It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Scientists at the universities of Exeter and Cambridge claim their research settles a prolonged debate over whether mankind or climate change was the dominant cause of the demise of massive creatures in the time of the sabretooth tiger, the woolly mammoth, the woolly rhino and the giant armadillo.
Known collectively as megafauna, most of the largest mammals ever to roam the earth were wiped out over the last 80,000 years, and were all extinct by 10,000 years ago.
Lewis Bartlett, of the University of Exeter, led the research, which also involved the universities of Reading and Bristol and is published in the journal Ecography. He said cutting-edge statistical analysis had helped solve the mystery almost beyond dispute, concluding that man was the dominant force in wiping out the creatures, although climate change could also have played a lesser role.
Examining different regions of the world across these scenarios, they found coincidences of human spread and species extinction which illustrate that man was the main agent causing the demise, with climate change exacerbating the number of extinctions. However, in certain regions of the world – mainly in Asia – they found patterns which patterns were broadly unaccounted for by either of these two drivers, and called for renewed focus on these neglected areas for further study.
Why is it that so many villain characters are correct?!??!
Humanity seems to draw more similarities to that of viruses/parasites than it does other animal species.
It does not seem possible for models alone to resolve the question of whether megafauna were hunted to extinction, due to the number of assumptions in the models (4).
originally posted by: NewzNose
a reply to: Ghost147
Is it at all possible the species has suffered at the hands of their fate as intended by nature? To everything there is a season.
originally posted by: NewzNose
a reply to: Ghost147
We didn't cause mass extinction of dinosaurs, right?
I cannot see nature possessing the ability to intend anything. Nevertheless, it certainly is possible that the arrival of humans in accordance to the extinction of many of these species is pure coincidence. However, from statistical evidence we see that there is likely a connection.
originally posted by: Ghost147
This isn't the least bit surprising.
Turns out our ancient ancestors had the same poor judgement/habits that exist today. It's always unfortunate to see one single organism cause so much destruction. Yes, it is within their nature, but unfortunate nonetheless. Humanity seems to draw more similarities to that of viruses/parasites than it does other animal species.
Scientists at the universities of Exeter and Cambridge claim their research settles a prolonged debate over whether mankind or climate change was the dominant cause of the demise of massive creatures in the time of the sabretooth tiger, the woolly mammoth, the woolly rhino and the giant armadillo.
Known collectively as megafauna, most of the largest mammals ever to roam the earth were wiped out over the last 80,000 years, and were all extinct by 10,000 years ago.
Lewis Bartlett, of the University of Exeter, led the research, which also involved the universities of Reading and Bristol and is published in the journal Ecography. He said cutting-edge statistical analysis had helped solve the mystery almost beyond dispute, concluding that man was the dominant force in wiping out the creatures, although climate change could also have played a lesser role.
Source
The methods they used to come to this conclusion is quite simplistic really. The researchers ran thousands of scenarios which mapped the windows of time in which each species is known to have become extinct, and humans are known to have arrived on different continents or islands. This was compared against climate reconstructions for the last 90,000 years.
Examining different regions of the world across these scenarios, they found coincidences of human spread and species extinction which illustrate that man was the main agent causing the demise, with climate change exacerbating the number of extinctions. However, in certain regions of the world – mainly in Asia – they found patterns which patterns were broadly unaccounted for by either of these two drivers, and called for renewed focus on these neglected areas for further study.
originally posted by: NewzNose
a reply to Gost147
I cannot see nature possessing the ability to intend anything. Nevertheless, it certainly is possible that the arrival of humans in accordance to the extinction of many of these species is pure coincidence. However, from statistical evidence we see that there is likely a connection.
You have a human brain with limited abilities as we all do. We humans cannot understand the ALL THAT IS, just those portions we are capable of understanding. Nature does what nature does and for a reason known only to Nature. You cannot see the reason, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
originally posted by: NewzNose
I am not one to believe in coincidence. I believe in purpose. The reason a species goes extinct is for purpose. With or without our human intervention. Can you fathom the concept that by retarding a species from its timely extinction, we are causing harm on some other level?