/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.2635003]

Oh hey /sci/ dont mind me, just announcing the official and scientifically verifiable date for the end of humanity. We've officially got another 300-2,000 years. We've let down Sagan, Einstein, and all the other greats. We had to make the cure profitable before we could even save ourselves. It's been a great run assholes.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/03/02/species-census-yes-the-6th-mass-extinction-is-h
appening-now/

[Anonymous No.2635010]

bump for the end.

[Anonymous No.2635017]

300-2000 years is quite a gap. so i call BS

[Anonymous No.2635019]

>Look outside of your window. Imagine taking away three-quarters of the living things you see and ask yourself if you want to live in that world.

Hell yes I do. Living things always creeped me out.

[Anonymous No.2635022]

300-6000 years
IMPLYING I GIVE A SHIT.

[Anonymous No.2635030]

>>2635017
If you take into account what they're predicting, and the near infinite amount of variables, its not that bad of a gap. We probably have a higher percent error for carbon dating but you wouldn't call that BS would you?

[Anonymous No.2635072]

lol mte

[Anonymous No.2635113]

Im gonna be dead by then, the entire specie can go fuck herself

[Anonymous No.2635119]

>Im gonna be dead by then, the entire specie can go fuck herself

Too bad reincarnation is what happens after you die. Then your soul will die and that is worse than Hell.

Pic related. It's where you go when your soul dies, unless you are Jewish then you go to Saturn.

[Anonymous No.2635131]

>>2635119
Fuckin' sandworms.

[Anonymous No.2635132]

>>2635119
is that pandors box and the gay cube from hell raiser

[Anonymous No.2635138]

>>2635119


LOL

[Anonymous No.2635139]

>>2635119
>>2635131
.... what? Reincarnation? Sandworms? What does that have to do with ANYTHING??

[Anonymous No.2635144]

>>2635139
Confirmed for underageb&. GTFO

[Anonymous No.2635149]

a brief list of biases affecting the conclusions:

rare animals are harder to find, so almost by definition any new species we are just now discovering is probably on the brink of extinction.

smaller organisms are much less likely to be cataloged first, so we have little idea how much diversity in the barely-visible to 5cm range has been lost just in historic times. Likewise, oceans and remote areas are last to be cataloged, and again we don't know what's been lost before we got there.

Paleofaunas are by their nature far from complete.

Larger animals are far more likely to be preserved as fossils than smaller ones. Larger fossils are far more likely to be found than smaller ones.

Animals from specific types of environments are extremely likely to be fossilized, conversely, animals from other environs are extremely unlikely.

Organisms at or near the base of food webs are under-represented in both fossil collections and the fossil record.

A significant number of extinction events measure drastic reductions in macrofauna, but lack unbiased data regarding collapse of populations of smaller organisms.

By the time we notice that our food webs are being wiped out, ie mass plankton deaths and waves of insect and plant deaths, macrofaunal extinctions are already unavoidable. Coral reefs should have been our first hint.

We measure extinction at the top of the chain, when we know it often begins at the bottom, or near the middle.

we know we're headed for catastrophic extinctions, we don't care.

[Anonymous No.2635153]

>>2635144
What? How the fuck am I underage?

Why is /sci/ so full of fuck???

[Anonymous No.2635161]

>>2635149
i would have cared if i was 16 years old but i'm 30 now so everything is preatty much just MEH