> 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction
I'm well aware of the subject. If you open the link you'll see that the baseline is not "natural extinction rates" but "background extinction rates". That is rates during the periods of time when environment doesn't change. When environment does change however the rates are orders of magnitude higher. We live in the times of change.
Whether the Holocene extinction is on the level of the big six or on the level of other 30+ smaller known extinction events is up to the debate. Either way it's nothing new. You are here today thanks to all these extinction events, be grateful not to be a trilobite.
The comment I was replying above just throws together a bunch of words that sound good, like "diversity" and "sustainable", without any attempt at an actual analysis of the situation. That is not appreciated.
If you open the link you'll see that the current "change" is caused by humans. Spreading invasive species isn't the most significant cause, but it is a cause. So I don't see how that contests what I said.
Yes. And it's not the first time when one of the species change the environment so much to cause a mass extinction events. So what's your point?
> So I don't see how that contests what I said.
It depends on what you said because I don't see your messages up in the thread. Would be glad to reply to a specific opinion.
Sorry, but I'm a bit baffled why you're being so insulting when you clearly don't know much about the subject at hand.
Yes, extinctions happen naturally.
Also yes, humans are causing extinction rates 100 to 1,000 times higher than natural extinction rates[1]
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction