revision

6

Tajah Fraley

English 1101

Dr. Laura Beasley

10/25/2018

The Sixth Extinction

The Sixth Extinction is written by Elizabeth Kolbert, and she clearly describes the possibility of the human species going into extinction just like other species that have gone into extinction before. She allows the reader to learn about the human species without officially introducing it by skipping its name. The reader discovers in the end that they have been reading about their own species. This makes it easy and interesting to read “The Sixth Extinction”. Humans has been in existence since time immemorial and is by far the most intelligent species on the planet today. It is not possible for humans to be extinct? (Add more of a response to the critique assignment--in other words, why is her argument effective (or ineffective)? What rhetorical strategies does she use?)

Kolbert starts by introducing a species that doesn’t have a name but one that provides names for all other creatures on earth. This is effective because Kolbert have been warning for decades that human actions are pushing life on our shared planet toward mass extinction. Such extinction events have occurred five times in the past, but a bold new paper finds that this time would be fundamentally different. Fortunately, there’s still time to stop it. She introduces the creatures that live on the eastern side of Africa. The species are not fast and very productive but it intelligent and very destructive. The species can overcome a lot of fears, and it even moves across oceans to other parts of the continent where they meet other beings that are very similar to them. They interbreed and kill off. The species is described to be destructive because it killed other animals for food. As the species continues to interbreed, and travel and to different to settle, it causes the climate of the planet to change. As these climatic changes occur, some other animals are not able to adapt as fast and they get wiped off the face of the earth. The changes occurred included extreme temperature changes which cause the sea levels to rise. Some animals also move to other parts of the planet that they can survive in. At this stage where the species is the most destructive on earth, it is given a name “homo sapiens”. This mass extinction of animals due to the activities of this species is however not the first. It actually comes after five other instances of mass extinction. (Eldredge page 4) (How does this make her argument effective? Add more analysis/critique here to avoid only summarizes the beginning of the chapter.)

Kolbert describes the extinction of those species that over time have seemed to be extinction proof as a major worry of the kind of damage that human beings are causing to the planet. Amphibians have over the years been described as the most adaptive compared to other animals. Amphibians, such as frogs have now started going into extinction. This has been a major concern especially in Panama; a place which used to host numerous gold-frogs. The fact that humans have been traveling, and influencing so much in the environment has made it impossible even for this species to survive in their natural habitats. Now those that remain are helped with care in the Panama amphibian museum.

Not everyone used to believe in the theory of extinction. Therefore, Kolbert seeks to prove to such people that certain animals used to exist many years ago, that no longer exist today. She quotes several scientists who have gathered evidence in the form of fossils and they discovered that those animals no longer exist(Which rhetorical strategy is this? ). Cuvier, one of the scientists who studied the fossils faced huge opposition from people who argued that the fossils belonged to animals that existed. However, this was not a true statement and he worked to develop a theory that he sought acceptance from both fellow scientists and the general public. Although it is difficult to prove the theory of extinction, Cuvier can convince a lot of people that it is true that animals go extinct. He even cited the considerable Biblical story about the great flood that saw the massive death of animals. (Wake, David B., and Vance T. Vredenburg).

After Cuvier, there came other scientists that sought to prove and strengthen the theory of extinction. There came William Whewell uses logic to describe extinction in two different ways that are uniformitarianism and catastrophism. (Reword for clarity). He describes extinction as a uniform process where a species cannot produce anymore and age and disease wipe out all available members one at a time. A catastrophic extinction is described as one where a whole species is mysteriously wiped out especially be a natural disaster (by what)?. Another scientist Lyell also sought to prove extinction by uniformitarianism. He closely refers the Charles Darwin’s concept that the world is constantly changing even when we think that it is not. Such changes are what makes some species to gradually be wiped out of the face of the earth. Other than stating that the state of the earth was constantly changing, Darwin also states that since extinction is as a result of such changes, then there must be as well rise of another species as one is getting wiped out. However, since the two events take a very long time to happen then the current generation of human beings might have never witnessed the rise of a species. However, we might have lived in a time when a species went out of existence without even knowing. Darwin believed that human beings are the major cause of the existence of most species on the planet. He specifically points out the rate at which a species of tortoise on the Galapagos island due to human hunting activities. This is the case for a dozen other species of animals. Other species that faced the same extinction process are the various fish species that have continued to perish due to the reduction of marine green life which is caused by increased acidity in rainwater. Other scientists that are sited in the text of the “sixth extinction” include Thomas Kuhn the famous history scientist, Walter and his son Luis Alvares and the geologists and Ken Caldaria who focused his research on the impact of carbon gases on the temperature of the earth. Darwin and other scientists believe that human beings are not any different from other species and they face the same fate of extinction with the other species, but Kolbert strongly disagrees with them. (You include a lot of summary, but make sure you focus on your critique of Kolbert's argument.)

From the context of “the sixth extinction,” Kolbert’s argument is effective because most of the extinction has been caused by humans’ activities while others have been caused by the animals failing to adapt accordingly to the changes in the environment. There have been several species that used to exist many years ago that do not exist anymore. However, humans have not gone to extinction and is not at risk of extinction. It is also because of the human species is very intelligent, and this makes it destructive. Humans are the ones that cause the extinction of other species to accommodate for its existence. Humans are very adaptive compared to other species, and this helps them survive the changes in the environment. The human species is a great threat to the existence of other species especially because it depends on this species which are inferior to it for survival. Darwin describes the tactics of survival as dangerous as they end up eliminating some species in the ecosystem as other animals strive to survive. The scientifically proven theories of extinction, therefore, show that the species that is superior in the eco-system survive the extinction. The human species is by far the most superior species compared to the other species on the planet. This makes it close to impossible to eliminate the human species because the superior species is the one that influences the changes in the eco-system. These changes are usually in favor of the species hence the changes only make the species stronger while in turn making other species weaker. ( how does this fit with Kolbert's argument and your critique?  (Leakey, Richard, and Roger Lewin)

It is, therefore, true to conclude that the extinction of different species will continue to happen on the planet as species strive to survive. The rising of new species may also become a possibility as some animals are constantly evolving, and the interbreeding. These completely evolved species will lead to other species being born. The human species cannot be wiped out through any scientifically proven methods due to its intelligence and its level of destruction, which allows it to win the battle of existence every time. (So, are you disagreeing with Kolbert? Remember, you'll want to stay focused on responding to Kolbert's argument.) Humans might, however, face challenges in the future if it continues to reproduce uncontrollably since there will be very few species to eliminate.

Works cited

Eldredge, Niles. "The sixth extinction." An Action Bioscience. org original article. American Institute of Biological Sciences (2001).

Leakey, Richard, and Roger Lewin. "The sixth extinction: biodiversity and its survival." (1996).

Wake, David B., and Vance T. Vredenburg. "Are we in the midst of the sixth mass extinction? A view from the world of amphibians." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2008).

Harris, Jack. "The sixth extinction." Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 25.4 (2000): 245-249.

Ceballos, Gerardo, Andrés García, and Paul R. Ehrlich. "The sixth extinction crisis: loss of animal populations and species." Journal of Cosmology 8.1821 (2010): 31.