Inside The Worlds Most Unusual Fossil Site - The La Brea Tar Pits

[Chesterton]

If you live in Louisiana, you can get paid for killing nutria.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

If you live in Louisiana, you can get paid for killing nutria.

Which is an introduced, non-endemic species to North America.

Not the same thing at all.

Your efforts at conflation are failing and very transparent.

 

[sjastro]

What is sad is how this thread has descended into trolling.
On the flip side of the coin nearly thirty years ago I purchased a 10 acre rural property which was little more than a paddock devoid of wildlife with the exception of grazing sheep.

In an exercise involving both beautifying the property and the use of science in a process known as ecological succession, I partitioned the property reserving 4 acres for sheep grazing and the rest for revegetation with the planting of Eucalyptus and Sheoaks saplings and the growth of various species of Acacias from seeds taken from nearby parks.

In the first few years there was no ecological succession until the saplings and seeds planted developed into trees, then the bird population of species such as Cockatoos, Galahs and Crested Pigeons greatly increased.
Birds participate in a process known as ornithochory where plant species produce fruits that the birds eat. The seeds are then carried and deposited elsewhere, often in bird droppings, helping regenerate and spread forest vegetation.
There are also the second generation of trees that did not involve ornithochory that have seeded to eventually produce a third generation.

Ecological succession is now in full swing where nature instead of myself has taken full responsibility for revegetation.

 

[Shemjaza]

But scientists tell us that 99% of all species that have existed have gone extinct, and I'm sorry, but there's just not enough time in my day to feel sad for all of them. I'm not totally heartless though. I'd be very sad if cows and pigs went extinct because I love a good bacon cheeseburger.

Loss of species is different to the loss of individual animals, and I distinguish between the actions of conscious humans and the inevitable mindless churning of nature.

In the modern context extinction has the added issue to us causing damage to the environment that we depend on for our air and food.

 

[Chesterton]

Which is an introduced, non-endemic species to North America.

Not the same thing at all.

Your efforts at conflation are failing and very transparent.

How is it different?

Loss of species is different to the loss of individual animals, and I distinguish between the actions of conscious humans and the inevitable mindless churning of nature.

In the modern context extinction has the added issue to us causing damage to the environment that we depend on for our air and food.

As an atheist, how do you distinguish between the actions of humans and the actions of nature?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

How is it different?

Because the species is alive in other places around the world including its native range. Extinction is total death of a species or animal. Getting rid of them in one place isn't extinction.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

As an atheist, how do you distinguish between the actions of humans and the actions of nature?

Also, I know this isn't addressed to me but... I'm sorry, but that is such a very dumb and silly question to ask.

 

[Chesterton]

Because the species is alive in other places around the world including its native range. Extinction is total death of a species or animal. Getting rid of them in one place isn't extinction.

You realize that the world is a place, right?

Also, I know this isn't addressed to me but... I'm sorry, but that is such a very dumb and silly question to ask.

If you're unable to answer a question, it's probably better to remain silent.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You realize that the world is a place, right?

Wow. What an amazing bit of information. Which does nothing to show what I said was wrong. Getting rid of a non-endemic species in one location which it is introduced to while the rest of the species still lives in its endemic location is not the total extinction that I and others are talking about.

If you're unable to answer a question, it's probably better to remain silent.

I did give an answer: that is such a very dumb and silly question to ask. You're just nowhere near as smart as you want to pretend to be for others.

 

[Chesterton]

Wow. What an amazing bit of information. Which does nothing to show what I said was wrong. Getting rid of a non-endemic species in one location which it is introduced to while the rest of the species still lives in its endemic location is not the total extinction that I and others are talking about.

Yeah I know what extinction is. You just haven't answered why I'm supposed to be sad about it.

I did give an answer: that is such a very dumb and silly question to ask. You're just nowhere near as smart as you want to pretend to be for others.

Insulting a question is not answering a question. If you want to explain why the question is dumb and silly, I'll hear you out. But this will be your third try, and three strikes you're out.

 

[Tuur]

Which is an introduced, non-endemic species to North America.

Not the same thing at all.

Your efforts at conflation are failing and very transparent.

This, however, brings up an issue: When does non-endemic become endemic?

We didn't have armadillos when I was a boy. They didn't really show up locally until I was in young adulthood. We observed them slowly moving in from the south and southwest. Now, during the Ice Age there were giant ones around locally, and for all I know maybe the little ones, but by the time the first Europeans came here, they were gone.

Cattle egret we had, but they move here. Story was that a hurricane brought them. Don't know about that, but they spread from Africa to South America and came north.

Canadian geese used to migrate through here, but over the last few decades some have taken up permanent residence.

That's natural examples of non-indigenous species moving in. Not including us humans, of course. This was without human help.

Honeybees aren't native to North America. Whether intentionally or not, they spread here with Europeans. The same with some earthworms.. The latter is said to have had an impact on debris on forest floors. Don't know, just passing that along.

Hogs came here with the Spanish, then colonists. Then European boar got mixed into this stock by hunters looking for a thrill.

Local coyotes aren't indigenous, but were allegedly introduced by fox hunters.

Horses I'll leave as an open question, as they died out or were hunted out until brought back by Europeans. Apparently there were honeybees in North America millions of years ago, but what we have now were brought by Europeans.

Snakehead fish came here courtesy of aquarium enthusiasts. Pythons and boas from pet owners.

Then there's kudzu, privet hedge, Chinaberry, mulberry, and other plant species brought here by humans.

Here's the issue: is it good that we have armadillos and cattle egret and Canadian geese because they came here naturally, but not anything brought accidentally or deliberately by man? The panic about honeybees some years ago was because of the economic impact, but they aren't a native species. Nobody gives much thought to earthworms. I don't care for kudzu at all, and Chinaberries are toxic. If you want to really hear howls of outrage, point out that wild horses are invasive species.

Being that the history of indigenous species is in constant flux, what does it matter if a species was brought in by a storm or as an ornamental? Sure, any invasive species does damage, but at what point do we say "This is indigenous and this is invasive?"

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yeah I know what extinction is. You just haven't answered why I'm supposed to be sad about it.

None is answering why you're supposed to be sad because we're saying why WE'RE sad about extinction events. Not one person has said that you should be sad about extinction events.

Insulting a question is not answering a question. If you want to explain why the question is dumb and silly, I'll hear you out. But this will be your third try, and three strikes you're out.

Because the actions of man are the actions of man, and the actions of nature are the actions of nature. You answer your question with your question.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

This, however, brings up an issue: When does non-endemic become endemic?

The issue is that I've submitted a request to moderators to get this thread cleaned up because this type of talk is off-topic and frankly ridiculous now.

 

[Tuur]

What is sad is how this thread has descended into trolling.
On the flip side of the coin nearly thirty years ago I purchased a 10 acre rural property which was little more than a paddock devoid of wildlife with the exception of grazing sheep.

In an exercise involving both beautifying the property and the use of science in a process known as ecological succession, I partitioned the property reserving 4 acres for sheep grazing and the rest for revegetation with the planting of Eucalyptus and Sheoaks saplings and the growth of various species of Acacias from seeds taken from nearby parks.

In the first few years there was no ecological succession until the saplings and seeds planted developed into trees, then the bird population of species such as Cockatoos, Galahs and Crested Pigeons greatly increased.
Birds participate in a process known as ornithochory where plant species produce fruits that the birds eat. The seeds are then carried and deposited elsewhere, often in bird droppings, helping regenerate and spread forest vegetation.
There are also the second generation of trees that did not involve ornithochory that have seeded to eventually produce a third generation.

Ecological succession is now in full swing where nature instead of myself has taken full responsibility for revegetation.

An interesting post. I live in a humid semi-tropical part of the US, and here ecological succession reclamation-wise happens naturally. Very naturally. It's a running battle with various natural species that spring up where they are inconvenient. There's a progression of species, but it all happens without human intervention. I assume it's due to the combination of temperature and rainfall promoting vegetation.

 

[Tuur]

The issue is that I've submitted a request to moderators to get this thread cleaned up because this type of talk is off-topic and frankly ridiculous now.

Off-topic perhaps. The issue of what determines indigenous and non-indigenous is hardly ridiculous. Inconvenient perhaps, but ridiculous, no. You have to wonder about the impact of honeybees on the bumblebees that were already in North America, and were already pollenating some crops raised by Native Americans. But honeybees seem to be regarded as indigenous now.

Don't worry. All these words will likely vanish away, and it will be as though it never happened...

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Off-topic perhaps. The issue of what determines indigenous and non-indigenous is hardly ridiculous. Inconvenient perhaps, but ridiculous, no. You have to wonder about the impact of honeybees on the bumblebees that were already in North America, and were already pollenating some crops raised by Native Americans. But honeybees seem to be regarded as indigenous now.

Don't worry. All these words will likely vanish away, and it will be as though it never happened...

And what does this have to do with the La Brea tar pits?

 

[Tuur]

And what does this have to do with the La Brea tar pits?

See where I wrote "Off topic perhaps." The La Brea tar pits have long fascinated me, not only by what became trapped there, but what didn't, indicating a specific point when the tar pits formed. So have discussions such as extinctions and what's indigenous and what's not. If I were to go out in my yard right now, I would likely find ant species besides fire ant that aren't indigenous, but which I regarded as indigenous simply because they've been local for my entire life.

Yes, so these words will vanish, but not my delight in what we could call the pageantry of species. Like terror birds that came to North America from South America, but have been extinct in North America for well over a million years. Or animals that crossed the Bearing Land Bridge both ways. There was once bluegrass here, giant sloths and mastodon right here where I'm typing. That's fascinating.

These words will likely soon be no more. I guess you could say they're headed for extinction. And not a tar pit to be found to put them in.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

See where I wrote "Off topic perhaps." The La Brea tar pits have long fascinated me, not only by what became trapped there, but what didn't, indicating a specific point when the tar pits formed. So have discussions such as extinctions and what's indigenous and what's not. If I were to go out in my yard right now, I would likely find ant species besides fire ant that aren't indigenous, but which I regarded as indigenous simply because they've been local for my entire life.

Yes, so these words will vanish, but not my delight in what we could call the pageantry of species. Like terror birds that came to North America from South America, but have been extinct in North America for well over a million years. Or animals that crossed the Bearing Land Bridge both ways. There was once bluegrass here, giant sloths and mastodon right here where I'm typing. That's fascinating.

These words will likely soon be no more. I guess you could say they're headed for extinction. And not a tar pit to be found to put them in.

Now, see, I would call that discussion something that is actually on topic, since while it still talks about extinctions, it talks about something that is linked to the tar pits; when they were formed, and why we only find pleistocene animals in it and not older paleolithic creatures in it.

 

[Chesterton]

None is answering why you're supposed to be sad because we're saying why WE'RE sad about extinction events. Not one person has said that you should be sad about extinction events.



Because the actions of man are the actions of man, and the actions of nature are the actions of nature. You answer your question with your question.

Third strike. You're out.

And by the way, if you're sitting in a pub or a coffee shop talking with some friends or strangers and bring up a topic, you don't get to dictate where the topic leads. Unless you want to be a dictator.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Third strike. You're out.

And by the way, if you're sitting in a pub or a coffee shop talking with some friends or strangers and bring up a topic, you don't get to dictate where the topic leads. Unless you want to be a dictator.

As the Original Poster of the thread, I do get to say if it's gone off-topic or not since I started the thread. That is basic Internet knowledge.

The only one wanting to dictate here is you, Mister self-proclaimed umpire.

But let the record show that I did answer your questions, you just didn't like the answers and ran away.