Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Tuesday February 12 2019, @02:20PM   Printer-friendly
from the debug-the-planet! dept.

The first global scientific review of insect population decline was published[$] this week in the journal Biological Conservation. This is the first global study of its kind, and the term "impending catastrophe" would not be hyperbolic with respect to the findings:

Highlights

  • Over 40% of insect species are threatened with extinction.
  • Lepidoptera, Hymenoptera and dung beetles (Coleoptera) are the taxa most affected.
  • Four aquatic taxa are imperiled and have already lost a large proportion of species.
  • Habitat loss by conversion to intensive agriculture is the main driver of the declines.
  • Agro-chemical pollutants, invasive species and climate change are additional causes.

For some time now we've been warned by scientists that pollinators are having a hard time, creating problems for humanity WRT many food sources. However, this study paints a far more dire picture with the possibility of irreparable harm to ecosystems on a global level. Without strong insect populations, it's not unreasonable to conclude that humanity may not continue either.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 12 2019, @07:26PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 12 2019, @07:26PM (#800265)

    True, but I wouldn't dismiss a bunch of monks writing down ideas after collecting data and doing their best to model reality.

    I don't dismiss it, it could be right or wrong, who knows? It is just not worth the cost-benefit to learn more based on what I see here.

    I've read thousands, probably tens of thousands of academic "science" journal articles. Over 99% are BS, so most of that time was wasted (but if you don't know about what everybody who ever published anything on the topic thought what you say doesn't matter).

    Seriously, WTF is wrong with you anti-science people?

    Get this paper on sci-hub. How many of the numbers come from observations/experiments that were independently replicated? If any theories/models are mentioned, how many were verified by comparing the predictions to new data?

    From that (I bet both are zero, or perhaps there are one or two out of hundreds or thousands) I think you will get your answer: this stuff isn't science. If the headline said they made a (precise, not that number of species "went down") prediction and then tested it, then I would care.