A warning for the future.Unimaginable evidence about the damage to our worlds ecosystem.

When I read the following article, I felt the need to share, as it doesn't predict a very bright future for us.
If an extinction 12.000 years ago can have such long term effects, with a huge impact on the Earths ecological diversity.
I can only imagine that our way life can only make things worse.

As requested by the author, the link posted here, will guide you to a page called The Conversation.
I assume created by the author, for explanation and conversations about this subject.
Author : Chris Doughty
The Conversation

13 August 2013.

Megafauna extinction affects ecosystems 12,000 years later

If Earth were like a human body, large animals might be its arteries, moving nutrients from where they’re abundant to where they’re needed. Currently the planet has large regions where life is limited by a lack of key nutrients such as phosphorus. The Eastern Amazon basin, for example, is composed of trees that grow relatively slowly due to limited phosphorus. Likewise, animal life in much of the central Amazon is limited by a shortage of sodium.

I was aware of the lack of nutrients in the Amazon rain forest, but I thought that the forest waste was providing enough nutritional needs. I never even heard before that there are some basic ingredients missing, that effect the entire ecosystem of the area. The place in nature that the mega fauna made theirs to live, didn't only make them for fill a very influential part of their environment, because of the impact it caused. The regions diversity was a lot higher then it is now, and as the studies suggest, totally reliable on the animals existence.

We found mass extinctions of large animals in the Amazon 12,000 years ago switched off this natural nutrient pump by a massive 98%. Vital nutrients such as phosphorus were no longer spread around the region but became concentrated in those areas that bordered the floodplains. Even thousands of years after the extinctions, the Amazon basin has not yet recovered from this step change. Nutrients may continue to decline in the Amazon and other global regions for thousands of years to come.

With this new information about the important functions mega mammals unwillingly caused, I'm scared.
We also cause a lot of nutrients to be relocated on the planet, but the way we do it is hardly a positive development.
Please read the material and let it sink in, maybe we can still change our act.

On today’s planet, the supply of nutrients in the soil is determined by river deposits or nutrients that are airborne. Yet this analysis suggests that we may be experiencing a peculiar post-extinction phase in the Amazon, and probably many other parts of the world where large animals once played a vital role in fertilising their landscape. If humans contributed to the mass extinction of big animals 12,000 years ago, then the human impact on the environment at a global scale began even before the dawn of agriculture.

If we want our planet, to be a nice place to live , not only for our children and the animals, but also for the generations that will inherit our home when we are long gone. We really need to reconsider another set of habits we developed, and more important even.... Make sure we better the way we work, and adapt a more biological solution, that will endure time without creating any more problems for the future.

source:
www.scientificamerican.com... utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ScientificAmerican-News+%28Content%3A+News%29

The legacy of the Pleistocene megafauna extinctions on nutrient availability in Amazonia

Fifty Thousand Years of Extinction

Nitrogen and Water

I hope I've been able to convert the way how I feel about this unfortunate chain of events, and some of you will also share it with the world.

Sinter.

I read your thread and wondered about something a lecturer told our class at college. He said the nutrients and minerals came from vulcanic explosions. That made sense at the time and noone questioned this. Is it not the case because otherwise I cannot see any way of reversing this situation.

I also wondered, (in my ignorance as I know very little about this) but do not humans replace the role of the bigger
now extinct animals etc?

Originally posted by Shiloh7
I read your thread and wondered about something a lecturer told our class at college. He said the nutrients and minerals came from vulcanic explosions. That made sense at the time and noone questioned this. Is it not the case because otherwise I cannot see any way of reversing this situation.

I also wondered, (in my ignorance as I know very little about this) but do not humans replace the role of the bigger
now extinct animals etc?

Extinctions of the weaker after superior mutations overtake sources of nutrition and shelter is called the process of nature. The ego of the weaker is an inadequate shield.

reply to post by Sinter Klaas


If only this whole thing was just a bad habit we had picked up, and all we needed to do was just stop doing it, and all would be fine. Unfortunately this world has gone way too far to recover, Nooo I'm def not a doom and gloom merchant, I always strive to find the good in everything, no matter what, I try to find a benefit from a negative, after all we learn from mistakes and accidents, The governments have known all the above information for many years, like they know people don't need to starve anywhere in this world, there's lots for all of them to eat.. but governments don't want all things to be peaceful and run smooth... they want hunger and deprevation, someplace to get cheap labour amongst other things... I don't want to ramble off post, but I do think it's way too late to change our planet... we can only watch now to see how long it will last, maybe one more generation or not.. who really knows????

Considering the S. American rainforests are home to the most diverse forms of flora and fauna on the face of our entire planet...i'd say apart from cutting it and clearing it for logging and animal farming, there's not a lot to worry about in terms of nutrients or lack thereof in the area.

The clue is the name rainforest...it's a forest, bursting at the seams with massive plant life, so dense and so varied we still don't know all that these habitats contain.

If you want to worry or get scared about an ecosystem, worry about desertification, not rainforests.

Think about it, if there were not adequate nutrient resources in those areas, there would not be thriving, thick and dense, lush plant and animal life there..for the sake of clarity...it's a forest!!

reply to post by tkwasny


Sorry, what has your post to do with my questions about vulcanic distribution of minerals or humans replacing the distribution by bigger animals?

reply to post by MysterX


The rain forests are like a crop field. After a couple of years the soil will be poor in nutrients and the crops you used to grow there won't mature, get sick or maybe even grow at all. The crops sucked it dry of the nutrients it needs to get to become a strong and healthy plant.
We leave these fields empty for a while and distribute new nutrients, so we can use the field next year again.

The rain forests never cease to suck every little bit of minerals and any other nutrient 24/7, 365 days a year, year in, year out.

The forest floors are completely deprived of any nutrient whatsoever..

The only only nutrients available are those from the forest life itself, and every leaf, stick, tree and animal, that will die will reach the forest floor, and then it can pass back some of the nutrients it got when it was still alive.
But even this isn't enough to feed the entire forest like that.The distribution of nutrients is totally unfair and with outh any other mechanism, many species will perish away fast.
The only reason that the forest is so sucesful is because of a fungus. This fungus digests the fallen leaves and death materials, but it's also intertwined with every tree and every bodem living plant in the forest, connecting itself with all the roots, basically creating one huge organism. It's the only mechanism that is capable of the distribution of the so needed nutrients, and the organisms have adapted perfectly to each other to survive.

The desertification in other parts of the world, happens always, depending on the location of the continents and the sea currents.

For example, the Amazon is so huge that the water that vaporizes by the hot sun, will form clouds by itself and rains back again, another part will blow towards the Andes where the clouds will be blocked by the mountains, and eventually return back to sea as water, causing the rainy season when the water flows back and the rains keep falling down, drowning the forest in as much as 6 meter deep water.

A drop of rain in the desert will cause a flower to grow, and most places are filled with life beyond your imagination. As well as the shifting drought will also cause other areas to receive more water.

The problem with man is that we do dump lots of nutrients, but only at certain places, where we keep life stock or grow food. We do not throw some in the rain forest or something.

Anyway. I could go on forever. like this. Feel free to google your way to what you don't believe or like to learn.
It's worth it imo.

He said the nutrients and minerals came from vulcanic explosions

Well, Vulcan is a long ways from here

Yes this is a serious problem. Large animal carcasses brought lots of food, minerals, etc to different areas, like salmon today. They say that animals leaving salmon carcasses in the woods is critical for Canada and Alaska.

reply to post by Sinter Klaas


It sounds like the rainforest needs another volcanic eruption - there is a lot of volcanoes spewing right now in the world.

Nature has a way of taking care of itself - for example, in the US, forest fires are natural, and need to be - on nature's course.

As far as what we've done to this poor planet - forget carbon emissions - let's talk about GMO seeds, and nuclear power plants melting down.

I think it's just a short time until the planet is dead because of these 2 things that the world's gov't's seem to be pushing on us. I really feel for younger people - I know 2 couples who are pregnant with their first children and I feel for their futures.

If we had some influence on the world I would not be bothered by it, but our influence is too high.
Ecosystem change is normal, but the rate of it today is not. I don't think mankind will learn. For one we are disconnected to our planet.

So my antiheroes, who I glorify, are pest species, invasive species and species adapting to urban environments. Why? Because for one these species say "**** you" to mankind. The other reason is that they are hard to control, people seem to be wired (it could be nurture) to wanting to control everything.

I find hope in these species that the world will become wild again, the world becoming my own twisted paradise.

It may sound as if I don't care about humans. I do. I actually think that in order to survive, we need such a world.
But it may be a very void and boring world with many global species, that's one of the costs we pay.