Well, if this is the 6th Great Wave then maybe Life on Earth will bounce back yet again - without us.
If we go extinct, I am sure life will go on in some form. Life will always adapt to the evironment and evolve. If these estimates are right, it is concerning and sad I think. Humans occupy a lot of space on the planet. It would be nice if we could leave enough natural land so that most of the other species could continue to survive. I don't think we will go extinct any time soon. We are an extremely adaptive species. Future generations may live in a drastically changed world, however, and life may not be as "easy" as it has been recently.
Species depletion wipes out opportunities to make life "easy" for mankind. The current, human-induced rate of extinction is truly apocalyptic.
Plants and animals will do just fine without us! If we (all 6.3 billion of us) were to suddenly disappear, all the world's plants and animals (except maybe domestic dogs-the cats would be fine!) would all be much better off, and would thrive without us. The grasslands and forests would return to their former splendor, prey- predator relationships would quickly be re-established and the biodiversity and balance that was there before we showed up would quickly be restored. The plants and animals do not need us, and I can't think of one positive thing we have ever done for them!
Veterinary care. Wolves probably became dogs on their own, as though they could tell it was a good deal, despite the price they would pay (being beaten and eaten).
100 year scenario What would be the state of the plants, animals and environment in the Northwest (assume Oregon, Idaho, Washington, British Columbia) in 100 years if we all disappeared today? Assume no people in this geographical area for the next 100 years. For example 1. what would be the effects of forest and grassland fires if we were not there to put them out? 2. What would happen the Salmon? Would the grasslands of the palouse and Okanagan return? 3. Would we see elk again in the Kamloops region? 4. Would noxious weeds continue to prosper? 5. If coal burning plants were shut down for 100 years, what would be the effect on selenium levels in the soil and consequent effect on Californis bighorn sheep? At first it may seem silly to participate in this exercise, but I promise you if you really allow yourself to get into it, it will be a lot of fun, and the results will be suprising and we will all learn from it. A good way to start is to ask all the questions first. I have asked the first 5 questions; who wants to continue with question 6? Let's not allow any answers until we get at least 50 questions. In many ways, the questions are more important than the answers!! Is anyone interested? If so, who wants to start with question 6?
Question 6: In a hundred years will there still be GM Canola growing on Percy Schmeiser's fields in Saskatchewan? Q6a: Will Monsanto still claim patent rights on it? 7: Will Atlantic Salmon continue to thrive in Pacific waters? 7b: Will they have found a "natural" source of antibiotics? Ralph
If Arctic ice sheet returns in the next 100 years there won't be much going on here for awhile, with or without us. And, after it is over, our nuclear plants and toxic waste dumps might make things a bit tough over perhaps quite large areas if first crushed, then flooded by a mile of ice.
