Fun fact: One species goes extinct every 216 days on average since 1500 according to IUCN, or 0.0046 species per day. That includes the Dodo Bird last seen in 1662. _ Established in 1964, the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red List of Threatened Species has evolved to become the world’s most comprehensive information source on the global conservation status of animal, fungus and plant species. _

It is 150 to 200 species per day going extinct, as quoted in her TEDx Talk by Greta The Grating On People's Nerves as I like to call her, as determined on the other hand by sources using computers. Ain't computers fun, you can do anything you want with them like scaring the ________ out of everyone. So, 200 per day, or one every 200 days, depending on who you would like to believe.

@@garyha2650 Now I myself have done very little research on the rate of extinction so I don't know what the real statistic is. But even 1 every 200 days sounds unsustainable for the long term. People like Greta are likely just exaggerating to get peoples attention. Since most people tend to take the stance that if it's not going to happen in their lifetime then why should they care. If I'm 30 years old then I may have another 50 years to live and in that time 91 species will go extinct, that doesn't sound so bad. But with Greta's numbers 3.1 million will go extinct in that time then you might say "holy _____ everyone we've got to do something!".

@@shadetreephilosopher5568 Yeah, someone pointed to a Yale article on the topic that you might like: Global Extinction Rates: Why Do Estimates Vary So Wildly? e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_do_estimates_vary_so_wildly Then there's the IUCN Redlist: www.iucnredlist.org/search?taxonLevel=Amazing&searchType=species with pictures of species. I would be interested in seeing any real numbers presented in a way I can easily digest. I read these days that often extinctions are isolated on islands and due to hunting. So that's just excess human population perhaps. It would be interesting if there is even one bug known to have disappeared due to warming recently. I'd love to see a real discussion of it. Unfortunately the alarmist side is banking on the scary notion of 200 per day and that precludes any investigation or detail because then their claim immediately becomes exposed as a whopper of a lie, too bad. They've got to speak out that the claim was a mistake so we can actually start talking reality about extinctions, it would be interesting and might inform us better on what we can do to help. I'm pretty sure I have some understanding of how the 200 per day came to be, and I know from crunching data myself, how that can happen. When we start out hoping for a given result, it is too easy to filter data to support one's goal. Super easy, you just say, these outliers don't count, and multiply based on some assumptions, saying there must be 200 times more species than what we are aware of, especially considering microscopic organisms. And as far as species we thought were extinct, and they turned up later alive and well, we can just drop all of those, they are just more outliers. And our present trend must be a little more severe than ever before seen. Etcetera. Then presto, up to 200 per day. Tell Greta, she'll believe anything with a negative connotation, she never does any checking. “History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren’t there.” ―George Santayana I was reading about lies in history and this was one of them ... After ­Charles Darwin published his revolutionary "On the Origin of Species" in 1859, scientists scrambled to find fossil evidence of extinct human ancestors. They sought these so-called "missing links" to fill in the gaps on the timeline of human evolution. When archaeologist Charles Dawson unearthed what he thought was a missing link in 1910, what he really found was one of the biggest hoaxes in history. The discovery was the Piltdown man, pieces of a skull and jaw with molars located in the Piltdown quarry in Sussex, England. Dawson brought his discovery to prominent paleontologist Arthur Smith Woodward, who touted its authenticity to his dying day. This 150 to 200 species per day going extinct belongs on that list of greatest lies in history except that it blows away all of the others, nobody will believe than anybody would believe something that outrageous and obviously false. But it's a little easier to take when you realize that the climate fairy is counting species every day. :)

One species evolves every ??? days on average since ??? That's what I'd like to know.

@Aditya Pratap Singh You too have been marked for extinction, good sir.

Not me ...the rule is all good things come to an end .... I suck 😆

@@georgeelmerdenbrough6906 That’s a clever exploit

+Cinqmil says: "Dinosaurs didn't go extinct. They evolved. I have three little dinosaurs running around in my garden. I eat their eggs everyday." == Birds were already birds when dinosaurs extinct. Birds were already emerging as species while dinosaurs were alive before they extinct.

Idiot

i felt that embarrasment for them real hard lol

I though they were gonna say "uhhhhh..... ohhhhhh" best moment xD

I also though it was going to be him. :)

turns out it was someone just as good.

So true! ha, never has a "Whooo!" ended so abruptly ha.

Einstein was good at math ,think about it he was a physicist which is not possible without being good at maths.

@@1lightheaded Of course, but it's a known fact that when he was a student, math was not his thing (at that time). He preferred "mind experiments" to math, because they were more direct. Math took time to write it all out.

@@1lightheaded you're right on einstein, but not exactly on physicists. I'm not one (well not yet technically) but i studying to do be an (and do research in the field) astrobiologist, and as i haven't quite gotten to the biology part i ve been studying fundamental physics for the last 5 years, and thus have had the pleasure of meeting many brilliant physicist and even some of the most renowned in the world like the legendary alain aspect, recipient of many awards like the bohr, einstein and now the 2022 nobel prizes (guy who solved the einstein podolsky rosen paradox bells inequalities etc) And i can tell you that while it is true having a certain level in advanced math is vital to be a physicist, it doesn't make us good at math. I thought i loved math and i was objectively gifted, but going though 3 grueling years of french prepa (8h/day of theoretical math/physics+4h of homework to process the lessons) i quickly lost my false sense of confidence, when i read how mental mathématiciens are. And its true for most physicists i knlw, maybe not most but a very large portion. They have little interest in math save how it can be used to modelise the natural world, some even hate it, and i was very suprosed tofind out that when i finished prepa and went to university to study pure physics, i knew more then most of my teachers. Granted thats an exagération, i had only progressed to a certain level, to the point of distribution theory and advanced series function (think thats the english term), and they knew much more then that, but on function series i knew more then many of them as they had just focused on the tools they used and forgotten their lessons on all the superfluous rest, they didn't care or need to know it. And thats a sentiment i find in many physicists, they can't be bothered, cause to be honest -its a running joke in the field but also true- if we became physicists its cause we're to lazy to be mathematicians and don't want to deal with all tat complexity, which is why we always modelise things in basic ways

@@StephiSensei26 sorry madam, but thats simply not the case. I know a bit about Albert's life partly by curiosity, mostly because one of my relativity teachers had a double doctorate in physics and philosophy, and did his memoire on the life of albert einstein and how it and his personality made it possible for him to discover what may otherwise still be a mystery (not an exagération, he was unique in hos way of thought) Anyone who has seen or god forbid worked on einsteins theory knows he was more then good in math, he was a prodigy. Einsteins theories, well more specifically général relativity (SR is far less mathematical) are mathematically INSANELY COMPLEX. and i m not saying this lightly, i mean some of his non linear differential equations have not been solved TO THIS DAY even though some of histories greatest minds have worked on them for over a century. No he was so fucking good at math, at the time he was nearly as competent in the most advanced mathematics of the time as the fucking mathematicians themselfs! He had mastered Riemanns work on complex function series, something that had been discovered only a few years before. To give some point of reference/comparison, it's like if next year the nobel winner in physics presented his work and showed he used gregory perelmans proof of Poincarés conjecture. That proof is LITTERALLY one of the 7 great problems (well not anymore) of the MILLENNIUM, 7 nearly unsolvable problems clay institue declared the most important of the millénium in 2000, and gave a million dollar prize for each. Well perelman (the guy is on an other level, truely one of the greatest ever) strolled in barely a year later (remember they were supposed to keep mathematicians bussy for 999 years more) and dropped his proof to them before nonchalantly heading back to live in his mothers house and stop math, it took the entire world math comunity YEARS to even go though his work and understand his proof before they could validate it (he refused the million dollars obviously, legend). Well einstein wasn't quite that phenomenal in math but he was so good other physicists and many mathematicians just couldn't help him. He had a few issues in the decade that seperated his 2 relativity theories, as the math was so advanced. So he asked another legendary mathematician, grossman, to help him and even then it took years. So no einstein was DEFINITELY not bad at math Nor was he bad at math in school, in fact he excelled in math and physics, true he was a "lazy" student who didn't fit (at first) but he still had top grades, and when i mean top it is litterally top. Here's a link to an article where you can see for yourself an original report card of young albert in his early years, he scored 6 (out of 6) in every science discipline

@@alexisjuillard4816 Like WOW!

Nothing to do with chairs being empty ....everything to do with corporation profit / foreign labor ....simple as that Wait you want to invent something ...sorry china just stole your idea

To coojsta69: Corporate profits - YES. Foreign labor - NO! (lets quit being Xenophobic of 'others')

Aryan Zagros what are you talking about... The place is packed

***** no, sports arenas are packed, concerts are packed, an intelligent talk about our species history and where we may be headed doesn't get the same attention. Just the fact there are empty seats even in the front row is proof of the sad state of affairs.

Aryan Zagros it's not because it's arizona?

+Lemonducky86 thought the exact same thing :D but that made the surprise better, the guy talked about a mind-blowing improvement in a really important "system" of life

everything pops up from nothing, and will back to nothing again

" event "?

@@georgeelmerdenbrough6906 I am just trying to follow the Trump lead and downplay this whole thing.

How stupid do yall feel in 2024 lol.... Vote red ❤

... and die in a car accident four days later, joining the hundreds of billions of humans before them and preceding the deaths of tens-to-hundreds of billions of people after them, ending with an unknown, future event that will bring to an end the fleeting and insignificant speck in time and space that humans have been fortunate enough to occupy.

@@notatheist I love your optimism. 👍

@@notatheist buzz kill

whilst sticking my headphones on and turning up the air conditioning 🙂

Ya, I though she went extinct back in the 80's.

@@faybrianhernandez2416 she did, but then she turned back time.

She’s not allowed?

Thats not Cher - Thats Alica Cooper

Someone has to make them

And Opeth .. :-)

Strindberg was more important . A real genius.

You provided no source for your claim, i guess you lied through your teeth there. heres some info : arcticwwf.org/species/polar-bear/population/

@@barkosvega2718 yeah because the scientist that proved it.. got fired from her job.. and pretty stupid you plug wwf.. who is profiting of all of this madness..

@@cyberhawk80 whats the name of the fired scientist ? or do you just blabber bullshit ?

Today, polar bears are among the few large carnivores that are still found in roughly their original habitat and range--and in some places, in roughly their natural numbers. Although most of the world's 19 populations have returned to healthy numbers, there are differences between them. Some are stable, some seem to be increasing, and some are decreasing due to various pressures. Status of the polar bear populations Last updated 2017

@@cyberhawk80 Today, polar bears are among the few large carnivores that are still found in roughly their original habitat and range--and in some places, in roughly their natural numbers. Although most of the world's 19 populations have returned to healthy numbers, there are differences between them. Some are stable, some seem to be increasing, and some are decreasing due to various pressures. Status of the polar bear populations Last updated 2017

Yep, that was my thought too.. they shut off the cheer valve really fast lol

ha ha i spotted that.....wrong neil huh

😂😂😂

And instead they got an AMAZING piece by this Neil .. 'elitism' bashing ... in effect .. YAY .. Best part of the whole thing, imo. .. :-)

this was propaganda for climate change..

Didn't you know the debate is now over. They said it has been proven beyond any doubt. Hmmm........

There isn’t much to debate anymore - if at all, under any means with this world’s altered climate. Should’ve come earlier; when ideologies were horribly much of the publicized climate science.

U know the science isn't strong enough when u have to rely on the tears of a young girl. No debate, no argument, just emotion.

Meaning you miss the one blokehead who would just cry HOAX HOAX with no supporting evidence? That's not what debate means.

Well, that might explain why humans have always needed to believe in…. miracles, somehow. 🤔

The effect of similarity due to chemistry comparative change between periodic records is the measure..

@@Skymannot6939 I'm just day dreaming but let's say for instance we are warming the climate. Lets also state that the globe is overdue an ice age (which we are). What would be the consequences of ceasing the production of the excess heat? Personally I'd rather have droughts and closer beaches than ice 2 miles thick.

Scientists have no common sense.

Product placement

Do u think they flew them in? Lol

@@matthewstone1362 Yep, by helicopters and limos....

He still doesn't get the fact that his face is important... change that view. ;-)

I'm still watching But you're saying there's no NDT? ☹

Peart .. !!

honestly, I think Niel brought the wrong speech for this presentation. Even though it's super irrelevant to the subject of extinction, it was one of the most interesting ideas XD

@@gsingh8113 Agreed I was quite moved by what he said .. I've dreamt of a world like the one posited all my 60yrs .. then we they voted for the orange one .. devastated .. thankfully he's gone, but the err people that voted for him have not. An equible word is anathema to an Uber Capitalist right wing society ..(And as for their religion ... well..!!) .. :-(

They don't turn over,- they wander. Under and over, eachother. Seismic techniques allow us to physically see that they do this. One very good example is the pacific plate that has subsided in an angle under Japan and into korea - which birthed the Korean Volcano Paektu. Look it up here on KZfaq.

MEOW

Oooof 🤣🤣🤣

I don't see you taking any effort to solve these issues. How about contributing instead of ridiculing some that are?

@Domino's Rider lol. Nice try. Not everyone has English as their native language, Try writing in my language and see how far you get. Poor judgement will equal to poor answers.

@@godtroll749 There is nothing i or you can do. We , adapting our social systems and the weaknesses in our character as humans will not be able to accomplish social justice and these talks are powerless against those systems and the ones that have the most influence on what those talks are aiming at. But troll some more please :-)

i didn't realise this was so old

Great comment. 👍 Amazing. Some people would argue. But they couldn't understand the time you spent on such an endeavor.

That's cool, though, because nobody in the visual and performing arts had a job to begin with.

What you don’t believe in talking snakes, donkeys, bushes, etc, you live in fantasy not reality

@@berryvwjnr6481 🤣

I can tell you that there is a question within Christianity. Old earth creationism and new earth, such that for old earth we are the product of evolution. I don’t think it would be fair, nor proper to ignore the postulates within Christianity, given we don’t know one way or the other, but merely conjecture. Many times the conjectures are proven (ignoring Gödels contribution to this statement) to be true, yet we also find many times for our strongly believed conjectures to be false. This is of course without getting into the other dimensions of analysis that is expressed by how we all currently live. If we accept the axiom that the mathematics that describes these things to be fact, then we must equally contend with criticism of our axioms, specifically Gödel’s incompleteness theorem which states that you cannot say anything is true as a fact. As you may be able to extract from the formulation of this response, I decided to minimize the effect of this theorem, just as you have with your response. With that said, who are we to say that Christianity is unsubstantiated and suggest it’s absence of validity despite its seemingly evident viability (somewhat a pun to this talk, considering we don’t see Christianity go through extinction). Ergo, I caution dismissing Christianity, especially under a narrow, seemingly superficial and biased research of Christianity. (Sorry for the long response, late night comment, I’m bored and this just something to do, also not that I had and have no intention of appearing rude or disrespectful)

@Alice Amell Are u suggesting that most believers are essentially too afraid (?) to use their own critical thinking skills? I don't think you can say that because you're raised in a certain culture or society that you lose the ability to discern fact from fiction. That's just living with blinders on. I've received mostly ~negative~ feedback regarding my atheism but it doesn't change the fact that theism simply isn't plausible nor verifiable in ANY way.

Who cares lol

+Dan Monaco Agreed. Some of us have even reached adulthood unable to construct grammatically correct sentences, that contain thoughts which are cogently and coherently expressed. A little something to consider for the next time you decide to muse upon others' stupidity.

+Mark Burianyk Very good Sir. Creatures. I stand corrected. I'm glad you got my point.

Phelan You mean the comma that is, at it's worst, superfluous? Why not paint us a picture of this irony that, sadly, will not actually accomplish what you say it threatens to do?

There is no need to be offended, you simply need to look up how to use a comma correctly. It's a little more complicated than just splitting up breaks and thoughts.

Dan Monaco have you read Kathleen Dean Moore or Derrick Jensen?

So 3 years later. What happened?

that nis a bad metaphor unless most are in Beta

Tom Miller He is actually from New Haven, Connecticut

Tom Miller No. But he was caught trying to break in to the lab...

Withstand Ha ha ahha

Withstand Interestingly, neanderthal's had a 6% larger brain than modern humans

Tom P another interesting brain fact, blue whales have the largest brains of any animal, and they still aren't capable of half performing half the functions our brains are. size doesn't always matter!

Stretching imagination, a further invention of intelligence by General Artificial intelligence could be an example of such a being.

Stop smoking that shit . Idiots cannot handle it .

1 minute

Sorry, no 100 seconds

Hell

denial is their way of dealing with fear and uncertainty

Conspiracy Theory is filling the gap that decreasing faith has created .

@@georgeelmerdenbrough6906 I think there may be some truth to that. People seem to want to believe in a higher power of some sort. Whether that's aliens, God, shadow governments, luminatie, or underground lizard people there seems to be comfort in knowing that someone or something has more knowledge and power than we do. So that same outlet in your brain that most people plug God into could also have a deep state government that's covering up the existence of bigfoot plugged into it.

@@georgeelmerdenbrough6906 conspiracy theory is faith based...

@@georgeelmerdenbrough6906 THAT is an interesting point.

Change?Ok I'll sell my coal fired power plant, decommission my nuclear station,stop commercial whaling and make sure to destroy all my oil rigs.

We're fooked

he's aware he's smart. nothing wrong with that. he speaks fluently and has just the right amount of charisma to host.

@@rossconi I admire his knowledge and honesty, believing in verifiable facts not Bronze Age superstition where snakes, donkeys, bushes speak

@@berryvwjnr6481 When you have been around long enough, or have had just the right experiences, the rocks will make more sense than corporate media!

but this is not infotainment for the Techno peasants this is an academic presentation ,did you have any university ?

@@1lightheaded Indeed, I did “have university.” Your attempt to insult me, combined with your grammar and use of punctuation (or lack there of), indicates perhaps you did not. My original comment was simply my opinion on these “great debates.”

He is not likely to talk the polar bear out of anything

Did you figure that out when he said dinosaurs smoking cigarette?

Right, because you know more than multiple scientists

@@jegdfacdbdvwcebfbdcdvsn8727 No, I just don't lie like the multiple scientists.

@@fransdav5573 what is your evidence that they are lying? Why would they lie, what do they have to gain?

@@jegdfacdbdvwcebfbdcdvsn8727 The evidence that they are lying is that there isn't evidence for what they say. There can be many reasons why they are lying (e.g to have a job, to be famous, to have something to do, etc) or just because of rebellion against their Creator.

Is slowing down China’s near monopoly on production a good thing since it is fueled primarily by growing reliance on coal?

Not at the conspiracy club that you did They are not worried they are illuminati :) this glyph means I am being sarcastic

Substance is not important to you topic extinction your take oh well

BOB OVER: That was a very interesting point and is making me think! Humans as a complex interdependent system, like everything else.... Not humans as individuals, is what has evolved. Fascinating ( Spock eyebrow)... But it may be just an example of how poorly our gathered information is distributed. I'm sure there are several people alive that could fit the bill and make stone knives and bearskins in the garden of eden, but most people, as you say, know nothing...not even what primitives knew.. so is that because we haven't evolved, devolved, or just specialized. I think specialization is a kind of evolution... where no "one" can know the totality of human knowledge, we ceased being individuals and became a collective, but we just haven't admitted it yet! To busy hating and killing "the other guys"... in many ways we have not evolved I guess :)

_"My point is this. As individuals, we are not ..."_ I think you may have missed the point that humans are, and always been, a social species. An alone human is a dead human. _"Most people can't even start fires with sticks or make arrow heads"_ Most ants cant make other ants and the once that can cant take care of themselves even. Yet there is plenty of ants. Do you get the point?

You are simply discrediting all things that make us humanity. We are societal bound as are a ton of others species. If every human was to be capable of everything we would not co-exist, let alone need one another. We above everything genuinely have traits that set us above any other. Decision making, thought analysis, invention, dominant features, primitive thought, etc. How are scientists so wrong to say we are highly evolved? Is your premise solemnly based on our ability to store information? If so, you're discrediting study and information.

Adam and Eve is a fable.

I stopped reading at Adam and Eve.

2020 has reintroduced the neanderthol mentality. It's pretty obvious that those who have the 96% running through their veins have come out of their caves to run our governments and burn down our cities with a vengence.

That is a modern stereotype, Neanderthals weren't Morons and could survive without access to Walmart.

Lol , yes i see people with heavy hairy brows and hunch backs,

***** "but if you really understand genetics you can never use it support such racist claims," Maybe you don't have to claim that one 'race' is superior, but couldn't you say one 'race'(particular set of genes) allow for more intelligent rational thinking or something. Which later could be argued that this kind of thinking is superior to plain ignorance. In the same way you could say one set of genes is objectively better at scaling mountains and living at high altitudes for extended periods of time. In that way, Tibetans ARE superior. I just want to know the limits of what we can say about any particular trait in humans. Only because it is SO taboo to suggest that any human race is better than any other in any way. Unless it's physical things like africans being better sprinters or Tibetans being better mountaineers.

***** It seems obvious there will have to be differences between races, especially those which have bred among themselves for generations. It probably isn't as relevant these days. As in, once we can manipulate genes, there wouldn't be a need to find superior genes among races. All humans have potential to express all genes (I guess?). So by that stage it will be irrelevant to look at humans as different races, other than for curiosity. I really don't like that social and moral implications can get in the way of discovery, but I guess we do have to remember we are an unstable society of bomb wielding maniacs.

brod2man About half a century ago, a doctor in Italy discovered that one of his patients had very high cholesterol but he was perfectly healthy in that sense and suffered no heart problem or other side-effects. He also noticed this anomaly is also present in many of his relatives. He traced his ancestors to a woman who by chance had this gene that could break down cholesterol before it causes damage. So he passed that on to his offspring. So if that meant this particular advantage would increase the survival in that environment then her descendent would clearly have a higher survival rate. This kind of genetic anomaly has been contributing factor in creating every single cell type. It is very unlikely that two or more people would accidentally come up with the same new beneficial gene. It is the same as twin brothers buying two separate lottery tickets from two different places and they both win the lottery at the same time. So one person in one town can only pass on the gene to the their family and since they could not integrate with other villages in prehistoric times that gene would stay in that village and affect the course of the evolution of that village. Since we mix this cannot happen. But it will happen is isolated groups. You are assuming that humans are all the same and are all moving in the same direction. That is very misleading. Each single human can change the course of human evolution to bread a new specious. Just think what the world would be like if every man died and you would be the only man left and the next generation of humans would all be like you. The other point you made was about intelligence. There is NO such thing as intelligent. It is not quantifiable. Since you are looking at intelligent from your point of view, then you are evaluating it by your standards. Have you noticed why people who drive slower than you on the road you think of them as morons and those who drive faster are maniacs? This is a huge topic which I have spent a life time working on and can explain that in absolute details. I am trying to write a book on the subject of evolution and intelligence etc.

brod2man Yes the threat of being labeled a racist has stifled the study of difference between races. Read on the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. As people become more mobile and interbreed it wont matter anyhow.

xanthromera Thanks for the suggestion, I'll check it out. I think there's a real issue with trying to be politically correct. Sure there may be people who take offense, but we need to be honest and open about our thoughts and intentions. Similar problem seems to be occurring with Islam and fear of being labelled as an Islamaphobic if you are seen talking ill of the religion. To suggest there is a link between Suicide terrorism and Islam is immediately attacked as racist (which doesn't even make sense). This attitude of protecting beliefs to appease to people's feelings can limit us and may actually be dangerous in some cases.

Don't kid yourself, the polar bears are suffering and will become extinct. They are already migrating. A panel of woo-casters can do nothing, you are cloth-eared fools.

@@goatamongsheep4296 Are you smoking crack mate? How about looking at actual REAL science. Real data. Real evidence. There are over 25K polar bears today. They are not migrating to Mexico for cheap drugs and alcohol. They want to stay where they can get heaps of white powder.....kind of like the stuff you use. The next thing you will be saying is that we should close ALL power stations and only have wind and solar.

Changes make a difference? Awareness helps? Wow what a concept! 😆 😆 😆

Krauss is not working on string theory so unless you mean something else, you should clarify what you mean

@@stavrosmaiden You're simply wrong.

@@143freespeechnobuts5 could you please send me a peer review scientific paper of his where he helps to evolve string theory somehow?

Americas answer to UKs Brian Cox

Not only Krauss does not work with String Theory, he also says that the String one is bull-shit; and if it were true, the fact that it is gonna be impossible to test, for maybe 1000 years, makes it nevertheless bs for the time being. "Nevertheless"? ... well ... in this case ... "foralongwhilethemore."

Climate change and the paradigm that you must be on the GHG bandwagon to get funding. If it relates to CO2 and disaster (if only by mention and not by factual experience) then funding is assured. A sad commentary on post-modern science and government funded agendized propaganda. Anthropocene? Really? Polar bears? Sheesh...

Fossil record here come humans!! WASF

I'm outta here. CO2 b.s., give me a break.

Please

All forces contribute to extinctions either directly or indirectly