As for why I’m “assuming” they will diminish, this the conclusion, not the presumption, of most of the research in that area.
What you call “conclusion” is probably a forecast, since we’re talking about the future, right?
In broad terms, we should expect this kind of thing to happen because so many species are adapted very strongly to very specific niches. When circumstances change rapidly, those species are unable to cope, and die out, but there are no species which are strongly adapted to the new circumstances to adequately replace them.
Recent ice ages have advanced and retreated very quickly on the evolutionary time scale. Earth’s various ecologies survived, for example, the last ice age just fine and the glaciation looks to me to have been MUCH more disruptive for temperate zones than a couple of degrees of warming are likely to be.
Yes. By itself, anthropogenic climate change is unlikely to result in a mass extinction on the level of one of the Big Five, but it would still almost certainly be visible in the fossil record as a mass extinction event
I agree that we’re in the middle of an anthropogenic mass extinction, the only thing is that it has nothing to do with climate change. It’s just man taking over the planet. This mass extinction started thousands of years ago, goes on now, and will likely continue in the future.
I think that whatever extinctions global warming may cause, they will be insignificant and indistinguishable from noise given the ongoing (non-climate) human impact.
What you call “conclusion” is probably a forecast, since we’re talking about the future, right?
In some cases, yes, in other cases, it’s already observable as an ongoing process (I brought up reef ecosystems before because they’re a particularly visible example of this.)
Recent ice ages have advanced and retreated very quickly on the evolutionary time scale. Earth’s various ecologies survived, for example, the last ice age just fine and the glaciation looks to me to have been MUCH more disruptive for temperate zones than a couple of degrees of warming are likely to be.
The original onset of the first ice ages was indeed quite ecologically destructive and qualified as a substantial mass extinction event (although it was still much slower than anthropogenic climate change.) But virtually all species alive today are ones that have persisted through multiple glaciation periods. The flora and fauna of today’s world are denizens of the ice ages.
I should note that all of the points that you’re raising have plenty of representation in the existing literature on climate change. It’s definitely not the case that scientists don’t think of these things. But these points are followed up with more research to determine what kind of expectations are warranted, and in some cases they’re ones that merit concern.
What you call “conclusion” is probably a forecast, since we’re talking about the future, right?
Recent ice ages have advanced and retreated very quickly on the evolutionary time scale. Earth’s various ecologies survived, for example, the last ice age just fine and the glaciation looks to me to have been MUCH more disruptive for temperate zones than a couple of degrees of warming are likely to be.
I agree that we’re in the middle of an anthropogenic mass extinction, the only thing is that it has nothing to do with climate change. It’s just man taking over the planet. This mass extinction started thousands of years ago, goes on now, and will likely continue in the future.
I think that whatever extinctions global warming may cause, they will be insignificant and indistinguishable from noise given the ongoing (non-climate) human impact.
In some cases, yes, in other cases, it’s already observable as an ongoing process (I brought up reef ecosystems before because they’re a particularly visible example of this.)
The original onset of the first ice ages was indeed quite ecologically destructive and qualified as a substantial mass extinction event (although it was still much slower than anthropogenic climate change.) But virtually all species alive today are ones that have persisted through multiple glaciation periods. The flora and fauna of today’s world are denizens of the ice ages.
I should note that all of the points that you’re raising have plenty of representation in the existing literature on climate change. It’s definitely not the case that scientists don’t think of these things. But these points are followed up with more research to determine what kind of expectations are warranted, and in some cases they’re ones that merit concern.