Ecology movements mid 70s - early 80s vs now?

Due to the current civilization progress in recent decades, acceleration of the development of industry, automotive, urban agglomerations, intensification of agricultural production, etc. and related greenhouse gas emissions, global warming, ozone layer depletion in the atecologicalecologicalmosphere, increase of environmental pollution, growing problem of smog in urban agglomerations, the increase in pollution of the seas and oceans to which unsorted waste is thrown away is cut out as part of the predatory economy of tropical forests in the Amazon and other largest natural forest ecosystems.

In addition, the secondary effect of global warming of the Earth's climate is the increasing, more frequent weather anomalies, including drought, leading to steppe and desertification of areas that were previously natural forest ecosystems or areas exploited by agriculture.

As a result of the above-mentioned processes, every year many species of flora and fauna disappear forever.

As a result, natural biodiversity diminishes, which for millions of years evolved evolutionally on Earth.

In this way the natural resources of the planet Earth are irretrievably in decline.

In view of the above, the issue of environmental protection and biodiversity is one of the most important challenges of humanity in the 21st century.

Classical economics must change towards a green economy based on the strategy of sustainable pro-ecological development.

Therefore, I am asking you for the following query:

How can environmental protection and biodiversity be improved by using current ecological technologies?

Please, answer, comments.

I invite you to the discussion.

Best wishes

Black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes), a North American species presumed extinct in 1979 until it was rediscovered in 1981. Same thing happened to the Bermuda petrel, peccary, venomous Cuban Solenodon etc.

And the list is much bigger.

The main argument is that if there is no concrete reason, why the organisations are putting the term 'extinct' for a species?

Is it not controversial and funny?

Is it not time to rethink about this problem?

Please jot down your opinions here with any updates in this area.

Thanks in advance.

A lot of hue and cry is made about climate change and the environment in general. Public and private money is poured into research to study its effects on the environment, sustainability etc. Should we study nature or ourselves?

" Our studies must begin with our selves and not with the heavens. "-Ouspensky

Human activities have been found to have a direct correlation to climate change and its impact on the environment(I=P x A x T, the Ehrlich and Holdren equation), in spite of what some complacent sections say to protect their own self interests.

We hardly know about Human nature. We can scarcely predict human behavior. We need to find out why we think like we do and why we do what we do and why, in spite of all knowledge and wisdom, consume more than what we need, in the form of addictions to consumption and imbalance not only ourselves but also the family, society and environment around us..

Humanity is directly responsible for all the unnatural imbalances occurring on the planet. Yet we refuse to take responsibility and instead focus on climate change, or fool the public exchequer with a 'breakthrough in renewable energy just around the corner'. We scarcely know what drives human beings. If we had known, all the imbalances around us would have had solutions by now, given the amount of money plowed into finding such solutions. Are we blindly groping in the dark of climate change because we don't know the answers to our own nature?

Is it not high time we focus on what makes us human, correct our consumptive behavior and leave nature to take care of climate change? Why focus effort on 'externals' when the problem is 'internal'- 'me'?

Aren't we addicts denying our addiction and blaming everything else but ourselves?

" We are what we think.

All that we are arises with our thoughts.

With our thoughts, we make the world." - Buddha 

IMHO, We don't need to save the World. It is enough if we save ourselves from ourselves. The need of the hour is not vain glorious interventions, but self-restraint and self-correction!

The Mind is the Final frontier.

rooted to the bottom and with floating leaves

Recently I took a photo of this cave-dwelling harvestman some 300 meters from the entrance in a northern peruvian cave (1500 metres above sea level). Could you please help me to identify the Genus and Family? Thank you very much.

Greatings from Peru and a happy new year!

Stefan

they are from a mangrove ecosystem in the Gulf of Oman.

The Amazon Tropical Rainforests are referred to as the 'lungs of our planet'. The Amazon Tropical Rainforests and other highly biodiverse natural boreal areas are one of the key factors in removing CO2 from the atmosphere and are thus a limiting factor for greenhouse gas emissions, slowing the rate of progressive global warming, reducing the scale of the ongoing climate crisis. The tropical rainforests of the Amazon and other highly biodiverse natural forests and other natural green areas are a major reservoir of terrestrial biodiversity. In some but unfortunately still few countries and urban agglomerations, the scale of aforestation exceeds that of forest deforestation. Unfortunately, this does not apply to the tropical rainforests of the Amazon and many other natural forests of the tropical and subtropical zones. It is essential for the future of future generations of people, the state of the biosphere and the planet's climate to protect the state of biodiversity in the natural ecosystems of the tropical rainforests of the Amazon and other natural forests and to convert deforestation processes into aforestation. The state of biodiversity of the planet's biosphere and the rate of progressive global warming depend to a large extent on this. It has therefore been a common knowledge issue for many years to significantly increase the level of nature conservation, including the protection of the biodiversity of the tropical Amazon rainforest and other natural forest and natural ecosystems. It has also been a matter of common knowledge for many years, confirmed by many scientific studies and published scientific papers, that the processes of deforestation of the tropical Amazon Rainforest and other natural boreal, forest formations of the planet must be urgently converted to processes of aforestation. This, if it has been common knowledge for years, is why deforestation processes still dominate many times over aforestation. This problem was already signalled by researchers and scientists in the second half of the 20th century. Unfortunately, large-scale deforestation of the tropical Amazon rainforest and other natural forest formations of the planet continues. In addition, over the last 15 years the scale of deforestation of the Amazon rainforest and other natural forest formations of the planet has increased instead of decreasing. At the UN climate summit COP26, many countries pledged that by the end of this decade at the latest, i.e. by 2030, deforestation processes would be significantly reduced to such an extent that aforestation processes would prevail. But why should we wait until 2030 for this when we know how important this is for the preservation of the planet's biodiversity and for the urgent issue of halting or slowing down the progressive process of global warming. The improvement of conservation techniques and the development of aforestations programmes is fostered by the society-wide pro-environmental awareness of citizens, modern technologies, available financial resources, scientific knowledge, etc. So what is missing, what still needs to change. Is the key problem still the lack of changes in politics and business, i.e. the necessary changes towards pro-environmental and pro-climate reforms, the development of a real environmental policy and environmental protection, the implementation of the concept of sustainable economic development, the realisation of sustainable development goals, the pursuit of sustainability of the development of civilisation with the surrounding nature and climate, the carrying out of a pro-environmental and pro-climate transformation of the classic, dirty economy of excess towards a sustainable, green economy of moderation, a closed loop economy?

In view of the above, I would like to address the following question to the esteemed community of researchers and scientists:

What do you think about this topic?

What is your opinion on this subject?

Please answer with reasons,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

How would I obtain a single (average) list of species in such scenarios for biodiversity indices such as Shanon Weiner? For example problem as follows.

Could anyone give a detailed description of the difference between conservation of energy and invariance? Is there invariance of energy at all? Or, at least give the differences between CONSERVATION, INVARIANCE, and SYMMETRY. Standard books in these areas do not give the differences between these!

Raphael Neelamkavil