I think your comment raises a good point. What is the point of biodiversity?
Is it preserving the current variation of the genetic codes as results of millions of years of evolution, because that's valuable in and of itself? Because this diversity could be v…
I think your comment raises a good point. What is the point of biodiversity?
Is it preserving the current variation of the genetic codes as results of millions of years of evolution, because that's valuable in and of itself? Because this diversity could be valuable to humans? Or is the amount of different animal individuals valuable for some other reason?
Is it valuable for ecological stability? Like the wolves of Yellowstone? How do we quantify that?
I am not sure I've ever read a cogent analysis of this. I would love to.
Side note: The paper you link makes a huge logic jump, from "extinction rates are much higher than background now" to "we're entering the 6th great extinction". I agree with the former, but from what I know today, not with the latter, and the paper doesn't support it.
Super interesting, thanks for sharing!
I just read the abstract and eyed the paper.
I think your comment raises a good point. What is the point of biodiversity?
Is it preserving the current variation of the genetic codes as results of millions of years of evolution, because that's valuable in and of itself? Because this diversity could be valuable to humans? Or is the amount of different animal individuals valuable for some other reason?
Is it valuable for ecological stability? Like the wolves of Yellowstone? How do we quantify that?
I am not sure I've ever read a cogent analysis of this. I would love to.
Side note: The paper you link makes a huge logic jump, from "extinction rates are much higher than background now" to "we're entering the 6th great extinction". I agree with the former, but from what I know today, not with the latter, and the paper doesn't support it.