Underwater Fossil Graveyard Reveals Toll of Human-Caused Extinction

If humans had never set foot in the Bahamas, the islands today might be teeming with Cuban crocodiles, Albury's tortoises and rock iguanas.

These creatures survived the thawing of the last ice age, but not the arrival of people, a new study finds. On Abaco Island, a graveyard of fossils at the bottom of a flooded sinkhole suggests that humans caused more animals to go extinct than natural changes in the climate, the researchers said.

The new study, published today (Oct. 19) in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, shows that 17 species, all of them birds, disappeared from Abaco during the transition from the Pleistocene to the Holocene epoch. But when humans showed up about 1,000 years ago, 22 more species of reptiles, birds and mammals vanished. [6 Extinct Animals That Could Be Brought Back to Life]

"These animals could make it through the natural changes of the ice age to the modern climate—the island getting smaller, the climate getting warmer and wetter —but the human-caused changes were too much for them," said David Steadman, an ornithologist and paleontologist at the Florida Museum of Natural History, who led the study.

The fossils were collected from Sawmill Sink, a forbidding blue hole in a pine forest on Abaco Island. The top 30 feet (9 meters) of the sinkhole is filled with clear freshwater that's easy to dive in. But underneath that is a 15- to 20-foot (4.5 to 6 m) layer of opaque water saturated with hydrogen sulfide that blocks out all light and is corrosive to human skin. Still below that is a layer of salt water depleted of the oxygen that would otherwise fuel the growth of bone-decaying fungus and bacteria.

Source: www.livescience.com...

Whole talk about humans being behind ongoing extinction event has a new meaning when you see it on very clear example of small islands of Bahamas. It is clear that we humans are very destructive and we are unable to live with nature... and defying facts is that we are actually making it from bad to worst... in simple terms - we have not learned our lessons yet.

What a shame. I suppose the people living there long ago had to eat though, but driving the animals into extinction is bad.

Just for perspective. 99.9% of all species that have existed on earth are now extinct. Most were gone before humans came around.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

You seem to make a distinction between us and nature for some reason.

We are part of nature, although a seemingly very destructive part and therefore part of the natural cycle of things.

We will inevitably destroy most if not all of the planet at some point. But something will survive even if it's only bacteria, but a new cycle will begin none the less.

We humans prove that knowledge does not always lead to intelligence.

a reply to: Nexttimemaybe

excellent points!

humans and nature are one in the same. Until we accept that and respect that fact there will be such events as OP posted.

knowledge can lead to many things. In the past but especially today it mostly creates arrogance and pride and we put ourself on a pedestal before all other creatures and nature because we are not so dependant of it. But that is just an illusion, which will soon dispel if we will continue to develop in a way without equal respect for all.

if all the bees dies we will soon follow!
If sea life is extinct or is getting there we will soon follow!
if forest are gone we will soon follow!

balance is the key, can we still manage to set things right? I think we can, but time is a lady who waits for no one.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Just for perspective. 99.9% of all species that have existed on earth are now extinct. Most were gone before humans came around.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

I am not sure if that supposed to make me feel better?? We are well aware of Holocene extinction on-going event. Thing about us, humans, is that we without even trying are capable to outdo natural or any other form of catastrophe...


a reply to: Nexttimemaybe

As Sir Arthur C. Clark mentioned once - 'It has yet to be proven that intelligence has any survival value.'

a reply to: SuperFrog

More assumptions pairnting humans as the bad guys lol. Not one mention of finding human artifacts of ANY kind. But humans gone done it. It is interesting that there is a hydrogen sulfide layer, animal swims down to grab prey, overshoots, burns out eyes, dies off. No that can't be it, has to be those pesky humans.

Typical example of trying to make alleged science fit a political agenda.

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: bobs_uruncle

Amazing how many arr in denial about man's role in causing mass extinctions.

In order to advance as a species we have to recongnize the damage we are causing.

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: SuperFrog

More assumptions pairnting humans as the bad guys lol. Not one mention of finding human artifacts of ANY kind. But humans gone done it. It is interesting that there is a hydrogen sulfide layer, animal swims down to grab prey, overshoots, burns out eyes, dies off. No that can't be it, has to be those pesky humans.

Typical example of trying to make alleged science fit a political agenda.

Cheers - Dave

I can agree that there are many factors involved when looking at species extinction, but why can't we also agree that we humans play a role in that process? It's not all our fault, as it were, but it seems that many people are willing to dismiss our role as easily as those that are willing to blame it all on Man.

Politics on both sides, if you ask me.

Nature doesnt belong to man, man belongs to nature.

There was a culture more advanced who got wiped out by, monkeys

a reply to: SuperFrog

There are a lot of ways that I see this report.

First, just becomes an animal leaves an area, doesn't mean it went extinct. It could have just relocated to a more favorable place. Of course, it is possible they left because they didn't like the company, but that still wouldn't mean we caused then to become extinct.

Second thing, is the survival of the fittest belief. If we have a catastrophe and a group of different species survive in one area, especially if the area is completely foreign to half of us, some of us just aren't going to make it.

originally posted by: Nexttimemaybe
You seem to make a distinction between us and nature for some reason.

We are part of nature, although a seemingly very destructive part and therefore part of the natural cycle of things.

We will inevitably destroy most if not all of the planet at some point. But something will survive even if it's only bacteria, but a new cycle will begin none the less.

We humans prove that knowledge does not always lead to intelligence.

Well the same logic means something else might someday come and sweep us away too, taking the stage and reigning over Earth.

Like someone else say, 99.9% of all species on Earth are extinct. I remember there was a time our atmosphere was very different and hostile to current life. It was because of the emergence of certain bacterial life which enabled us to exist. Its presence altered the composition of our atmosphere. Some life became extinct as a result, but it allowed us to be here. Arthur C. Clarke elaborates on this idea here (autostarts at 8:04):
youtu.be...

EDIT: "youtu.be" is the link youtube.com gives when copying the url link from the video. It routes to the youtube.com page.

Here's hte video embedded (skip to 8:04.. it runs to about 9:00):
NOTE at 9:00 he starts to say it's not over and done yet for us. We may exist for some time, even if "machines" someday supercede us. This also means perhaps reducing our affects on Earth are good if it increases our survival. The best environmental science supports this in that ensuring the health of the ecosystems also ensures a breathable atmosphere and habitable environment. Of course, ultimately, I believe we'll learn to create artificial living spaces and possibly live underground or travel outside Earth's habitable bubble, but we're a long ways from that. For now, we're best to devote most learning to how things work on Earth.

But don't mistake what I say. Space exploration isn't going to die. In fact, Robert Zubrin is just as nutty as ever about going to Mars. There're people who will try to create artificial biospheres. They will study how to keep astronauts alive on the Moon or on Mars or in spacecraft. There're people who will relentlessly exploit Earth's resources without a care for its consequences. There's a lot we can't stop from happening. There're things we CAN do however and that'll have to suffice.

See the nut yourself and understand there're others: