Re: Extinction and Loss of Habitat

From: "Julius Boos" ju-bo at email.msn.com> on 2001.11.07 at 00:37:16(7759) Dear Ted, The Do-do? Passenger pigeon? Stellar`s sea cow?? The giant Auk?? ALMOST the American buffalo? The whooping cranes?? The Tasmanian marsupial 'tiger'? Need a few more?? Keep up with a 'changeable world"??? Surely you jest---'pave paradise and put up a parking lot', and I guess we have to expect all the plants and animals to then 'change' to be able to live on a barren expanse of cement??? Come ON! Respectfully, Julius +More >>Am I missing something? Did the big dinosaurs die off because of loss of habitat? Most species have died out because they are failures of one sort or another or are not able to keep up with a changeable world. This is basic Darwin and modern permutations thereof. I think I am safe in saying this is science. "Ron Iles" AROID-L m.net> Sent by: cc: aroid-l@mobot. Fax to: org Subject: Re: Extinction and Loss of Habitat 11/06/01 11:25 AM Please respond to aroid-l Ted! You must be joking? Ron ----- Original Message ----- To: "Multiple recipients of list AROID-L" Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 4:12 AM Subject: Extinction and Loss of Habitat I take exception to the statement that most extinctions are caused by loss of habitat. Surely some, maybe many are in the large scheme. But new predation, disease, and plain old climate alteration must be right up there. And then there is the probable fact that some species are just not well evolved - failures, in other words. I think habitat loss gets a big following since it is an obvious factor in large animal extinctions, particularly those of recent times. You know, the warm fuzzies. I wish I had the Book of Life and could review the numbers on this that would include all "species", including the millions that have perished since the beginning. Just a skeptic about sweeping pronouncements. ted.held@hstna.com

Note: this is a very old post, so no reply function is available.