Another factor to be considered is the habitat fragmentation. Huge parts of the earth's surface are artificial, agricultural or degraded landscapes without natural vegetation. There often aren't any directions today for species to slide along gradients - compared to previous climate changes. When the spot (reserve, natural forest area) you are living in disappears, and when the natural "next stop" is occupied by humans and technology, where do you go? This should boost the extinction rate even more.
@CSYGUY The rate of future change is much higher than that of the transition from the last glacial to interglacial. During the last major warming, species had thousands of years to make the necessary migrations. Not so this time, if the future warming forecasts are even remotely accurate. And I won't even dignify your other comment. Did you even read the paper?
Because wildlife will also be competing with humans for habitable land I fear that species loss will be even greater. Food crop production is frequently said to need to double by 2050 to meet expected population growth and agriculture has been the single biggest driver of habitat loss and extinction since the Pleistocene.
If the author claims that Professor Mark Urban is STANDING under a sheet of aufeis, why should we believe he is in Alaska or anything else in the article for that matter?
CSYGUY
Jan 4, 2012You propose a theory and then try to disprove your theory - it is called science. Try it sometime.