• Radicalized@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s called a cascade extinction event. With each endangered species their ecosystem is affected, leading to more becoming endangered. Eventually a threshold will be passed where human intervention won’t be enough to save them from extinction.

    • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Eventually a threshold will be passed where human intervention won’t be enough to save them from extinction.

      It’s unfair for humans to claim “saving” creatures from what humans have done to their respective ecosystems to begin with.

      It’s like setting a nursing home on fire and randomly helping 2 residents out as you leave. You didn’t save 2 people, you murdered 198 instead of 200.

      • TeryVeneno@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes and no, the humans doing the “saving” and the ones doing the “killing” are different groups. So it’s still technically a save but only as far as different humans have different interests. The culpability is still as a whole on us as a species.

  • lugal@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    If the number is rising, they clearly aren’t dying out. Checkmate atheist

    • ickplant@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wonder the same thing, the little article that came with the chart did not explain this.

  • iAmTheTot@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    How much of this is due to finding a new species or something, versus a previously not endangered species becoming endangered?