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.
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.
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
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I will have to make a subsidiary thread, because the general knowledge of biodiversity and ecology is so poor, that the vast majority of people don't realize I am making profound, expert points.
1/🧵
I'll start with my point about species. Most are not familiar with this, as they have zero education about it, so they probably think I'm just trying to be controversial. There is no single definition of a species, and all break down at some point.
"There’s no exact figure for how many species live on Earth. As of 2024, more than 2.1 million species have been scientifically described and named, but this is likely to be nowhere near the true number living on the planet."
In other words, it is almost impossible for a layperson to understand biodiversity intellectually, when they have fundamental misconceptions about the core concepts of biodiversity. Ecology, the interactions of these species, is even less understood.
2/
What is known about the most complex field of knowledge known to humanity, is a tiny fraction of what could be known, and most of it is probably unknowable on a level of complexity, impossible for us to comprehend.
3/
A long time ago, and repeatedly over many decades, I said if @TheGreenParty had an electoral breakthrough, the establishment, the media and political mainstream, would viciously turn on them. It was not hard to foresee, when you know the tawdry reality of the establishment. 1/3
The established order, isn't a group of people working together for the public good and the country. It is a tawdry, corrupt, powerful and wealth clique, in which the powerful and rich, cooperate to make themselves even richer and more powerful, at the cost of everyone else.
2/3
The first and most important rule of Rich and Power Club is that it exists only to further the aims of those in this clique. The second rule is that it doesn't exist, and the third is, if anyone breaks ranks or threatens the aims of this clique, then they must be crushed.
3/3
"Keir Starmer has probably made his standing in the Labour party worse with the response to the byelection defeat he gave in a short broadcast interview this morning."
Let's talk about Keir Starmer, and what he is and who he really represents.
It is very clear that Keir Starmer is utterly disingenuous, and what he falsely claims he stands for, is not what he is really about, at all. Whilst Starmer is acting very stupidly, he cannot be as stupid, as he makes out.
Nothing you see about Starmer is genuine or real.
2/
I will qualify what I say, by pointing to the most salient features of his disingenuity first. Starmer claims to be acting in the interests of Labour, clearly he isn't, he's utterly destroying the Labour Party, and aiding Reform.
3/
You'd have thought if this illegal behaviour, had been certainly observed, the volunteers would have alerted election officials at the time to what was happening.
Second, more care and time would have been taken to collate these observations, before contacting the media.
2/11
On the face of it, it seems odd that no attempt was made to report this to election officials as it was happening, and why it was immediately reported to the press as soon as the polls closed, when there were 22 polling stations.
3/11
"Pollster Lord Hayward was reacting to a report issued by Democracy Volunteers, which claimed to observe high levels of ‘family voting’ the Gorton and Denton by-election"
I smell a rat. Lord Hayward is a Conservative politician.
"However, Manchester City Council, which is overseeing the by-election, was critical of the organisation for not raising concerns earlier during the day."
These "Democracy Volunteers", never said a thing, during polling. But a ssoon as polls closed they ran to the press.
I had never even heard of "family voting" before this report, and it is very clear that they are primarily referring to Asian families. See this below, to make it clear that this is what this is about.