Most ecosystems in nature are critically poised within the changes and evolution of environmental factors. Changes often take place over many thousands of years, even millions of years. It took over one million years for the dinosaurs to become extinct. Previous extinction events have been "natural". In the present case, extinction of species is inextricably linked to human activity. Present extinction of species is faster and far more numerous than at any other geological time, on this planet. The present rate of extinction is about 100,000 times FASTER compared to that of the time of the dinosaurs. The events that led to the extinction of the dinosaurs were two massive bolide impacts that changed the dynamics on the surface of the planet. We, humans, are far more potent than that...

The symbol e is that which I have created to represent Organica Spiritualia. This is to relate our "spiritual being" to nature. In fact it is our human intelligence (reactive animalistic processing of environmental factors for survival into stylistical actions) that creates our "spirtual being". Our consciousness is organic, based on our memory. Most animals that have a central memorising system of environmental factors can have a consciousness of space and position.

Our individual memory is greater than that of individuals in others species and gives us the ability to invent a lot of solutions, including fake solutions that solve "problems" nonetheless... But beyond these fake solutions, including ethical solutions, there are relationship between our generosity and species that do not really matter to our survival.

Organica spiritualia gives us the power to be generous to nature beyond our needs. But our needs are bathed more and more in greed, another Organica Spiritualia activity with less ethical understanding of where we are at at this point in time — an evolved being from a soup of life on a planet to which we could decide we owe nothing to.

The relationships between human survival and that of other species is often not as important as we could think... But this relationship is more important than our needs, because at this point in time we have evolved to be where we are — together on the planet. It's an ethical choice in which our judgement (or carelessness) of life or death over other species may alter the course of our future history or not... It is a stylistic choice. Extinction of species resulting from our activities is our stylist choice. We can and should choose different and care better.

extinction of species is forever.

Insect squiggles on the wood of a tree that was burned off then felled... (note: all pictures in this series on biodiversity by Gus Leonisky)

Much of what we do has an effect on the planet. We are bringing about one of the biggest ‘mass-extinctions’ there has ever been. We destroy and pollute habitats, introduce alien species into established ecosystems, and are warming the planet faster than it has ever been warmed before. We must expect severe problems!

Modern agriculture requires us to stamp our own version of nature onto the environment. We prefer monocultures and eliminate biodiversity in the effort to produce enough food for ourselves. When ‘unproductive’ land is ‘brought under the plough’ we dismantle ecosystems that have often taken millions of years to establish themselves. We do this at our peril and we must expect the planet to ‘fight back’! If we successfully destroy all the Coral Reefs we must accept that this will affect many commercial fish species in unpredictable ways, if we remove all the rain forests we can expect weather changes, if we use pesticides without care we must accept that we will kill the good beasties along with the bad.

"We go by bicycle when daddy is running late; otherwise we walk," I told her.

"Good," she replied.

I asked why.

"Cars are bad."

I learned later that upon arrival at her reception class each day pupils have to tick a box on a piece of paper denoting how they journeyed to school that morning. Though they are never told in quite so many words that cars are actually bad, they are nevertheless steered, by their eco-aware teacher, towards the two former modes of transport – because cycling and walking are both environmentally friendly, and environmentally friendly, as my daughter appears already to know, is "good".

A week later, and we had a similar kind of conversation, this one about the fact that we currently grow no fruit or vegetables in our small garden. I informed her of the wonders of Ocado, but she insisted that self-sufficiency was better. At school, my daughter explained, they have an allotment where they grow tomatoes and strawberries, possibly potatoes and almost certainly marrows. She wants us now to do likewise.

Friends who have children older than my own have told me this is just the tip of an iceberg which (so long as the iceberg doesn't inconveniently melt due to global warming) will continue to grow as she does.

"Mine told me to turn off the hoover the other day," a father said to me, "because it used too much energy. She also stands by me while I brush my teeth, to make sure I have the tap turned off while I'm doing it."

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/daddy-where-will-the-polar-bears-live-2121710.html

A new survey shows lemurs are far more threatened than previously thought.

A group of specialists is in Madagascar - the only place where lemurs are found in the wild - to systematically assess the animals and decide where they sit on the Red List of Threatened Species.

More than 90% of the 103 species should be on the Red List, they say.

Since a coup in 2009, conservation groups have repeatedly found evidence of illegal logging, and hunting of lemurs has emerged as a new threat.

The assessment, conducted by the Primate Specialist Group of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), concludes that 23 lemurs qualify as Critically Endangered - the highest class of threat.

Fifty-two are in the Endangered classification, and a further 19 Vulnerable to extinction.

It was an astounded Charles Darwin who scientifically confirmed that plants could capture and digest prey, after years drawing them, studying them and becoming immersed in their intricate biology.

He wrote in 1860: "I care more about Drosera than the origin of all the species."

In the same letter, he noted: "I am frightened and astounded at my results ... Is it not curious that a plant should be far more sensitive to a touch than any nerve in the human body!"

Mr Bourke says: "Of course, at the time it was blasphemous to suggest that a plant could've turned the tides and be eating animal prey, but Charles Darwin was fascinated by this plant.

I think it took quite some time for Charles Darwin to release the information for fear of being locked up for being insane.

Darwin delayed the publication of his thesis on insectivorous plants for another 15 years.

Read more:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-04-01/carnivorous-plants-drosera...

Read from top...