According to the United Nations, we are losing about 200 species per day--a thousand times the normal background rate of extinction. How does this stack up to previous mass extinctions? Scientific American editor Fred Guterl explains.

• Related Articles

• What Role Does Climate Change Play in Tornadoes?
• Search for Survivors Races On as Dozens Feared Dead in Tornado-Hit Oklahoma
• Drought Gobbles Up Texas Turkey Hunt

10 Comments

1. 1. Forsythkid 01:26 PM 10/21/12

   I think that the extinction dice were cast a long time ago. Mankind is and always has been a tribal organism and as such cannot think in terms of a global community much less its welfare. We have gone in the opposite direction of group care ever since the first caveman picked up a club and found he could hurt others with it. Now a days, were you to ask random people how they felt about planet earth and all these extinctions, most would stare at you with blank expressions before walking away.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. vmfenimore 04:05 PM 10/21/12

   I think the human capacity for long term planning is what is extinct.
   
   
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. priddseren 04:46 PM 10/21/12

   Or the 200 species per day is yet another claim with no basis in anything but a rigged statistical model. Rigged or at least invalidated by the fact that we don't know how many species exist, that number is also a total guess.
   
   This doesn't mean efforts to NOT kill off species should be stopped just to not go to extremes based on wild claims which are nothing more than prophesies of doom.
   
   As long as most countries on the planet have people living in them who cant even respect the life and freedom of other humans, there is no way those same people will offer that same respect for life to the other organisms on the planet. For example, why would africans stop killing elephants for tusks when they wont stop killing other humans? The market for these Tusks, the far eastern countries also have no problem with other humans being killed for a variety of reasons. Just one example of many but the fact remains, too many people live under forms of leadership where violence is normal and respect for human life does not exist and these same places also have almost no desire to save life on the planet in general. Until these cultures change and respect life, there will be no saving of the planet.
   
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. priddseren in reply to Forsythkid 04:54 PM 10/21/12

   How about instead of ridiculous concepts of global "community" which doesnt work, we attempt to push the respect for the freedom and life of individuals, because an individual who respects the life of others is more likely to respect the life in general. Group care is thinking that got us to where we are today, what do you think a tribe is, a group. And as long as cultures continue to tell individuals they must be prepared to sacrifice their individual life and freedom to the group, then these same humans will transfer that ridiculous social concept to life in general. How could it be any different? In most countries, Socialism, tribes, theocracy rule and in every case, the state or leaders of the group have demanded the ability to literally enslave or kill any member of the group in the name of the group. So why would anyone living in this condition decide an animal or a plant or worm, the soil, even the air we breathe are also not subject to the same potential death or ending in the name of the group. Individuals who respect the life of everyone else and realize individuals must cooperate to exist are far more likely to see the need to include all life in both the respect to exist and as part of the cooperation needed for life to continue.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. DancerTiffy 05:34 PM 10/21/12

   Humans can no more halt or slow down their relentless rate of expansion into the rest of the biosphere than can bacteria slow down their growth when reaching the boundaries of their petri plate. Humans are going to rape and plunder this planet until there is nothing left or until climate change finishes us off first.
   Evolution's 'apes with big brains' experiment is doomed to failure.
   I wonder if millions of years in the future if some types of scientists digging through the geological record will be able to figure out that it was us that caused the 6th mass extinction?

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

6. 6. frankblank in reply to priddseren 05:44 PM 10/21/12

   Well, as the old saying advised, "Eat the Rich."

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

7. 7. Bird/tree/dinosaur/etc. geek 02:42 PM 10/22/12

   That was meant to be a veiled Jonathan Swift ref, by the way.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

8. 8. Don Quixote 07:36 PM 10/22/12

   Priddseren - Concur on all points. Most people have given up their individuality in favor of the "group" and then complain about the state of things. Fred Guterl said so little of substance in this video - I am surprised, but I guess not much of value can be said in a few minutes unless you think you're addressing only the 'believers'.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

9. 9. Waymon 09:21 PM 10/22/12

   99.99 % of all the soecies that have ever lived have gone extinct. That does not mean we should not be responsible in our dealings with the environment, and not be compassionate. But it does mean that we cannot take it upon ourselves to save every spieces that lives today.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

10. 10. bucketofsquid 06:06 PM 10/31/12

    As far as I can see the term "species" is rather oddly flexible. The difference between now and the previous great extinction is we weren't there but we are here now.
    
    Vanishingly few educated people are going to continue bad practices when confronted with a real possibility of starvation. For this simple fact the increase in education levels world wide and the delicacy of food production and transportation will lead to a culling (naturally or otherwise) of the excess population.
    
    It is a natural pattern for any species to have cycles of growth followed by collapse. Human population will very likely collapse. This will reduce demand for resources. If we can maintain a technological base we will be in a very sweet situation with a high tech base and low population. That would be the perfect time for real outward expansion to other areas of our star system.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this