CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 San Jose Sharks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 30248
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:15 pm
 


From http://www.physorg.com/news128257729.html

Study says near extinction threatened people

By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID, AP Writer

(AP) -- Human beings may have had a brush with extinction 70,000 years ago, an extensive genetic study suggests. The human population at that time was reduced to small isolated groups in Africa, apparently because of drought, according to an analysis released Thursday.

The report notes that a separate study by researchers at Stanford University estimated the number of early humans may have shrunk as low as 2,000 before numbers began to expand again in the early Stone Age.

"This study illustrates the extraordinary power of genetics to reveal insights into some of the key events in our species' history," Spencer Wells, National Geographic Society explorer in residence, said in a statement. "Tiny bands of early humans, forced apart by harsh environmental conditions, coming back from the brink to reunite and populate the world. Truly an epic drama, written in our DNA."

Wells is director of the Genographic Project, launched in 2005 to study anthropology using genetics. The report was published in the American Journal of Human Genetics.

Previous studies using mitochondrial DNA - which is passed down through mothers - have traced modern humans to a single "mitochondrial Eve," who lived in Africa about 200,000 years ago.

The migrations of humans out of Africa to populate the rest of the world appear to have begun about 60,000 years ago, but little has been known about humans between Eve and that dispersal.

The new study looks at the mitochondrial DNA of the Khoi and San people in South Africa which appear to have diverged from other people between 90,000 and 150,000 years ago.

The researchers led by Doron Behar of Rambam Medical Center in Haifa, Israel and Saharon Rosset of IBM T.J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, N.Y., and Tel Aviv University concluded that humans separated into small populations prior to the Stone Age, when they came back together and began to increase in numbers and spread to other areas.

Eastern Africa experienced a series of severe droughts between 135,000 and 90,000 years ago and the researchers said this climatological shift may have contributed to the population changes, dividing into small, isolated groups which developed independently.

Paleontologist Meave Leakey, a Genographic adviser, commented: "Who would have thought that as recently as 70,000 years ago, extremes of climate had reduced our population to such small numbers that we were on the very edge of extinction."

Today more than 6.6 billion people inhabit the globe, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

The research was funded by the National Geographic Society, IBM, the Waitt Family Foundation, the Seaver Family Foundation, Family Tree DNA and Arizona Research Labs.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 San Jose Sharks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 30248
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:17 pm
 


Imagine that; we didn't enjoy a stable climate 70,000 years ago. Good thing the 2,000 humans on the planet reduced their carbon emissions or we'd be extinct now. :lol:


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8878
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:26 pm
 


Interesting, though it seems like they've failed to take into account massive volcanic eruption in Indonesia around the same time (give or take a millennium or two) that made Krakatoa look like a hiccup. An eruption that lost likely had the effects comparable to a nuclear winter scenario.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 San Jose Sharks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 30248
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:28 pm
 


xerxes wrote:
Interesting, though it seems like they've failed to take into account massive volcanic eruption in Indonesia around the same time (give or take a millennium or two) that made Krakatoa look like a hiccup. An eruption that lost likely had the effects comparable to a nuclear winter scenario.


Which is something else that deserves more of our concern than AGW. :wink:


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8878
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:30 pm
 


Except that sort of thing is far beyond our control. Climate change is.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 San Jose Sharks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 30248
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:42 pm
 


xerxes wrote:
Except that sort of thing is far beyond our control. Climate change is.


Really. We didn't have much control over it 70 millenia ago - what's changed?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 20757
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:42 pm
 


BartSimpson wrote:
Imagine that; we didn't enjoy a stable climate 70,000 years ago. Good thing the 2,000 humans on the planet reduced their carbon emissions or we'd be extinct now. :lol:


The problem I continually find with the global warming deniers argument is that you point to past espisodes of warming just like this human near extinction angle as somehow proof that it won't be so bad.

The problem is that only a few loonies are saying it will be apocalyptic in nature (pun intended) but the rest see that because humanity occupies a buttload of landspace the impact on us can easily be devestating on select people and select places. I don't believe that it will lead to extinctiomn but if it causes food shortages far greater then we can expect or the spread of diseases generally confined to climate regions then the impact by human standards can be and will be dire.

Furthermore to say that humans are having no or negligeble impact is simply incorrect. Yes the earth has cooled and warmed but so what? Humans are exacerabating the extremes of both ends.

The earth may have a natural rhythm but we humans are throwing it off as we emit more C02 while cutting down existing carbon sinks.

None of this even touches pollution which is just as bad if not worse. The fact that we are creating a new island made up entirely of discarded plastic should be raising more then a few alarm bells and curious eyebrows.

To top it off we seem to have the vast majority of the global warming deniers all wasting trillions in some made up war on terror whereby they have elevated a few thousand zealots to the danger level of the invading mongol hordes.

Priorties are way way out of whack.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 20757
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:44 pm
 


BartSimpson wrote:
xerxes wrote:
Except that sort of thing is far beyond our control. Climate change is.


Really. We didn't have much control over it 70 millenia ago - what's changed?


The pyramid biilding Yautja extraterrestrials controlled the climate in order to protect their hunting ground.





PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:49 pm
 


This denier has been freezing his ass off for the last week in a record long cold spell.


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3103
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:56 pm
 


mtbr wrote:
This denier has been freezing his ass off for the last week in a record long cold spell.


Not to worry. When the real change comes you'll be dead cold. :wink:





PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:59 pm
 


Wada wrote:
mtbr wrote:
This denier has been freezing his ass off for the last week in a record long cold spell.


Not to worry. When the real change comes you'll be dead cold. :wink:


I'm sure it will be better than being dead from the neck up :wink:


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Edmonton Oilers
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8561
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 3:01 pm
 


mtbr wrote:
I'm sure it will be better than being dead from the neck up :wink:


Yup. *snicker*


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 20757
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 3:05 pm
 


mtbr wrote:
This denier has been freezing his ass off for the last week in a record long cold spell.


A localized cold spell is not proof for your global warming denier argument. The global warmest march on record however provides alot more evidence for the global warming side of the argument.

Yet again we see the inherent contradiction in the anti-global warming argument.

"Ït doesn't exist but if it does exist then its perfectly natural. If it isn't perfectly natural then it won't be that bad. If it is that bad then we needed to thin out the heard anyway."





PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 3:11 pm
 


DerbyX wrote:
mtbr wrote:
This denier has been freezing his ass off for the last week in a record long cold spell.


A localized cold spell is not proof for your global warming denier argument. The global warmest march on record however provides alot more evidence for the global warming side of the argument.

Yet again we see the inherent contradiction in the anti-global warming argument.

"Ït doesn't exist but if it does exist then its perfectly natural. If it isn't perfectly natural then it won't be that bad. If it is that bad then we needed to thin out the heard anyway."


Localized....started on V. Island last weekend is still hanging on in the prairies and is now pushing into N. Ontario.


Shame on you its not called global warming....it's CLIMATE CHANGE , global warming couldn't cover all the lies...


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 20757
PostPosted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 3:14 pm
 


mtbr wrote:
DerbyX wrote:
mtbr wrote:
This denier has been freezing his ass off for the last week in a record long cold spell.


A localized cold spell is not proof for your global warming denier argument. The global warmest march on record however provides alot more evidence for the global warming side of the argument.

Yet again we see the inherent contradiction in the anti-global warming argument.

"Ït doesn't exist but if it does exist then its perfectly natural. If it isn't perfectly natural then it won't be that bad. If it is that bad then we needed to thin out the heard anyway."


Localized....started on V. Island last weekend is still hanging on in the prairies and is now pushing into N. Ontario.


Shame on you its not called global warming....it's CLIMATE CHANGE , global warming couldn't cover all the lies...


No matter how you spin it its still localized when its only a region covering a portion of the earth.

Your arguemnt gets defeated when you take into account the warmest march on record.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  1  2  3  4  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.