

My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can't believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do... https://tr.im/li1di9

Bumpo's picture

How about stopping the Geo-Engineered Chem Trails and fess up to Fukushima; oh, and please spare us more 'Climate Change' bullshit.

4freedom78's picture

dont worry our dear leaders have a plan, first make western world like third world country slum and then release some pandemic or civil war on it.

The Saint's picture
The Saint (not verified) 4freedom78 Sep 3, 2016 10:54 PM

The scientific community is putting out so much B.S. these days that nobody even believes their stupid research tales any mores.  Scientists of the 21st Century arrive at a conclusion then try to make the data fit their belief.  This is all done because the government of late chooses the agenda and what results they want to see and they fund the scientists who fall in line.  It's totally bogus science coming out of public funded science departments.  Disgusting.

 

archon's picture

Did you catch the part about "scaling back" from 160% to 90%?  Just so there's no confusion or misinterpretation about what is meant here... he is speaking of eliminating that many people to achieve that goal.  Fucking psychopaths...

Pinto Currency's picture

 

And the ice cap will be gone by 2013.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/17207-al-gore-forecasted-ice-free-arctic-by-2013-ice-cover-expands-50

 

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H.L. Mencken

old naughty's picture

wait, humans get to stay around, deservedly so? Wow.

Is the last sentence the conclusion, either way, we will stay?

As slaves, or zombies?

de3de8's picture

What makes this guy the last word on the subject? What is going to happen is polluters like China and India will hit the wall long before the world and the change he promotes will start in these locations by default. Will be the Petri dish to monitor. BTW, the Chinese still haven't figured out that the US succeeded in transferring it's pollution to them.

Manthong's picture

“Humans have changed the Earth so much that some scientists think we have entered a new geological age.”

I want to type a comment, but I have to get that little bit of vomit that just came up rinsed out, first.

OK, the whole “ Holy Hocky Stick, we are incinerating ourselves”, global warming claim that the UN has been using to try and get a global tax and the liberals have been using to poison the minds of the kids and re-shape society is based on one lousy tree in Quebec, Canada.

Serious scientists have debunked that junk science from the formerly esteemed Professor Michael Mann.

NoDebt's picture

When future anthroplogists look back all they're going to find of our era is radiation and debt (which they will still be paying off).

 

Manthong's picture

Well, for one thing they will find the perfectly preserved face of Nancy Pelosi in her sarcophagus because it has already been preserved in plastic.

And for another, they will find solid gold codpiece that Alan Greenspan wears under his suit.

They won’t find the three foot long cast iron male appendage facsimile that the Clintons have been ramming up the American public’s bottom for over 35 years because it will have rusted away years before.

 

(..and evidently there are a few fools that remain scammed by the phony tree ring data)

 

Tarzan's picture

It would be funny if not so sad.  I received better information in grade school!

Tell me, if for millions of years the earth has swung from one ice age to the next over many thousands of years,

If Boston harbor was carved out by two or more ice ages, with thousands of years of warming between, (this is what they taught us in grade school, before scientists became propagandists),

how did that happen before humans caused "Climate Change"?

If we are causing the Earth's temp to rise, how are we causing the temps of the sun and planets around us to rise?

We couldn't destroy the earth if we tried!  If we tried, thousands of years later, there would still be a blue ball spinning around the sun with white sandy beaches, AND NO PEOPLE!

WarPony's picture

Agree. Just wiki "ice age" (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age) and in the first chart on the left it shows an approximately 150ky cycle of warming spikes followed by rapid cooling and a gradual run up (and down) to another warming spike - also in relation to dust and CO2 in the atmosphere.  We are at solar minimum (less sunspots) with more sun surface generating solar forcing. And, there are no SUVs in the fossil record or on the other bodies in the solar system that are also warming.  Finally, the solar system is allegedly in a Galactic cloud of dust which would provide more fuel for increased solar forcing.  AGW, not so much - calling B.S.

auricle's picture

Thanks for all the facts there Reese. This is the best our scientists can do?

From his website..

Dr. Halter has studied nature for 4 decades. He holds a PhD in ecostress subalpine eucalypt physiology

This Might Hurt's picture

I can still catch every spicies of fish I caught as a kid a the shore...and that's the share, and that's the Jersey Shore!!!  I think we're ok.

Took Red Pill's picture

maybe so but what's in the fish?

"Humans Are Ingesting Plastic Thanks to Ocean Pollution"

http://www.globalresearch.ca/not-a-fish-tale-humans-are-ingesting-plasti...

Manthong's picture

"Humans Are Ingesting Plastic Thanks to Ocean Pollution"

How did that old cartoon song go “I’m strong but I’m spastic ‘cause I eat’s me plastic..says Popeye the sailor man”?

And isn’t that song a slur against disfigured persons?

I am calling the SPLC  (Society for the Prevention of Loathsome Cartoons).

 

PositiveChanges's picture

Yes, but I hear not a whisper concerning anything except CO2.

Which is 100% necessary for human life.

We blame Zika, but refuse to look at the known carcinogens we use to kill bugs.

We see our friends and families and children die of cancer, we insist vaccinations increase.

Chemicals are destroying our planet and our health.

We'll double down on those while we tax the very breath that is necessary for life, and attempt to shorten growing seasons and reduce the most basic thing all plant life requires.

We are insane and morons like this author solidify it.

Handful of Dust's picture

The Big "Q" is which half?

By th elooks of the state of Europe, my guess is the European white male Chrisitan will be 'extinct' in 5 years.

The Saint's picture
The Saint (not verified) archon Sep 4, 2016 10:25 AM

Two more points.

1.  Can we make sure that Mosquitos are one of the species eliminated? and

2.  If 50% of the species on earth disappear the other 50% will soon follow since the food chain would be disrupted beyond repair.

But, this story is just science make believe anyway.

Lorca's Novena's picture

Those georgia guidestones just might be someones plan...

MalteseFalcon's picture

On a positive note the earth's population is predicted to peak around 2040 and fall from there.

On a negative note by 2050 the lost species will include the MalteseFalcon.

Billy the Poet's picture

the Maltese Falcon has been missing for ages. Last I heard Gutman and Cairo were off to Istanbul because they thought the Russian had it.

Mr. Universe's picture

2040 seems about the limit to Mr. Universe's verse as well. Most people seem to forget that we are on a minuscule hunk of rock hurtling through the galaxy at ~70,000 MPH. We have no photon torpedoes to defend or warp drives to escape any disasters. We are at the mercy of the Universe. Sure man has grown, but into what? The Squire of Gothos of whom Mr. Spock commented "Intellect without discipline, power without constructive purpose".  Who knows what the future holds, maybe TPTB already know the Giant Meteor 2016 is on it's way and nothing really matterssss, to me.

 

i-dog's picture

Can we nominate which regions the half of all humans are to be eliminated from? Please?

J S Bach's picture

Why does anyone pay any attention to these worthless sons-of-bitches?  They are wrong almost 100% of the time.  Their positions are basically useless to society and they must somehow justify their snobbish titles with lunatic ideas which vault them to the status of "expert".  Just ignore them and go about your lives.

SubjectivObject's picture

Half the species will be gone before 2050 because desperately hungry humans ATE them.

Vatican_cameo's picture

 

What a Revelation.  Over 99% of the species to ever walk this planet since life started are now extinct.  The best part is all these Pseudo-Genius Cement-heads will be long since dead before they can see their predictions fail miserably.  That's just great.

Zero Point's picture

I'm sure when this is proven completely wrong, there'll be a complete apology, just as there was for the predictions that coastal cities would be partially under water by 2012. Oh.. wait...

Rhetorical's picture

Doubtless there is a lot of shit science but humans use more energy and resources then the rest of the worlds living organisms combined. We are our own force of nature and it should'nt be that suprising that is has consequences. Even if climate change is as you say a fraud we cant keep mining non renewable fossil fuels indefinitely and will have to switch to a basket of renewables now willingly or later when we run out. Look at oil and how new finds are in ever more remote places as we've mined out the easy to get deposits. Fourtanately in certain regions solar wind etc are becoming more and more economical. Are they the best solutions in all cases? No but they are becoming more economical with each passing year.

PT's picture

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=georgia+guidestones&client=firefox-b&...

"Maintain Humanity Under 500 000 000 In Perpetual Balance With Nature"

... and they gonna do it peacefully and humanely and with no restrictions on population growth what-so-ever becoz they don't need to.

The people in charge of finding the solution ain't interested in common sense.

Debt-Is-Not-Money's picture

The "Scientific Community" consists of fraudsters of which 99.99% are paid from government sources in one form or another (either directly or by one of the brainwashing centers). Scientific Whores would be a more accurate term.
Can anyone out there identify more than one Independent Scientist"?
The government trolls are active on this thread judging by the level of downvotes to reasonable comments!

SixIsNinE's picture

here is a well laid out presentation on chemtrails by Sofia Smallstorm :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYMTtfD06Z0  -

also, i linked on another thread about John Brennan, cia director's talk to the CFR recently talking about chemtrails but he calls them Stratospheric Aerosol Injections and he claims it's needed to address climate change and $10 billion a year is worth it    !!!  youtube search it

 

greenskeeper carl's picture

Yep. By 'scaling back' they mean all of you living in hovels a la Calcutta or sub Saharan Africa. Or squeezed together in mega cities where a family of 4 can expect to live in a 700 SF apartment and eat soylent green twice a day, if they are lucky, and ride the subway to work, if they have a job.

While we are living this lifestyle, the limousine liberal class who constantly preach this nonsense will continue on as they do now with huge, private mansions on lots of land, and flying around on private jets.

Anyone who believes these people is just plain stupid. They lie about everything, get caught lying, and lie some more.

Archibald Buttle's picture

nailed it. and if, perchance a ton of poors die in the process, well, you have to break some eggs to make an omelet.

HedgeJunkie's picture

Bombastic Bob there, representing a 'scientist' raises my hackles.  Any asshole that speaks like that, with a smile, raises my hackles.

1033eruth's picture

ARE YOU FUCKING SHITTING ME?!!!!  42 people gave you a thumbs up and believe in chem-trails on ZH?  

I hope not.  You twisted fuck, you made THREE points.

#1  Geo-engineered chem trails.

#2  Fess up to Fukushima

#3  Spare us the "climate change" bullshit.

I will give the 42 people that gave you a thumbs up for either #2 or #3 the BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.  If there are that many people that believe Uncle Fraud is spraying people from the upper atmosphere, then there is ZERO hope for this country.  

 

SixIsNinE's picture

what hole in the ground do you live in?      you must be blind.   you think the $10 billion a year that John Brennan claims we spend on GEOENGINEERING Stratospheric Aerosol Injections (chemtrails) is bogus?   go to his CFR presentation and listen.

then try what/why in the world are they spraying docs on yt

repost:

here is a well laid out presentation on chemtrails by Sofia Smallstorm :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYMTtfD06Z0  -

also, i linked on another thread about John Brennan, cia director's talk to the CFR recently talking about chemtrails but he calls them Stratospheric Aerosol Injections and he claims it's needed to address climate change and $10 billion a year is worth it    !!!  youtube search it

1033eruth's picture

FUCK YOU!!!!  This is not the venue to debate this BS you fucking retard.  I've got nothing but condescion for people that believe Uncle Fraud is spraying the world for some unknown purpose and yet the elite are immune to its effects.  

Fuck you and your propaganda video.  I can't debate him and I can't debate you because of this POS format.  BIG MIDDLE FINGER TO THE TINFOIL RETARDS that believe we're being sprayed from the upper atmosphere.   

1033eruth's picture

There is a HUMONGOUS difference between cloud seeding and the tinfoil nature of claiming that Uncle Fraud is spraying humanity for unknown reasons.  

I didn't miss the primer jackoff.  When you mention chemtrails be certain to elucidate on its PURPOSE.   

JuliaS's picture

George Carlin:

Over 90 percent, over, way over 90 percent, of the species that have ever lived on this planet, ever lived, are gone. Wooosh! They’re extinct. We didn’t kill them all. They just disappeared. That’s what nature does. They disappear these days at the rate of 25 a day—and I mean regardless of our behavior. Irrespective of how we act on this planet, 25 species that were here today will be gone tomorrow. Let them go gracefully. Leave Nature alone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c

And Steve Hughes has a simial line of observations, for a good laugh:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nea-MpVgRL0

kev the bev's picture

Correct, and the planet will be taken over by many new species such as the fukashima 5,7,9,32 eyed monster with 25, 56 and 67 legs with multiple dicks , and the vacineous african Bill gates ebola sorosian clintonian reptilian. The planet will go on, we just fucked it up for humans. Congratulations Goldman et al!

1033eruth's picture

JuliaS - It is 100% impossible to educate the fucking ignorant on ZH or anywhere on the internet.  FUCK your lack of common sense YOUTUBE videos.  

Animals require habitat - PERIOD.  With humanity infringing on their habitat GLOBALLY, it has a tendency to ERADICATE their habitat with very few exceptions like the pigeon and the coyote.  

In the very, VERY short time, that we've gone from 1 billion in population to 7.2 billion TODAY, we've wiped out whole forests, ad nauseum.  Can't and won't go into the habitat we've destroyed because human mouths supercede all other life on the planet.  I've only been on the planet 58 years and the population has DOUBLED in my life time.  

You're a fucking retard Julia.  Look at a chart of humanities population growth, which you won't or if you do, it won't mean anything to you.  What took MILLIONS of years for the species to disappear according to your contention, we're responsible for doing the same in 100s of years.  Again, millions and 100s, its all the same to retarded fucks that can't tell the difference.

 

Golden Phoenix's picture

A shame your sister is too ugly to be a prostitute. A bag over the head seems to run in the family.

logicalman's picture

The biggest problem with science is the fact that its funding is controlled by governments and corporations.

He who pays the piper calls the tune.