Gerardo Ceballos: “Will the Ongoing Population Extinctions Lead to a 6th Mass Extinction?” | TGS #25

[@ellenhunter5123]

Wow. This one really got me. I always listen as I walk and I had to just sit down in the woods and cry. Thank you so much for always asking what we can do because without that included in the conversation it is just to bleak. It feels like things are intensifying in so many areas.

[@cristinataliani5619]

Conservationists are outgunned by greed and violence!!! The biosphere may survive in isolated pockets when global industrialized civilization collapses along with the radical reduction of Homo sapiens!!! We have become a plague species!!!

[@UCCLdIk6R5ECGtaGm7oqO-TQ]

@@cristinataliani5619 Your reply has been censored.

[@TennesseeJed]

Thanks Nate! I look forward to these conversations every week

[@simonheyn3419]

+1

[@oliviachipperfield6029]

Nate, when you spoke about the sadness you feel when observing nature, the inability to watch productions that show nature's majesty, I absolutely get it. I can't stand to watch these shows, knowing what we are doing to their habitat.......our habitat. I've noticed the lack of insects and birds in my area. It's heart-breaking and infuriating. The worst part is when nobody talks about it and you think 'I can't possibly the only person around here who is noticing this! Why is nobody saying anything?!'.

[@Larkinchance]

I have noticed a number of videos on KZbin and TicToc where the idle rich have taken large cats as pets, Cheetas, pumas, tigers, lions. My objection is that once they are removed from the wild, they cannot go back furthering their extinction. Also wild animals begging for food because of habitat destruction... During this summer I noticed the street lights no longer had clouds of swarming insects attracted by the light.. It is all ominous and very unsettling...

[@davidwalker2942]

One factor contributing to loss of numbers of animals, if not extinction of species, is 'road kill'. With the density of roads on the landscape and frequency and speed of vehicular traffic, there has to be a direct impact on the issues being discussed. 'Road kill' is most obvious with larger animals but smaller animals, such as birds, turtles, etc., disappear into the pavement soon after being killed. Insects are never found though it is obvious that butterflies just flying close to a high speed semi-truck lose control and spiral to the pavement. Case in point, the fact that so many insects had to be washed off vehicles when speeds were lower and roads less numerous. The automobile and other vehicles make daily and migatory trips a series of road encounters having a statistical chance of sudden death. Maybe low for a given crossing, but multiplied by the number of crossings for an individual animal, the chances of survival are definitely reduced, substantially in many cases. About 15 years ago, a beekeeper who commuted on a California freeway where bees were crossing an 8 or 10 lane freeway adjacent to almond orchards (where hives are trucked in from many states for the pollination time) wrote about this to the 'letters' section of Bee Culture magazine. He calculated the number of bees smashed on his windshield, the number of cars on the freeway, and estimated the number of bees killed there each day. It was astounding.

[@verito2019]

Mr. Nate su podcast ha sido de gran inspiración! Agradezco por gente como usted! La forma en como usted expresa sentirse sobre la situación tan precaria de las especies con las que compartimos este planeta es exactamente como yo me siento al respecto! Y puede ser muy desalentador ver que aparentemente a la gran mayoria de todas las personas a mi alrededor parece no importarles! Gracias por su trabajo! Es muy inspirador!!!

[@sendler2112]

Wonderful! Wonderful! Fascinating. Intelligent. The expertise is changes over time in animal populations but the conversation ranges to include how our co-evolution has imbued a sometimes hidden or yet to be discovered affinity to all other life, ranges to include the folly of social drivers of consumption, ranges to include the modern supernormal stimulii that are hijacking our natural love of nature. And reminds us that we share one planet with all of our (remaining) Aunts, Uncles, and Cousins, going back to the last common ancestor. We are all part of this family tree and richer for it.

[@brtjohns]

well said

[@SeegerInstitute]

Nate I have 1000 animals here at my regenerative farmi school here in Hawaii come and visit. It’s not only the large animals like elephants and dolphins who are self-aware. The more time you spend with all of the animals the more you realize that you would be hard-pressed to find one that does not possess self-awareness

[@thegreatsimplification]

I understand. It’s makes the beauty and tragedy deeper

[@SeegerInstitute]

@@thegreatsimplification Nate, I think what I’m doing here in Hawaii is some thing you would be interested in. I am a venture capitalist who is devoting 100% of my time and resources to building a new asset class in the form of a place-based catalyst to promote global well-being. I hope to persuade high net worth individuals to fund a federated endeavor - first nationally, then globally to train new leaders in a decentralized, zero growth model based on a small farm cooperative to invent the future we all need. Reach out and I’ll give you a zoom tour around the farm. I think you will dig it.

[@rd264]

@@SeegerInstitute how is what you operate better for the animals than a roadside zoo in Texas? if you cared at all about the animals your goal would not be 'how can I leverage them into an asset' ? Zoos are useful for research but never good for animals.

[@roberthornack1692]

I weep every time I walk through the forest close to my home. I've lived here all my life & watched as greedy developers have built around it. I've observed coyotes, raccoons, opposoms, snakes, frogs, bats, disappear. I'm done with hopium. Until humans drastically reduce their numbers, it's only going to get worse.

[@karenkoerner6015]

Gerardo has not failed humanity. (Most of) humanity has failed Gerardo.

[@nicholasporteron]

This episode was awesome. I can’t seem to find any information online about Creatures United though. Seems like a cool project.

[@thegreatsimplification]

It launches this September. I'll post links when available

[@cristinataliani5619]

Try joining The Nature Conservancy or WWF!! Find a local nature preserve and become a volunteer land steward!!! This what I do and I live in a Brazilian city!!!!

[@ronalddecker8498]

This topic is the one that hits my heart the hardest. I imagine an alien civilization debating whether to make contact with our civilization. Asking: How do humans treat the other sentient creatures they share their planet with?

[@zpettigrew]

Nate. Keep this guy as a contact/node for others that we can recruit into the Game B Prototypes/Universities. As an Ecological Economist PhD, can't you even collaborate with other researchers to get Grants and Govt funding for some proactive prototypes?

[@balajis1602]

Hai Nate i would love to see professor cory bradshaw from flinders university as your guest to make it a spinoff or continuation of this episode.

[@boombot934]

Thank❤🌹🙏 you, Gerardo Ceballos and🌱👍 Nate🎓! 4% mammals left on land 35%humans by biomass and 61% farmed animals😢😢😢😢

[@rnunezc.4575]

Muchas gracias Gerardo y Nate. 4% de animales salvajes del total global. Si esto no es depresivo entonces que es. Esa cantidad, para mi, significa extincion total en pocos años.

[@brtjohns]

That was a great listen. It felt like lightning hit me when Gerardo said the world's wild animal population has diminished by ~80% in the last 50 years. I assume that includes marine and terrestrial. Meanwhile, the human population exploded in that time, more than doubled in just 50 years. I have a hard time taking people seriously when they reject the idea we're throwing off earth's harmony and overall systems. Few things seem more obvious. We cant replace all those lost ecological functions. We are plowing through planetary boundaries. Another alarming mention was ~70% of the weight of all the world's birds is just chickens and turkeys. All other birds in the world, several thousand species, constitute ~30%. Flight and flightless I assume. Wow. I frequently think about the prediction of a civilization collapse by 2050. Gerardo is far from the only scientist to say it's highly probable. Makes a lot of sense when you examine big picture- resource competition, intensing climate, human population growth and migration, soil degradation, misguided and corrupt politics, economic instability, uncooperative and hostile international relations... to just name a few. Average Joes & Janes in frequent widespread violence seems almost a given, sadly.

[@oliviachipperfield6029]

💯

[@JulioGarcia-wp2um]

Lies

[@rd264]

predictions and tipping point discussion is assumes that the current decades long biodiversity and warming collapse is avoidable, not ongoing, and widespread.

[@christinearmington]

What’s like this around Lake Superior? The boundary waters?

[@treefrog3349]

Human ego-centricity is its' "achilles heel". We have arrogantly come to believe that the Earth itself is all about US and not about the totality of the biosphere.

[@MattAngiono]

This was a great conversation! ! I wish there were more caring people willing to face these things and change.... But that brings me to what I see as the most poignant part of the discussion, where you ask what is going on in your head with the chickens.... I have to ask, what IS going on in your head? I mean, the answer seems obvious... as obvious as the reason people get upset when they hear about the dog markets in China and freak out.... These animals, when you take the time to observe them, seem just as capable of being individuals with sentience and some kind of consciousness as any others.... So then how could you love some of them, because of the personal connection, but then completely reject the hundreds or thousands who you are directly responsible for their incredible suffering? This is just for a momentary pleasure on your taste buds, and yet an animal has to live a whole life of agony for your mere minutes of enjoyment... Doesn't this suggest a pretty high level of cognitive dissonance? What is the reason you're rejecting the idea of eating pigs, but not chickens? At least with a pig, one individual would cover many meals, while with chickens, there are hundreds of individual sufferers killed for each one, even more so with one cow.... can we really use some intelligence argument to justify why this isn't actually doing way more harm to these creatures? It hurts me so much to see these conversations happen amongst "animal lovers" that then neglect the very real impact of such simple decisions.... It's so easy to just not eat them. It's healthier even, and there's little sacrifice of tasting amazing food. I eat even better, I would say, for the last 6 years of being vegan than when I worked on a BBQ and had meat everyday.... The only sacrifice was a little time to figure out alternatives, which are now even more abundant and widespread. Then there's the environmental impact... It takes 4-5 times the land to grow equivalent proteins in animal products. A study in the journal Nature suggested an area the size of RUSSIA could be turned from animal farms into wild biodiverse forests... this would absorb an estimated 16 years worth of carbon emissions as well (though I care more about the animals it would allow to flourish).... What's the justification for continuing to support this industry, when we are out there pushing this global change while refusing to make it ourselves? Is reducing (and not cutting out completely) really enough? You talked about maximizing impact, but wouldn't this be a lot more effective if you actually practice what you preach? Wouldn't it seem a lot more viable if you could say, look eating meat is unnecessary and I'm a living example of how easy this change can be easily accomplished? This isn't a dichotomy either... you can minimize negative impact on animals while making positive impact on hearts and minds... these aren't mutually exclusive ideas. I'm also an avid wildlife photographer, and it was this that motivated me to become vegan, when I really faced the consequences of my actions consciously, and realized how hypocritical I was to love taking pictures of these amazing creatures, while paying for (or getting paid for at the BBQ) the destruction of their homes and lives.... We know the biggest threat to these wild environments is animal agriculture, like in the Amazon, where it's being burned to make room for more cattle products and feed... I just don't understand how we can say we want to see the world change so dramatically when it comes to our impact, but then not face the largest reason we are causing this damage. Not to mention the cognitive dissonance we are accepting by being willing to cover up the suffering of these billions of animals while trying to get people to care about them... Sure, I can see the higher value of wild animals from my own perspective, but when it comes to ethics and remaining consistent, aren't we just making excuses? Especially since so many wild animals must die in order to continue making domestic animals into products, as the statistics you're discussing clearly demonstrate... I mean, 96% being humans and their products, while we've lost 80% of wild animals!?!?! How do we think this is okay?!? Honestly, when it comes down to it, I don't see us getting out of this mess, especially when the few people who are even willing to look at these issues can't make such a basic change as becoming vegan... Sure, some people will probably never care much about nature like we do... But you DO care, and aren't yet thinking about this... how will we ever change the world when we aren't willing to lead the pack and make such an easy sacrifice for the benefit of ourselves, let alone the animals? I don't mean to rant, but this seems like such an important issue that I see so few environmentalists willing to face... Veganism gets treated as some extreme view, when really it isn't even that hard and makes such a massive difference, especially on animals... It's just a simple ethical decision that brings you so much closer to acting in a way that is consistent with the many beliefs and values you discuss regularly on this channel. I would feel so much better listening to this knowing that you had stopped hurting so many animals, just because they are delicious or are convenient to consume.... I can tell you from experience as well, that you would feel SO MUCH BETTER about yourself and your choices if you didn't have to live with that cognitive dissonance every time you made the decision to ignore the suffering you're consuming in these meals... There's also ethical arguments about consuming the byproducts, such as eggs, but I won't go there now as this is already long.... Just do your own research about all the suffering that comes from the dairy industry, because in many ways, it's even worse... I hope these words of compassion (not just judgement) can help you to realize what is "going on in your brain" and rethink this a bit... I'm more than happy to point you to research, recipes, videos about the ethics, or anything else that could help! Please, we need animal lovers to stand up for the animals consistently! 🙏

[@simonheyn3419]

Good points, but what Nate is discussing (especially concerning values) does not necessarily imply veganism. (Assuming that fulfilment of biological norms and death without suffering are ethical:) There are ways to ethically raise, kill and eat animals- potentially, even for 8 billion people.

[@MattAngiono]

@@simonheyn3419 I appreciate that. But this all depends on your ethics.... True, many people don't have an issue with slitting someone's throat, so long as that someone isn't human. Yet they rightfully recognize that killing any human is wrong without that person's consent, but with animals they think it's fine, even though there obviously isn't consent. If you consider animals to have any rights at all, like the way you're not allowed to beat or torture your dog for example, those rights would extend to the most basic right to not be needlessly murdered. You can have the cops called on you for just leaving your dog in your car on a hot day for example, and people are put in jail for animal abuse regularly. The question, is why animal products are exempt from these very basic ethical concerns. We don't have to eat them or wear their skin, or test products on them that can't even apply to humans anyways. But we CHOOSE to... So if it's unnecessary to raise them just to be exploited and eventually killed, what's the ethical justification? You wouldn't say it's okay to take your life to feed someone without your explicit consent, so why can we make the decision to do it to others...? It's a literal holocaust, and we still call ourselves the compassionate "humane" species... From any outside perspective, where it's easily possible and even better for the planet to feed ourselves off of plants, how do you think we'd be seen in the realm of ethics and compassion? We don't have to enslave these other species at all, and yet we do... So what's the justification? It's true that many animals have and will have to die at the hands of humans, but they don't have to be farmed as food or for their bodies. We could absolutely minimize the killing to a very small percentage, and every person who follows the tenets of veganism is taking part in this. Reducing is also a little helpful, but then why not go all the way vegan, ethically speaking? If you said, well I don't have to rape anyone, but once a year I go out and indulge myself, no one would see that as okay... we'd put anyone in jail for that single act of abuse. So how is it really different when it's a chicken, that you know was abused, that you are then paying for, and that you didn't have to eat to survive, but just felt it was pleasurable? Not to mention, you know the collective harm this is doing to the planet and the wild animals that were forced from their homes or exterminated to make room for the farms and feed lots.... Obviously, this probably won't convince you, but if you are going to talk ethics, I don't think there's any way around this all. You or Nate or anyone can obviously accept the cognitive dissonance and continue to care about SOME animals and not others, but at least admit it's hypocritical... Or take on the challenge and join the vegan effort, and practice what we preach in every way we can!

[@ronalddecker8498]

An odd take on this subject (as I enjoy Science Fiction): an alien visitor talking to a human “I am confused as to how you can treat your cattle the way you do?” Human reply: “Do you eat meat?” Alien: “Yes, we live closely with our animal companions and love them, and make sure their lives are as full as possible.” Confused Human: “How can you eat an animal your love?” Confused Alien: “How can you eat an animal you don’t love?” I am not sure anything makes me more sad than how many species of life we will take to extinction with us. Perhaps if i visited a factory chicken farm might do the trick.

[@rd264]

interview Prof. Michio Kaku please

[@sociocyberneering]

You could have more outreach by getting subtitles with multiple languages.

[@KatharsisderWelt]

People can start by having less kids.

[@dayanidhi8754]

Dissapointing after the hour mark, Nate. You produce some great content, so credit there, but how can you preach something you don't even follow? Especially, especially when it's not getting in the way of 'maximising your impact'. Some activities may be directly required, like travelling by air to spread the word or to do research. However, personal choices that don't align with your greater purpose make no logical sense. William rees was right. Just because people are knowledgeable, it doesn't mean they're going to act on said knowledge. It's dissapointingly hard to find people who lead the way. There are few strong enough to spread inspiration that way, only the greatest do.

[@iutubiutampoc]

Nate, what happens with you having your chickens and eat others chickens is just dissonance cognitive, you haven't lost the ability to disassociate what is in your plate from the creature that had been. There is an excellent book of Melanie Joy: "Why we love dogs, eat pigs and wear cows".

[@MagnumInnominandum]

The answer is no. You are soaking in it.

[@rd264]

unclear garbled telephone interview of subject [interviewer audio is fine].

[@thegreatsimplification]

Wasn’t telephone. Was zoom in place in Mexico w poor internet. Not everyone has resources of Joe Rogan and guests. We do the best we can - for now. Thanks