
Wait, Have We Really Wiped Out 60% of Animals? - betageek
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/10/have-we-really-killed-60-percent-animals-1970/574549/?single_page=true
======
fallingfrog
Good reporting is becoming a bit rare these days, glad to see the Atlantic
being precise. It's still a worrisome report but it is important to not
misstate what that 60% figure really means.

------
xupybd
"The dichotomy between precision and impact is a false one." I love that
sentence.

I hear time and time again strong disagreements on climate change, that simply
boil down to a lack of precision on both sides. I also hear people called
climate change deniers when they try add precision. It really doesn't help get
people on board to solve the issue. We don't need propaganda to get people to
take this seriously we need to build trust instead.

------
alexandercrohde
Tl; dr:

1\. Distinguishes 60% reduction in living animals from 60% average reduction
per-species. Then cherry-picks a hypothetical where the latter is less severe
than the former (though it could be greater too).

2\. Accepts that humanity has caused a huge loss in life, but mildly distracts
by looking at "since prehistory" rather than the much more severe changes
since 1970.

3\. Concedes the distinction in point 1 is nitpicking, seemingly negating the
point of the article.

4\. Justifies itself with the explanation that without technical accuracy such
claims are easy to mistakenly lump in with conspiracy-theories and ignored.

~~~
xupybd
I think point four justifies the article brilliantly.

------
omarforgotpwd
Yes, and all the other species of humans too.

