Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

A Scary Thought

Expand Messages
  • raybell_scot
    A friend of mine noticed last year, and I did too, that there were a number of dead bumblebees about. He put this down to car exhaust fumes, which was a likely
    Message 1 of 8 , May 13 12:39 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      A friend of mine noticed last year, and I did too, that there were a
      number of dead bumblebees about. He put this down to car exhaust
      fumes, which was a likely explanation.

      However, I have heard that there is a problem in some parts of the
      world with hive depopulation. One explanation for this, as well as
      fungi, etc is that mobile phone signals are confusing bees'
      navigation. Some studies have also shown that electric pylons are
      capable of doing this too.

      Someone has said that if bees go, we may have four/five years left. I
      don't know about that, but a huge amount of our food sources, and
      ecosystem is dependent on pollination by bees. Only a handful of
      fruits, for example, are pollinated by other creatures. "The Death of
      Grass" has already been written about - as a large number of food
      sources, including rice and wheat, are grass based, but what about
      "The Death of Bees"?
    • hectopede
      As a result, in the areas of car roads humankind will die out, only cars stay :) Actually, I think we know only fraction of all the effects the new chemicals
      Message 2 of 8 , Jun 14, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        As a result, in the areas of car roads humankind will die out, only
        cars stay :)

        Actually, I think we know only fraction of all the effects the new
        chemicals emitted by people do to the environment.



        --- In sciencefictionclassics@yahoogroups.com, "raybell_scot"
        <raybell_scot@...> wrote:
        >
        > A friend of mine noticed last year, and I did too, that there were a
        > number of dead bumblebees about. He put this down to car exhaust
        > fumes, which was a likely explanation.
        >
        > However, I have heard that there is a problem in some parts of the
        > world with hive depopulation. One explanation for this, as well as
        > fungi, etc is that mobile phone signals are confusing bees'
        > navigation. Some studies have also shown that electric pylons are
        > capable of doing this too.
        >
        > Someone has said that if bees go, we may have four/five years left.
        I
        > don't know about that, but a huge amount of our food sources, and
        > ecosystem is dependent on pollination by bees. Only a handful of
        > fruits, for example, are pollinated by other creatures. "The Death
        of
        > Grass" has already been written about - as a large number of food
        > sources, including rice and wheat, are grass based, but what about
        > "The Death of Bees"?
        >
      • raybell_scot
        ... Of course. It s not a cover up, it s our ignorance. We aren t always to know. I wonder how many species have become extinct (especially in the deep sea),
        Message 3 of 8 , Jun 15, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In sciencefictionclassics@yahoogroups.com, hectopede
          <no_reply@...> wrote:
          > Actually, I think we know only fraction of all the effects the new
          > chemicals emitted by people do to the environment.

          Of course. It's not a cover up, it's our ignorance. We aren't always
          to know.

          I wonder how many species have become extinct (especially in the deep
          sea), without us even being aware of them.
        • Aleus Mundi
          Krakens? Giant sea serpents? ... -- The Transmundial rules all [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Message 4 of 8 , Jun 16, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Krakens? Giant sea serpents?

            On 6/15/07, raybell_scot <raybell_scot@...> wrote:
            >
            > --- In sciencefictionclassics@yahoogroups.com<sciencefictionclassics%40yahoogroups.com>,
            > hectopede
            > <no_reply@...> wrote:
            > > Actually, I think we know only fraction of all the effects the new
            > > chemicals emitted by people do to the environment.
            >
            > Of course. It's not a cover up, it's our ignorance. We aren't always
            > to know.
            >
            > I wonder how many species have become extinct (especially in the deep
            > sea), without us even being aware of them.
            >
            >
            >



            --
            The Transmundial rules all


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • raybell_scot
            Well, large predators tend to be few in number (the ones we know about), and this rule would apply to the sea too. Lots of krill, many penguins, fewer seals,
            Message 5 of 8 , Jun 18, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Well, large predators tend to be few in number (the ones we know
              about), and this rule would apply to the sea too. Lots of krill,
              many penguins, fewer seals, few whales. Overfishing could make
              certain deep sea megafauna extinct, particularly the kind that never
              came to the surface. The Koreans, Russians and Japanese go in for
              seriously intensive fishing, and at least one giant squid was caught
              by them - apart from that, who's to say they're not cannibalising
              one another for lack of food?

              As for jungles/rainforests with slash and burn techniques, who knows
              what we've destroyed. Probably plenty of unknown insects, some
              mammals and reptiles. In South East Asia, they managed to film a cat
              sized mammal that even the natives couldn't recognise.

              They recently found a new tree species in SCOTLAND! And not even the
              most remote part. Two specimens in the one valley.

              --- In sciencefictionclassics@yahoogroups.com, "Aleus Mundi"
              <novovacuum@...> wrote:
              >
              > Krakens? Giant sea serpents?
              >
              > On 6/15/07, raybell_scot <raybell_scot@...> wrote:
              > >
              > > --- In
              sciencefictionclassics@yahoogroups.com<sciencefictionclassics%
              40yahoogroups.com>,
              > > hectopede
              > > <no_reply@> wrote:
              > > > Actually, I think we know only fraction of all the effects the
              new
              > > > chemicals emitted by people do to the environment.
              > >
              > > Of course. It's not a cover up, it's our ignorance. We aren't
              always
              > > to know.
              > >
              > > I wonder how many species have become extinct (especially in the
              deep
              > > sea), without us even being aware of them.
            • hectopede
              These must be ent wives! :) No wonder the Treebeard is a scott in the Lord of the Ring film. My sister knew a lad, who went to Taimyr peninsule to research
              Message 6 of 8 , Jun 28, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                These must be ent wives! :) No wonder the Treebeard is a scott in the
                Lord of the Ring film.

                My sister knew a lad, who went to Taimyr peninsule to research gnats.
                After he described 98 new gnat species, he got bored and left. Wouldn't
                you like to have some gnats named after you buzzing in tundra and
                bothering eskimos?

                The chemicals probably effect us too. According to one theory they
                confuse the genetic memory of our immune system and our bodies start to
                pick fight with peanuts and tomatoes, with anything. This leads to
                epidemic of allergies. Allergies were very rare in the beginning of the
                20th century.

                Andri

                --- In sciencefictionclassics@yahoogroups.com, "raybell_scot"
                <raybell_scot@...> wrote:
                >
                [...]
                > They recently found a new tree species in SCOTLAND! And not even the
                > most remote part. Two specimens in the one valley.
              • raybell_scot
                ... to ... the ... To be fair, there s other factors too perhaps. A lot of weaker babies just died, and our houses are almost vacuum packed (not to mention
                Message 7 of 8 , Jul 4, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In sciencefictionclassics@yahoogroups.com, hectopede
                  <no_reply@...> wrote:
                  > The chemicals probably effect us too. According to one theory they
                  > confuse the genetic memory of our immune system and our bodies start
                  to
                  > pick fight with peanuts and tomatoes, with anything. This leads to
                  > epidemic of allergies. Allergies were very rare in the beginning of
                  the
                  > 20th century.

                  To be fair, there's other factors too perhaps. A lot of weaker babies
                  just died, and our houses are almost vacuum packed (not to mention
                  overheated)
                • hectopede
                  ... start ... That s true, allergies don t have a completely satisfactory explanation yet. But the problem of allergy is not the weakness of organism. Vice
                  Message 8 of 8 , Jul 4, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In sciencefictionclassics@yahoogroups.com, "raybell_scot"
                    <raybell_scot@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > --- In sciencefictionclassics@yahoogroups.com, hectopede
                    > <no_reply@> wrote:
                    > > The chemicals probably effect us too. According to one theory they
                    > > confuse the genetic memory of our immune system and our bodies
                    start
                    > to
                    > > pick fight with peanuts and tomatoes, with anything. This leads to
                    > > epidemic of allergies. Allergies were very rare in the beginning of
                    > the
                    > > 20th century.
                    >
                    > To be fair, there's other factors too perhaps. A lot of weaker babies
                    > just died, and our houses are almost vacuum packed (not to mention
                    > overheated)

                    That's true, allergies don't have a completely satisfactory explanation
                    yet. But the problem of allergy is not the weakness of organism. Vice
                    versa, allergy is the excess of resistance power applied by our own
                    bodies. Our strong bodies pick friendly targets. In the worst cases of
                    autoallergy body starts to fight with its own tissues. For example skin
                    peels off, bloody mess.

                    Children mortality was high when the birth rate was also high. Now the
                    mortality is low and birth rate is low too. In the beginning of the
                    20th century 5% of German village population had some allergy, only 5%
                    of people lived in cities. In 1970s 5% of population lived in the
                    German countryside and 95% of them had some allergies. The reduced
                    mortality of children cannot explain such a big statistical change.

                    It is also a question of science fiction weather we can evolve fast
                    enough to keep up with the speed of changes in environment caused by
                    ourselves.

                    Andri
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.