Thread by @SteB777

I am hoping @ChrisGPackham will understand this as a naturalist, and he has some understanding of ecology and biodiversity, because my important points about this assessment are being ignored.

My central point is these redacted parts are of little use to us.
1/🧵

I completely agree with @GreenRupertRead that these parts should never have been redacted. However, the idea that the full unredacted report, would help us better understand these threats, is profoundly mistaken, and the ITN report is misleading.
2/

I have been making the same warnings for decades, and they were actually based on the same science and references, as this assessment used.

My point, is we don't know enough about the way our human systems rely on natural systems, to confidently make such projections.
3/

I am not saying they are overstating the threat, but under-stating it. The ITN report, gives the false caveat, that these are worse case scenarios, which are less likely to happen. I will take food supply, and illustrate which this is misleading.
4/

These projections are based on crude modelling. It is relatively easy and reliable to model climate, because of the limited variables. But when trying to model biodiversity and ecosystems, we are pissing in the dark, because of the complexity.
5/

One thing we can draw from ecology and I'm graduate in scientific ecology, is that it is not the average supply or trends, that limits a species existence in a region, but the minimum of resources or food supply. One shortfall, in one season, could wipe out this species.
6/

Nowhere is this clearer, than with human food supply. It would only take shortages in one year, to produce societal chaos. Take this research, published only a week ago. I have been warning about this, for literally decades.

7/theguardian.com/food/2026/feb/…

It is pointless worrying about GDP downturn in 2030, if a food shortage in 2028, created a collapse of the UK governance system.

You don't need absolute shortages. In a free market system, food hyperinflation could make food basics too expensive for people to afford.
8/

I keep trying to make the point, there's no field of science, no institute, studying humanity's reliance on biodiversity, natural ecosystems. We are flying totally blind, and it is all assumptions and guesswork. I keep challenging scientists to say who is researching this.
9/

There is massive denial about this. I know that scientific ecology, does not study humanity's reliance naturals systems. It only studies populations of non-human organisms. It is not a guess, it is what I'm a graduate in.
10/

This is why you won't find further useful information in this assessment, even if it wasn't redacted, because there are no experts, no research, the panel could have referred to, to create useful models, that weren't little more than guesswork.
11/

Many people have made warning about the collapse of our civilization, driven by climate change, biodiversity loss, which have wrongly been criticised as unscientific, because there was no scientific report than made these warnings.
12/

But the reason there are no scientific warnings about civilization collapse, isn't because the risk isn't real, but because there is no one, no field of science, no research programme, no institute assessing the vulnerability of our civilization.
13/

Don't take my word for it, see this peer reviewed paper that states this. For over 30 years I have been challenging senior scientists as to who is researching this, and I just get stonewalled. They assume it is being studied, but can't say by who.

14/pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pn…

I am not an alarmist or a doomonger, all I am asking for is a properly funded research programme, to establish, how much we know about the stability of ecosystems and biodiversity, and how much humanity is reliant on this.
15/

Alongside research into how resilient are our societies, our civilization to natural shocks, and how they would function, if something like food shortages/riots, a collapse of economic growth, knocked them out of kilter.
16/

Please note, that I am simply asking for research, to give us basic answers to things like what is our state of knowledge about these things, can we make future projections, with any degree of certainty. If we can't, we need to plan for the reality.
17/

Repeatedly, I find my points totally ignored by people, even though I used the best possible references and I have relevant qualifications. And most of all, even the most expert, can't answer my simple challenges.
18/

My point is, most people cannot even define what biodiversity is, have no idea how reliant we are on it, yet they are entirely sure that they can just ignore my points.

The level of denial, is off the scale. I have spent over 50 years of my life studying this.
19/

Let me make this clear. No current panel can assure us about our vulnerability to biodiversity, ecosystem and climate shocks to our civilization, as it is not being studied, and there are no experts in it. So currently it is guesswork, likely mistaken guesswork.
20/

@threadreaderapp unroll