The world’s fish are in danger—as is everyone who depends on them

Category: Science, Video

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

11 Responses to “Fished Out”

  1. Petey Wheatstraw says:

    We’ve surpassed Peak Fish, by a long shot.

    Next comes the Fish Wars.

    I remember in elementary school, in the ’60s, being taught that the world’s oceans held an inexhaustible supply of food for a hungry world.

    It’s starting to look like might have to nuke the planet/village to save it.

    • constantnormal says:

      No need for nukes, population dynamics will manage things without nukes … in nature, the “free market” actually works, with plenty of checks and balances to restore balance … things like mass extinctions, which usually start from the bottom of the food chain and unstoppably work their way up. Nature does not believe in the Federal Reserve or FDIC, when a species screws up, everybody pays the price.

      Most problems contain within themselves the kernel of a solution.

      I never said it would be a tolerable solution — Nature cares nothing for that, only that it is Effective. And extinction is the ultimate in problem removal.

  2. Joe says:

    I was born in 1950 and grew up in SF. Been eating in an affluent port city all my life. The variety of fish available in stores and at restaurants from my childhood and young adulthood is a sad memory.

  3. honeybadger says:

    Thanks for posting this.

  4. ch says:

    This article demonstrates a dirty little secret of the economics profession:

    While economists have ridiculed the “Limits to Growth” book from the 1970s, the path the world has followed since then is following closely the scenario laid out in that book.

    That fact plus the rise of rehypothecation, derivatives point to a scary answer to the question: “Why are the global elites putting so much of their wealth into hard assets?”

    Paper claims are a high multiple of real stuff and the supply of real stuff like fish is shrinking

    Take a look at coal production on a btu basis. Oil production on a btu basis.

    Gold production/ore quality. Copper production/Ore quality. Farmland per capita…

  5. WanderingTao says:

    The Global Footprint Network calculates that in 1993 the human population first began to consume more resources than the biosphere can replenish. The trend has accelerated since then and today every eight months humanity uses a year’s worth of resources. If GFN is correct, our choices are inevitably either limiting consumption or collapse. Both would involve monumental societal changes. The former would require limits to individuals “freedom” to acquire and use natural resources, the latter would be the establishment of a human behavioral sink.

  6. Slash says:

    Nah. Let’s just continue to treat the earth like a used tissue. Then when various natural systems accelerate in their collapse, we can sit around and whine about how nobody saw it coming.

  7. WanderingTao says:

    Perhaps banning Maalox at competitions would Darwin that demographic.