Best ecology books according to redditors

We found 571 Reddit comments discussing the best ecology books. We ranked the 158 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top Reddit comments about Ecology:

u/aspartame_junky · 122 pointsr/politics

They have already tried to establish their own "facts" with Conservapedia.

For example, Conservapedia suggests that the Theory of Relativity is not supported by evidence, and in fact, says "Claims that relativity was used to develop the Global Positioning System (GPS) are false." ... This assertion by Conservapedia is itself just plain false.

Chris Mooney goes into much more depth with this and other examples in his book "The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science - and Reality", worth checking out.

EDIT: I just checked out a few entries in Conservapedia. The following are good for a laugh:

Global Warming



Counterexamples to an Old Earth

u/HorseVaginaBeholder · 119 pointsr/funny

Unfortunately his non-fiction book Last Chance to See about a serious subject is waaaayyyy underrated because everybody concentrates on HHGTTG. I laughed much more while reading Last Chance to See.

As a German my favorite part was when DA described two German tourists in his group when they go to see mountain gorillas in Zaire.

Quotes from the book (but with all the context missing they are not nearly as good as actually reading the whole book, also, I've doubts those quotes are the best parts)



u/16807 · 110 pointsr/space

Voyager is nuclear, so no

EDIT: oh fine

Solar power isn't practical for use in the outer solar system. This is why Voyager was designed to use nuclear power, which places a hard constraint on its life at the expense of being able to operate longer in a time span we can appreciate. There are other reasons, of course - it's not automated to my understanding, its antenna is doubtlessly far too small to operate at those distances, and the time it would require for us to send instructions may be too long for us to bother doing it, barring all other impossibilities.

That being said, I find it rather profound Voyager would last long enough that it is possible to visit a star system, if only out of sheer probability. This book talks about it a bit, it's not my thought. It's an interstellar vacuum - there is nothing stopping this thing from enduring for millions or even billions of years. The pyramids will be buried, Mt. Rushmore will erode, continents will subduct our last earthly remnants, and random collisions may destroy our interplanetary artifacts. The sun itself will explode, possibly destroying the earth with it. All while this is going on, Voyager is just minding its own business. It (beside other interstellar probes) would be the longest lasting human artifact of all time.

u/pithed · 80 pointsr/news

Everyone should have this book:

i don't forage for mushrooms but have the book on my coffee table because the cover makes me giggle every time I see it.

u/Cr4nkY4nk3r · 60 pointsr/pics

Last Chance to See - one of my favorite books ever!!!

u/tubergibbosum · 42 pointsr/Portland

Two general types of experience you can get: hands-on, and book learning.

The former is very important, but not too difficult to do. A fair number of people in the Portland area go mushroom hunting occasionally, even if they only know a species of two. Sucking up to the right people is surprisingly effective. Also, getting in touch with or joining organizations like Oregon Mycological Society or the Cascade Mycological Society can be immensely helpful in making contacts and finding hunting partners/mentors.

The latter is also very important, as there is some much you can learn without actually holding a mushroom in your hands. For books, accessible guides like Mushrooms of the Pacific Northwest and All That the Rain promises and More are great for getting started, and heftier books like Mushrooms Demystified are good for those looking to take the next step in learning. Online, the hunting and identification board on The Shroomery, Mushroom Observer, and /r/mycology are great places to lurk and just soak in info, while sites like Mushroom Expert are good places to explore and follow what interests you.

u/dkuhry · 41 pointsr/television

This will be good. If you have interest in this topic and famous Brits, you should read Last Chance to See by Douglas Adams (Author of the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy).

He travels the world and experiences some of the most endangered animals and writes about them and the experience in the way that ONLY he can. (it was written in the late 80s, so some species he writes about are in fact now extinct)

u/davidmcw · 37 pointsr/pics

'Last Chance To See' - one of my favourite books

u/mdwyer · 33 pointsr/funny

Here's the 5-degrees of geek that makes this even cooler: This is from a show called "Last Chance to See". It is based on a book called, naturally, "Last Chance to See". The author of this book? Douglas Adams. The author of the Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy.

If you get a chance to read it, do so. It is a great book.

u/nicmos · 32 pointsr/askscience

I know this will be buried, but:

just to be clear, psychologists do not have a clear understanding of the mechanism behind motivated reasoning. all of the persuasion resistance strategies mentioned in the reference you provided are really downstream of the process, they are strategies that result from this motivated reasoning.

it's sort of like asking how Lionel Messi is so good at scoring goals (or LeBron James and basketball or whatever), and answering, "he uses such and such strategies" but that still doesn't answer why he scores all those goals as opposed to other people. it's part of the answer, yes, but not a complete answer. when does he use which strategies? how does he make the decision what strategy to use? when are they more or less effective? there are lots of questions remaining in addition to the critical one of determining the exact mechanism(s).

I'm also surprised you didn't cite the most complete account of motivated reasoning in a journal format, which is Kunda, Z. (1990) in Psychological Bulletin, p. 108.

edit:changed a 'why' to a 'how'. also, for a good recent treatment of this, Chris Mooney, a journalist, as a book The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science and Reality which doesn't actually answer those gaps I have brought up, but is a good intro into some of the science nonetheless.

u/Taricha_torosa · 31 pointsr/mycology

A friend took me when I was a bright-eyed and bushy-tailed college kid. I took our findings to a mycologist on campus who spent 20 minutes describing proper browning-in-butter protocol. I was hooked- both on mushrooming and the goofy people involved. I already collect field identification books, so I have a shelf in my bookcase just for mushroom ID and foraging. Every time i go out i try to ID a new mushie. Anything im super lost on i take to a mycologist friend in town, or i email the prof at OSU (which is 30 minutes drive) and bug them with it.

I also have permits for personal collection of mushrooms in all the local national forests (most were free) and researched the county and state park rules for collection on their property. Gotta be responsible, yo.

I recommend picking up All That Rain Promises and More (link) and the unabridged Mushrooms Demystified link2 because i reference both a TON, The first one is waterproof, and David is a certified goofball.

u/mista2kool · 30 pointsr/interestingasfuck

The World Without Us is about exactly that. Really good read.

u/vurplesun · 30 pointsr/

First read about these guys in 'Last Chance to See' by Douglas Adams. Worth a read.

Edit: Ah, what the hell...

Of these, the kakapo is the strangest. Well, I suppose the penguin is a pretty peculiar kind of creature when you think about it, but it's quite a robust kind of peculiarness, and the bird is perfectly well adapted to the world in which it finds itself, in a way the kakapo is not. The kakapo is a bird out of time. If you look one in its large, round, greeny-brown face, it has a look of serenely innocent incomprehension that makes you want to hug it and tell it that everything will be all right, though you know that it probably will not be.

It is an extremely fat bird. A good-sized adult will weigh about six or seven pounds, and its wings are just about good for waggling a bit if it thinks it's about to trip over something - but flying is completely out of the question. Sadly, however, it seems that not only has the kakapo forgotten how to fly, but it has also forgotten that it has forgotten how to fly. Apparently, a seriously worried kakapo will sometimes run up a tree and jump out of it, whereupon it flies like a brick and lands in a graceless heap on the ground.*

u/najjex · 28 pointsr/mycology

Start by picking a guide for your area and reading it thoroughly, especially focusing on the anatomy of a mushroom. Go hunting a lot bringing back what you find, take spore prints and work though the IDs. Also joining a NAMA affiliated club will help tremendously.

Regional guides


Common Interior Alaska Cryptogams

Western US

All The Rain Promises and More
Mushrooms of the Pacific Northwest

Midwestern US

Mushrooms of the Midwest

Edible Wild Mushrooms of Illinois and Surrounding States

Mushrooms of the Upper Midwest

Southern US

Texas Mushrooms: A Field Guide

Mushrooms of the Southeastern United States

Midwestern US

Mushrooms of the Midwest

Edible Wild Mushrooms of Illinois and Surrounding States

Mushrooms of the Upper Midwest

Eastern US

Mushrooms of West Virginia and the Central Appalachians

Mushrooms of Northeast North America (This was out of print for awhile but it's they're supposed to be reprinting so the price will be normal again)

Mushrooms of Northeastern North America

Macrofungi Associated with Oaks of Eastern North America(Macrofungi Associated with Oaks of Eastern North America)

Mushrooms of Cape Cod and the National Seashore

More specific guides

Psilocybin Mushrooms of the World

North American Boletes

Tricholomas of North America

Milk Mushrooms of North America

Waxcap Mushrooms of North America

Ascomycete of North America

Ascomycete in colour

Fungi of Switzerland: Vol. 1 Ascomycetes


For Pholiotas

For Chlorophyllum

For parasitic fungi, Hypomyces etc "Mushrooms that Grow on other Mushrooms" by John Plischke. There's a free link to it somewhere but I cant find it.

Websites that aren't in the sidebar

For Amanita

For coprinoids

For Ascos

MycoQuebec: they have a kickass app but it's In French

Messiah college this has a lot of weird species for polypores and other things

Books that provide more info than field Mycology

The Kingdom of Fungi Excellent coffee table book has nice pictures and a breif guide to Fungal taxonomy and biology.

The Fifth Kingdom A bit more in depth

Introduction toFungi Textbook outlining metobolic, taxonomic and ecological roles of fungi. Need some level of biochemistry to have a grasp for this one but it's a good book to have.

u/r_a_g_s · 27 pointsr/politics

> I think there must be some sort of primordial fear mechanism that Fox/Roger Ailes know how to exploit.

tl;dr Strong correlation between "being conservative" and "brain that tends to respond more strongly to fear, with bigger fear-handling brain parts [the amygdala]".

  • Mother Jones article from 2013 by Chris Mooney, "The Surprising Brain Differences Between Democrats and Republicans"

  • One of the studies referred to in the article

    > What they found is that people who have more fearful disposition also tend to be more politically conservative, and less tolerant of immigrants and people of races different from their own. As [Brown University researcher Rose] McDermott carefully emphasizes, that does not mean that every conservative has a high fear disposition. "It's not that conservative people are more fearful, it's that fearful people are more conservative," as she puts it.

  • The second study referred to in the article

    > Darren Schreiber, a political neuroscientist at the University of Exeter in the United Kingdom, first performed brain scans on 82 people participating in a risky gambling task, one in which holding out for more money increases your possible rewards, but also your possible losses. Later, cross-referencing the findings with the participants' publicly available political party registration information, Schreiber noticed something astonishing: Republicans, when they took the same gambling risk, were activating a different part of the brain than Democrats.

    > Republicans were using the right amygdala, the center of the brain's threat response system. Democrats, in contrast, were using the insula, involved in internal monitoring of one's feelings. Amazingly, Schreiber and his colleagues write that this test predicted 82.9 percent of the study subjects' political party choices—considerably better, they note, than a simple model that predicts your political party affiliation based on the affiliation of your parents.

  • Chris Mooney's book The Republican Brain

    > There is a growing body of evidence that conservatives and liberals don't just have differing ideologies; they have different psychologies. How could the rejection of mainstream science be growing among Republicans, along with the denial of expert consensus on the economy, American history, foreign policy, and much more? Why won't Republicans accept things that most experts agree on? Why are they constantly fighting against the facts? Increasingly, the answer appears to be: it's just part of who they are.

    > Mooney explores brain scans, polls, and psychology experiments to explain why conservatives today believe more wrong things; appear more likely than Democrats to oppose new ideas; are less likely to change their beliefs in the face of new facts; and sometimes respond to compelling evidence by doubling down on their current beliefs.

    > The answer begins with some measurable personality traits that strongly correspond with political preferences. For instance, people more wedded to certainty tend to become conservatives; people craving novelty, liberals. Surprisingly, openness to new experiences and fastidiousness are better predictors of political preference than income or education. If you like to keep your house neat and see the world in a relatively black and white way, you're probably going to vote Republican. If you've recently moved to a big city to see what else life has to offer, you're probably going to vote Democrat. These basic differences in openness and curiosity, Mooney argues, fuel an "expertise gap" between left and right that explains much of the battle today over what is true.

  • 2011 Psychology Today article "Conservatives Big on Fear, Brain Study Finds" that refers to this study which says:

    > We found that greater liberalism was associated with increased gray matter volume in the anterior cingulate cortex, whereas greater conservatism was associated with increased volume of the right amygdala. These results were replicated in an independent sample of additional participants. Our findings extend previous observations that political attitudes reflect difference in self-regulatory conflict monitoring and recognition of emotional faces by showing that such attitudes are reflected in human brain structure. Although our data do not determine whether these regions play a causal role in the formation of political attitudes, they converge with previous work to suggest a possible link between brain structure and psychological mechanisms that mediate political attitudes.
u/BoomptyMcBloog · 17 pointsr/environment

This subject is discussed extensively in the book The World Without Us:

>“Any idea what these are?” Thompson is guiding a visitor along the shore of the Plym River estuary, near where it joins the sea...Amid twigs and seaweed fibers in his fistful of sand are a couple of dozen blue and green plastic cylinders about two millimeters high.

>“They’re called nurdles. They’re the raw materials of plastic production. They melt these down to make all kinds of things.” He walks a little farther, then scoops up another handful. It contains more of the same plastic bits: pale blue ones, greens, reds, and tans. Each handful, he calculates, is about 20 percent plastic, and each holds at least 30 pellets.

>“You find these things on virtually every beach these days. Obviously they are from some factory.”

>However, there is no plastic manufacturing anywhere nearby. The pellets have ridden some current over a great distance until they were deposited here—collected and sized by the wind and tide.


>[Thompson] devised an aquarium experiment, using bottom-feeding lugworms that live on organic sediments, barnacles that filter organic matter suspended in water, and sand fleas that eat beach detritus. In the experiment, plastic particles and fibers were provided in proportionately bite-size quantities. Each creature promptly ingested them.

>When the particles lodged in their intestines, the resulting constipation was terminal. If they were small enough, they passed through the invertebrates’ digestive tracts and emerged, seemingly harmlessly, out the other end. Did that mean that plastics were so stable that they weren’t toxic? At what point would they start to naturally break down—and when they did, would they release some fearful chemicals that would endanger organisms sometime far in the future?

>Richard Thompson didn’t know. Nobody did, because plastics haven’t been around long enough for us to know how long they’ll last or what happens to them. His team had identified nine different kinds in the sea so far, varieties of acrylic, nylon, polyester, polyethylene, polypropylene, and polyvinyl chloride. All he knew was that soon everything alive would be eating them.

>“When they get as small as powder, even zooplankton will swallow them.”

I have to wonder why an article like this would get so many downvotes...are there that many users subscribed to Environment just so they can downvote any article that actually points out how bad the situation really is?

u/[deleted] · 17 pointsr/childfree

1.I don't think babies or kids are cute either. You are far from alone.

2.Why are you worried about your lineage? Are you from a noble family or something?

But think of it this way, there are 7 Billion people on Earth. Why are you so special that you need to breed?

You would be helping humanity more by not breeding.

Read this book:

Summary taken from New York Times article on it

>Some seven billion people are alive today; the United Nations estimates that by the end of the century we could number as many as 15.8 billion. Biologists have calculated that an ideal population — the number at which everyone could live at a first-world level of consumption, without ruining the planet irretrievably — would be 1.5 billion.


>Weisman visits more than 20 countries and interviews countless local scientists, families and policy directors, but the problem is always the same: There are too many people.

u/mess_is_lore · 16 pointsr/orlando

Architecture student here. A good book to read is The World Without Us if you're interested in what happens to infrastructure days to millennia after we are gone.

The building is definitely prone to mold spores and rodent infestations. In years to come I imagine the infiltration of vegetation will weaken the structure if upkeep is suspended. Other than that, it will probably become a large, 'modern' bat house.

u/jaggazz · 16 pointsr/Hunting

Anything by Steven Rinella. (Meat Eater, Scavenger's Guide to haute Cuisine, American Buffalo and The Complete Guide to Hunting, Butchering, and Cooking Wild Game: Volume 1: Big Game (Volume 2 Small Game comes out soon). I've read them all.

A sand county almanac is really good too by Aldo Leopold..

If you like humor, anything by Bill Heavy.

And for Shitter material, you can't beat this collection of short stories.

u/UserNamesCantBeTooLo · 16 pointsr/worldnews

You're right not to get worked up about it. It's just that it's an amazing example of the power of nukes.

And yes, the Earth's ecosystem has survived much worse over billions of years, but that's an empty argument. It's like saying that there's nothing to be bothered about when you're exposed to asbestos, because your country's population will be fine. You're not concerned about the country's population, you're concerned about your own health.

We're not concerned about the ecosystem for its own sake, we're concerned about our own species's wellbeing. Nuclear weapons are particularly bad for people.

And yes, ecologically there are a lot worse things going on. I'm not saying there aren't.

As I said at the beginning, the point isn't how terribly nuclear weapons tests have already poisoned everything, it's that it's amazing that trace amounts of them have already spread all around the globe--and that's a warning that continued use of nukes could lead to notable harm. Harm has been mitigated by things like the switch to exclusively underground testing, followed by the complete ban on nuclear weapons tests. It's silly to downplay the danger of nukes when the only thing keeping it in check is the wariness of the world's nations about nukes.

u/kyuubi42 · 15 pointsr/books

Siddhartha - Herman Hesse is a good one (also available on project Gutenberg)

A Sand County Almanac - Aldo Leopold is slightly longer, but a book I feel everyone must read at some point (at least the first half)

u/someguynamedg · 15 pointsr/Portland

It also has my absolute favorite cover of ANY book. Middle of the woods? Check. Massive fungus? Check. Trombone? Sure. Tuxedo? Why the hell not. It is simply magnificent.

u/Ihateourlives2 · 13 pointsr/news

You are asking questions that have been asked for a hundred years. Of course its hard to tell what the best way to live in or outside of the enviroment. Should we try to introduce predators instead of hunting? Should we let disease and starvation natural run its course rather than hunting? Should humans have any conscience role in trying to shape the environment? Or should we just isolate ourselves as much as possible?

All things me or you can never know. I like hunting, I dont mind buying tickets to hunt or fish. I liked volunteering to clean up the swamp and do some planting in the mouth of the lake I used to fish. Should I continue to try and be the Tenet of the land like Leopold said a long time ago, or should I just isolate myself and hope that society will figure that all out without me.

u/CaptainJackVernaise · 13 pointsr/TwoXChromosomes

If you're into field guides, you should check out All That the Rain Promises and More... by David Arora. It is amazing. Definitely worth stealing if you're ever ransacking somebody's place and you notice it on the shelf.

u/keener101 · 13 pointsr/askscience

I'm still a student, but let me give some small insight on this.

Apex predators can be keystone predators - meaning they exert an unequal influence on the trophic system. If they disappear, the whole system is severely damaged. But that's a different matter (but I recommend a book!)

Let's compare two keystone predators - bears and wolves - and the interactions they might have on deer populations.

Wolves are pack hunters. They directly chase and take down their prey. Because of this, wolves choose some prey over others. A wolf pack might kill a straggler - a weak, older deer, or one with injuries. They might also go for a large prize, maybe a massive buck with a large rack that slows it down (damn you sexual selection!).

The main takeaway is that wolves are killing adults. Wolves aren't likely to select young over full adults - a major advantage of pack hunting is to take down large and difficult-to-catch prey, so they would be squandering that if they targeted the little ones.

Bears, on the other hand, are ambush predators. They sit and they wait for something to encounter it (then they might stalk it). I think most big felids are this way too. Because of this, bears have a lower amount of choice in prey selection. You don't see bears chasing herds of elk across mountain valleys, or working in packs to cut off their unwary prey. They sit, and they wait, and then they maul.

The impact of this is that less experienced prey ends up making the fatal mistake of walking into a grisly (grizzly? har har) death. It's usually young deer that wander a bit too far away from their mothers, or the starving young adult who is going into new territory to find food. Bears usually kill younger prey.

Think about the ecological impacts on a species from these two predation pressures. The death of an old/sick/injured deer is likely to not cause a lot of harm (note that it won't cause a lot of harm - not that it won't influence) to the population. That old deer isn't likely to produce any more children, and the sick or injured one is likely to die soon anyway, and probably wouldn't be selected to mate with. A large buck might be quickly replaced by other rivals following his death, and his children (his investment) are still alive.

The loss of children, on the other hand, has profound effects on population dynamics. A baby deer killed represents a complete loss in investment of the parents, and any possible chance of those genes being spread by that child. Not only has all the work you've put into raising your child go to waste, but all the missed opportunity costs (energy, time, more breeding). No genes will be passed on from all that work. A child will not increase a population via his offspring or his offsprings offspring. A dead elder killed by wolves might not produce any more children - but a dead child will result in the loss of potential offspring that compounds across generations.

The effect of predators on prey is partially determined by what life stage of the prey the predators kill.

u/0ldgrumpy1 · 12 pointsr/Trumpgret

Actually it's way worse than that. Emotional reasoning affects people of all I.Q.s, they can be completely able to make rational decisions as long as they are not emotionally invested in it. As soon as it is something emotional, their reasoning goes to shit. The more intelligent they are, the better they are at defending the emotional position to themselves. And no, this isn't a false equivalence argument , there is a ton of evidence that the right wing are way worse, plus fox etc use it deliberately and always lead with something fear or anger inducing so they can get their bullshit in while logic is effectively switched off. Good sources,


u/johnrobe · 12 pointsr/videos

For those who have not read Douglas Adams' book Last Chance to See I highly recommend it.

This encounter took place as Douglas' friend Stephen traveled to the same places Douglas went in an attempt to see how things had changed since the original publishing of the book.

The bird in this clip is a Kakapo, and it was one of the most touching and funny parts of the original book. There was no porn in the original though.

u/JohnnyValet · 11 pointsr/politics

There is a recent book about just this phenomena.

The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science- and Reality

u/em_as_in_mancy · 10 pointsr/oregon

All That the Rain Promises and More: A Hip Pocket Guide to Western Mushrooms I loved this book. It’s quirky but wonderful.

u/Sanpaku · 10 pointsr/collapse

"Neomalthusian" is just a catch all phrase for the modern study of resource limits and human ecological overshoot.

It's modern origin is in the Club of Rome's funding of Donella H. Meadows systems dynamics work, which lead to the 1972 Limits to Growth report and regular updates since. Other good resources are Will Cattton's 1980 book Overshoot: The Ecological Basis of Revolutionary Change,
Joel Cohen's 1996 How Many People Can the Earth Support, and Alan Weisman's 2013 Countdown: Our Last, Best Hope for a Future on Earth. There's no shortage of books and academic studies which have drawn on these more popular titles (LtG, OS, HMPCtES, CD), but they're a good intro.

u/spodek · 10 pointsr/nyc

Nothing new is necessary.

Countdown by Alan Weisman, describes many nations that have lowered birth rates without coercion to increases in joy and abundance.

Usually it results from making contraception widely available, education, and concerted PR.

u/silfo80 · 9 pointsr/videos

The Book is pretty great:

Kinda reads like Bill Bryson or Mary Roach

u/annoyingbeggar · 9 pointsr/AskAcademia

Give yourself time and find out what interests you. In high school and as an undergraduate you will have plenty of time to explore different options to see what fits you best and in the meantime read some popular science books on climate change to get an idea of what kind of research is being done, what is already known, and a feel for the general direction of the fields. Unless you are a prodigy, you're going to have around 6 years before you are able to even scratch the surface on research and a lot will change in that time. I'll post back in a bit with some book recommendations if you'd like.

The Sixth Extinction by Elizabeth Kolbert
Field Notes from a Catastrophe by Elizabeth Kolbert
Climate Change: A Very Short Introduction by Mark Maslin

And as weird a suggestion as this may seem, one of the best lay books on some of the social aspects of climate change is probably Laudito Si by Pope Francis. Take or leave the religious aspects but his analysis of the social impacts is a good general summary of where most social scientists who study climate change stand.

u/ItsAConspiracy · 8 pointsr/climatechange

The heat-trapping effect of greenhouse gases is basic physics, known for over a century. So to believe that the Earth is warming but it's not our fault, you have to believe that:

  1. After 10,000 years of exceptional climate stability, the planet just coincidentally warmed up a lot right after we increased the atmospheric CO2 concentration by 43%, and

  2. There's some unknown negative feedback which is countering the known warming effect of the greenhouse gases we emitted, and

  3. There's another unknown natural process which is actually doing the warming.

    To dig into the case in more detail, the best source I've found is Hansen's Storms of My Grandchildren. He focuses on physics and geological history, rather than complicated computer models, and works through multiple lines of evidence.

    On another tack, a book which is often recommended but I haven't read yet is Merchants of Doubt, which documents how the fossil fuel companies are using the same tactics the tobacco companies used, to get the public to doubt well-established science.
u/l0rdishtar · 7 pointsr/politics

I found this to be a fairly decent book on the subject, it involved a lot of neuroscience and cogsci studies.

u/epiphanot · 7 pointsr/politics

Chris Mooney's The Republican Brain has some interesting things to say related to this. As does John Dean's Conservatives Without Conscience.

u/gofkyourselfthendie · 7 pointsr/antinatalism

Top is "The Sixth Extinction".

The fattest one in middle is Countdown.

u/DangerToDangers · 7 pointsr/Awwducational

I first heard from it from Last Chance to See, which is the least popular book Douglas Adams has written but the one he's the most proud of. So if anyone likes Douglas Adams, I think they owe it to themselves to read that book.

It also features the guy being shagged by the kakapo.

u/LordDinglebury · 7 pointsr/HeavySeas

Check out a book called The Wave: In Pursuit of the Rogues, Freaks, and Giants of the Ocean, by Susan Casey. She goes into quite a bit of detail about what happened to the München.

u/SwivelPoint · 7 pointsr/pics

and for you west coasters and trombone enthusiasts All That the Rain Promises and More

u/fatninja111 · 6 pointsr/UnresolvedMysteries

here's one I recommend to new divers. Pretty much every fatal diving accident involves someone diving beyond their ability.

u/joe24pack · 6 pointsr/

Kunstler is relatively mild, he still thinks we can survive this. Look for some of Jay Hanson's writings or even Catton's book.

u/hearforthepuns · 6 pointsr/science

The World Without Us may interest you.

u/GlassDarkly · 6 pointsr/InfrastructurePorn

Here's the book:

Don't know about the series, though.

u/Skadwick · 6 pointsr/BeAmazed

> Our homes and cities won't break down, and neither will a lot of what we have produced (should humans disappear).

They will more so than you might think, just on a longer scale than something like a bird's nest. Check out 'The World Without Us'

We and everything we do is literally a part of nature. The universe is a closed system and everything is increasing entropy :)

u/carn2fex · 6 pointsr/politics

Reminds me of this book. Steps through what would happen if humans suddenly stepped away from all the gulf coast chemical plants.. yikes: The World Without Us

u/Ikasatu · 6 pointsr/programming

This is a phenomenon described thoroughly by Douglas Adams in his less-fictional-than-usual account of a zoologically-focused trip he'd taken.

In a certain chapter, he gives the details of a bird with a specific sort of problem: this bird has invented something to make its life easier.

Most birds need to spend time incubating their nests, but the bird he describes creates a heap of material which warms the egg, so that it's free to go and do other things, such as hunt for food.

The inherent difficulty here is that the body of the bird regulates its own temperature, where the heap does not.
Thus, the bird has to constantly attend to the matter, adding here, subtracting there, in order to maintain the exact temperatures needed to incubate their young.

He then compared that to his own interest in computers, especially that he might spend the entire afternoon creating a program which will calculate a very close approximation the volume of the heaps created by these birds, instead of just figuring it out on paper, and then getting on with writing the rest of the book.

u/sarcastic_jerk · 6 pointsr/surfing

That wave is absurd... I like to imagine Laird riding much bigger waves than these and just not putting it out there. After reading The Wave I see these and wonder what he's up to, they talk a lot about 'Egypt' which is supposed to be enormous and insane. Anyway, if you want to know what his point of view on waves like this is, check that book out. It's a good quick read.

u/for_esme · 6 pointsr/pics

Yes, it is a man in a tuxedo, holding a flugelhorn & large fungi, sneaking around in a forest.

Apparently the book got this glowing review by the NYTimes: "is certainly the best guide to fungi, and may in fact be a long lasting masterpiece in guide writing for all subjects."

*Edit: (On Amazon, it's the #1 Best Seller in "Mushrooms in Biological Sciences")

u/jkmabry · 5 pointsr/mycology

All That the Rain Promises and More: A Hip Pocket Guide to Western Mushrooms

u/ramilusthedope · 5 pointsr/Anarchism

Biology doesn't the work the way the Neo-Darwinists, who you're thinking of, tells it does.

I recommend you take a look at this paper:

I also would recommend at the work of biologists like:

The famous physiologist Denis Noble and his two books:

"Dance to the Tune of Life: Biological Relativity":

"The Music of Life: Biology Beyond Genes":

James A. Shapiro's "Evolution: A View from the 21st Century":

u/seanosul · 5 pointsr/politics

Actually have a read of this

just as a starting point.

u/Gffcom · 5 pointsr/climate

No. We are in the middle of a mass extinction. Endless species have become endangered or extinct in the last hundred years. I realize what the article says, my critique of the article is that it’s happening now. The author posits present reality as a possible future.

u/turanaur · 5 pointsr/scuba

If you're looking for a good read on this topic, check out Diver Down. Real life stories and how to prevent them.

u/MagicArtist · 5 pointsr/pics

Here's an article speculating about what might happen if all of humanity suddenly disappeared. It's a little old now and it focuses mainly on New York City, but it's still a pretty interesting read.

Edit: After doing a little more digging, it turns out the guy who wrote that article (Alan Weisman) also wrote a book (The World Without Us) on the same subject.

A Duet of Edits: Someone else mentioned Life After People above, but I turned up another documentary called AFTERMATH : Population Zero that's supposed to be similar in nature. It's a 90 minute video, so you may want to pass on starting it if you don't have a nice block of time.

u/jeffAA · 5 pointsr/AskReddit

Here's a good read on the subject.

The World Without Us

u/TinyLongwing · 5 pointsr/whatsthisbird

The Eastern Sibley guide is exactly what you're looking for. His illustrations are very accurate and very clear, and since it only focuses on birds on the eastern half of the continent, it's much more portable than a guide for all of North America. It's sorted by taxonomic order, not by color, but as you become more familiar with birding you'll start to find that color isn't really the best way to ID anyway - location, shape, and behavior are necessary, too, and Sibley's illustrations and notes will really help to clue you in to things like that, in addition to the color patterns of the bird.

u/SixesandNines · 5 pointsr/birding

I would also recommend the sibley guide to birds of eastern North America. It's nicely laid out and it's a convenient size for carrying with you in the field.

As for binoculars, my first pair are these Nikon monarch 8x42:

I paid less than this, in the $230-240 range, on eBay I believe. You definitely don't want to discourage yourself with substandard optics, which can be unreliable or fatiguing. I've had this model for well over a year now and they continue to be a pleasure to use.

u/wheelward · 5 pointsr/SeattleWA

Depends upon what you mean by what "fine" means. Within a couple decades, there will be no coral reefs. We have already caused the 6th biggest extinction event in Earth's history and humans continue to cause unprecedented destruction to the biosphere. It is kind of like a massive asteroid is hitting the planet over the span of 200 years.

Human destruction to the planet is happening in many ways; it is a lot more complicated that people think. But "The Sixth Extinction" by Elizabeth Kolbert does a good job illustrating the variety of ways that we are damaging the planet in irreversible ways.

No, the planet is not "fine" and it will not be fine if we continue this path of destruction.

u/LoVermont · 5 pointsr/forestry

You read this one? Reading the Forested Landscape.

u/nahnotlikethat · 5 pointsr/Portland

Seriously, I have my mushroom book with the delighted trumpet man on the cover and I just need some rain.

u/stumo · 5 pointsr/collapse

Nope, none of those for my location, but there is this fantastic book which is the bible of most foragers in my neighbourhood. And this one.

u/dnissley · 4 pointsr/science

> 125kWh/day per person is sustainable IF the person multiplier remains constant or decreases.

The only thing keeping 125kwh/day sustainable is high EROI petrol. High EROI petrol is the only thing keeping 6+ billion people people sustainable on an ecological level.

EROI = Energy Return On Investment, aka you put in 5 barrels of oil worth of energy to pump up 10 more barrels of oil out of the ground. The Oil Drum had a good series of articles on EROI. Here is the first.

As far as the topics of population and sustainability goes the best book I know of is Overshoot.

u/freeradicalx · 4 pointsr/Futurology

I read Alan Weisman's The World Without Us a few years back, and in that book he theorized that if humans were to all instantly disappear, the first large pieces of our construction that would fail would be our dams. Apparently dams require constant inspection and maintenance to keep in working shape and most would fail very quickly without our intervention.

What the book didn't really touch on, and what I would be concerned about, would be region-scale environmental disasters that result from industrial facilities left unattended. Nuclear power plants, oil wells and refineries in particular. If we were to vanish, I imagine the world would instantly see hundreds of massive oil spills and probably within a week or so, various nuclear meltdowns. The planet can recover from that but I imagine it could create a massive die-off for 100,000 years or so, plus the lasting effects of radiation.

u/Sharrock · 4 pointsr/books

There are a bunch of suggestions in here already but allow me to supplement with a non-fiction book. The World Without Us bu Alan Weisman. Essentially he begins with the premise that humans are removed suddenly from the planet. He then explores (through research and discussion) what would happen to infrastructure, land, etc. He creates a narrative so its readable but it is also packed with interesting details. If anyone likes post-apocalypse settings this book provides a real-world anchor.

u/Animorganimate · 4 pointsr/NatureIsFuckingLit

There's a great book that deals with this exact topic, called The World Without Us, by Alan Weisman. It basically starts off with every human simply disappearing from Earth, and the process in which nature would reclaim the planet. It's science fiction obviously, but without an overarching story. It reads sort of like a historical text about a what-if scenario of the future. I recommend it if you're interested in this subject.

u/matthagen · 4 pointsr/booksuggestions
u/sotlite · 4 pointsr/birding

I like to use Sibley's Eastern or Western in the field - the smaller size makes it more manageable.

u/wainstead · 4 pointsr/water

Probably a lot of readers of /r/water have read Cadillac Desert.

I own a copy of, and have made two false starts reading, The King Of California as recommend by the anonymous author of the blog On The Public Record.

I highly recommend A Great Aridness, a worthy heir to Cadillac Desert.

Also on my to-read list is Rising Tide. I would like to find a book that does for the Great Lakes what Marc Reisner did for water in the American West with his book Cadillac Desert.

A few things I've read this year that have little to do with water:

u/foretopsail · 4 pointsr/askscience

Here're a couple of my favorite archaeology books. The first one is about modern garbage, and is based around the idea that "what people have owned--and thrown away--can speak more eloquently, informatively, and truthfully about the lives they lead than they themselves ever may."


The second one is a seminal text of historical archaeology, James Deetz' In Small Things Forgotten. amazon link

u/no-mad · 4 pointsr/AnimalTracking
u/Ramenhehexd · 4 pointsr/UCSC

Ah, yes. It's a classic read. I highly recommend.

u/saurebummer · 4 pointsr/mycology

For a pocket guide I'd recommend All That the Rain Promises and More. It has a little bit of a bias towards species in western North America, but it's still very useful in the east (I'm in New England and I love it). Mushrooms Demystified is pretty big for taking into the field, but it is a great companion to ATtRPaM, and it is the best all around field guide for North America, in my opinion.

u/Egotisticallama · 4 pointsr/mycology

I would suggest picking up Mushrooms Demystified and All That the Rain Promises and More. Great books to get you into identification.

And remember; There are old mushroom hunters, and there are bold mushroom hunters, but there are no old bold mushroom hunters!

u/mave_of_wutilation · 4 pointsr/mycology

Invest in a good field guide. All That the Rain Promises and More is good to get your feet wet, and Mushrooms Demystified is the bible. Also, see if there are any mushroom clubs near you. Have fun!

u/philmoreisit · 4 pointsr/AskAnthropology

Like the renowned physiologist Denis Noble has shown in his new book 'Dance to the Tune of Life: Biological Relativity':

Or as James A. Shapiro has shown in his book 'Evolution: A View from the 21st Century':

The paradigm of Neo-Darwinism (which "sociobiology" is derivative of) is wrong even on biological grounds. It gets even more ridiculously wrong when you introduce the anthropological critique.

Adding a tweak here and there won't change that.

And game theory is no better.

u/Mofaluna · 4 pointsr/worldpolitics

Here's a good read on that fenomenon

The scary part is that the more educated they are, the more susceptible they are to that kind of nonsense.

u/Bilbo_Fraggins · 4 pointsr/politics

9/11 is one of the major things that made it took a turn for the worse.

Experimental psychology has consistently shown existential risk and a culture of fear drives a turn to the right politically.

I highly recommend the book The Republican Brain for the full story, but this article shares the basic point and a podcast with the author of the book is here.

For a good overview of what the differences between the right and the left are which might help you think about why people move to the right in times of uncertainty, I recommend this infographic.

u/AetheralCognition · 4 pointsr/JoeRogan

>You'll need to think of a better ad hominem.

I addressed the position you've taken and the reasons why you see things that way. If you found that offensive, i'm sorry but that is a personal problem. Insulting you was not the point or the totality of what i said.

>And you probably think NYT is unbiased also.


>"conservative christian right" hasn't been a boogey man since 1997

Are you serious? Have you watched any of the red debates? Its like 90% theocrats.

Since Nixon/Reagan and the merging of religion and politics the right has gone so much further right and into science and fact denial that it's ridiculous to anyone that isn't brainwashed by it, and repeatedly told to dismiss any dissenting information on any desperate and falsified grounds they can find

Id like to give you some homework.

The first is more about ideological factors driving the detachments from reality

The second is more about psychological factors driving those same detachments.

"Reality has a well known 'liberal bias' " - Stephen Colbert

u/Science_Babe · 3 pointsr/WTF

It's actually a very good read and the author is clearly in love with mushrooms including the psilocybe types. ;)

u/BforBubbles · 3 pointsr/Cooking

Welcome! Mushroom season is just getting started! Check Google, FB or Nextfoor for your local mycological society, they'll have some good info for you, too. this is a guide specifically for PNW mushrooms. this is a really popular mushroom identification book, this was my go-to guide for identifying mushrooms in the field. The author, David Arora, has written a few books.

Happy hunting!

u/infodoc1 · 3 pointsr/mycology

All That the Rain Promises and More by David Arora. Fantastic guide with a lot of information on edibility. Also highly recommended is its companion guide by the same author, Mushrooms Demystified

u/EvanYork · 3 pointsr/Conservative

If you really believe that conservatives aren't biased you're really only giving evidence that conservatives aren't any less biased then anyone else. But, since you asked, here's a well-known book on the topic. I don't endorse the book or the slant it uses to discuss the issue, but it's the most famous popular work on the topic and sources a whole wealth of science to support the fact that everyone has cognitive biases.

The most important concept here isn't that conservatives are biased or that liberals are biased, it's that the difference between liberal and conservative is essentially the difference between two different sets of cognitive bias.

u/Random_Thoughts_Gen · 3 pointsr/politics

Saved you a click: Emmett Rensin

Try this one instead: The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science- and Reality

u/DigitalPsych · 3 pointsr/atheism
u/josefjohann · 3 pointsr/IAmA

The question isn't whether or not they have both, which they certainly do, so much as it is the proportions they occupy in their respective bubbles of conversation.

Also I'm drawing from themes from Chris Mooney's Republican Brain, which I think is a decent starting point for a lot of summarized research on the matter.

u/jsamuelson · 3 pointsr/scuba

Do the Scuba Review:

That should cover the basics with some self-education...a great reality check is this book:

u/iheartmyname · 3 pointsr/booksuggestions

The World Without Us was a pretty interesting read. It's about all of the trappings of consumer culture and how long they would still remain if there were suddenly no humans around. It's pretty eye opening about how long certain things will keep harming the planet, and about others that surprised me with how fast they'd go away.

u/xnd714 · 3 pointsr/kurzgesagt

Parallel worlds by Michio Kaku is pretty good, if you're into the history of string theory and/or the universe. I read it about 10 years ago, so I'm not sure if it's outdated nowadays.

The world without us by Alan Weisman talks about what would happen to the earth if we disappeared, it talks about engineering marvels like the hoover dam, NY subway system, and nuclear waste storage sites and what could happen to these if humans were not around the maintain them.

I'm looking for a book about space if anyone has a suggesting. Particularly books that talk about neutron stars and other cosmic wonders.

u/nuclear_knucklehead · 3 pointsr/askscience

A great book on the subject is called "The World Without Us" by Alan Weisman.

There were also TV series' on Nat Geo and History based on the book called "Aftermath: Population Zero" and "Life After People" respectively. Episodes of these are (probably still) available for viewing on youtube.

u/MedicineMan81 · 3 pointsr/AskScienceDiscussion

This book will answer all those questions (and many others) in great detail. A really interesting thought experiment. I highly recommend it.

u/BBQTerrace · 3 pointsr/pics

This book might interest you.

It get's a bit environmental protectionist preachy at times but it answers a lot of these questions in very rich detail.

u/OrbitRock · 3 pointsr/onehumanity

Book list:

Nature and the Human Soul by Bill Plotkin. The author discusses this same theme of The Great Turning. Argues that people in modern western society are pathologically orientated towards adolescent things, and among our main problems is that few of us mature fully, and few of us can ever be considered elders who guide each other towards a wise way of life. He also argues that we historically have developed equally in both nature and culture, but modern people spend their lives solely in culture, and lack understanding of the natural world.

Future Primal by Louis Herman. The author lays out a big picture view of human history and how the solutions for the future we face can be found in the past among primitive cultures. He links his own personal struggles to the planetary struggles we face, and shows that it is true that the personal and planetary are linked.

The Ascent of Humanity by Charles Eisenstein. Lays out huamn history, and "how the illusion of a seperate self has led to our modern crisises".

Sacred Economics by Charles Eisenstein. Looks at how primitive economies differed from our own, and how we can come to a different understanding of economics and wealth in our own society.

The More Beautiful World our Hearts Know is Possible by Charles Eisenstein. Lays out a vision for what the world could be and how we could organize ourselves in a wiser way.

Limited Wants, Unlimited Means an analysis of the economics of hunter-gatherer societies by an actual Economist. Very in depth look at the different foundational beliefs and practices. This is the most scientific and in depth book I've ever come across on this subject.

Eaarth by Bill McKibben. Goes into great detail on the the stark reality of the effects that climate change have already had and will likely have over the next decades and century. Finsihes by making reccommendations for how to make a life on a rough new planet.

Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. A look at the deep history of our species. This book presents an understanding about what humans are and where we've come from that I think is hard to get anywhere else, really great work.

Blessed Unrest by Paul Hawken. Very similar to the theme of my above post, the author explains how this new movement is much larger than you might think, and could soon become one of the largest cultural movements in all of human history.

Active Hope by Joanna Macy. On "how to deal with the mess we are in without going crazy".

Greening of the Self by Joanna Macy. An exploration into the idea that we are interdependent with the ecology around us.

Natural Capitalism by Paul Hawken and others. A look at how we can start a green industrial revolution.

The Green Collar Economy by Van Jones. Lays out the idea that one solution- work on constructing a sustainable infrastructure- can fix our two biggest problems: the ecological crisis, and the rampant poverty and inequality in our society.

Spiritual Ecology: the cry of the Earth by Thich Nhat Hanh, Joanna Macy, and others. Outlines a spiritual perspective of what is happening to the world, and how we can remedy it, rooted in Buddhist thought.

Changes in the Land by William Cronon. A look at how the ecology of New England has been altered since Europeans first set foot there.

A Sand County Almanac by Aldo Leopold. This is one of the classics of nature writing by a great naturalist. I include it here because I think it fits, and shows how much of this in not new thinking. Leopold talks about his experiences in nature and from living off the land, and lays out his own 'land ethic' for how best to coexist in nature.

The Evolving Self: a psychology for the third millennium by Mihaly Czikszentmihalyi. Explains the authors view of psychology and how to find meaning in the modern world. Talks about playing an active role in the evolutionary processes of life, and linking that up with your own personal evolution.

Braiding Sweetgrass by Robin Wall Kimerer. Brings together scientific understanding, indigenous wisdom, and respect for nature and for plants, in a very poetic book.

The Future of Life by E. O. Wilson. Wilson is one of the greatest biologists of our time, and gave us many of the foundational concepts that we use today, such as popularizing the idea of "biodiversity" and the desire to preserve it. Here he talks about the future of life and the challenges we face in preserving the Earths biodiversity.

Half Earth by E.O. Wilson. Here Wilson lays out his strategy for saving the biodiversity of the Earth and preserving it through the hard times it will face in the future, by devoting fully half of the surface of the Earth to wildlife habitats. This book just came out so you might not be able to order a copy yet.

If you know of any other books or media in this sort of genre feel free to post it.

u/playa_named_gus · 3 pointsr/pics

The book is one of the funniest things I have ever read while also being informative and captivating. Douglas Adams was such a great writer.

Please check it out!

u/bghenson23 · 3 pointsr/birding

Go on some group walks ( and meet some other birders - they'll have some thoughts on places to visit and can tell you about other local resources.

Woodend has some great classes for example.

Ditto what LigoRider says - As for guides to birds, having a good field guide is key (iBird pro is good for an app, but book can be handy too). Sibley is the generally recommended book.

For learning, I think specific guides can be helpful. For example:

u/mrbuckley · 3 pointsr/surfing

I'm in NorCal and we get those fairly often. On fast rising storm swells out of the north west is when you'll see them most because the energy is so close together the wave energy often gets compounded. You'll be out in 2 ft surf riding a longboard then bam! a long period head high and hollow set rolls through. I'm reading this book right now, you'd probably find it really interesting, they talk about freak waves in the 3rd or 4th chapter.

u/nodnodwinkwink · 3 pointsr/videos

Exactly. You know those huge container ships? Rogue waves have completely destroyed those, sometimes without a trace. If anyone is interested, you should read a book called The Wave: In Pursuit of the Rogues, Freaks, and Giants of the Ocean by Susan Casey. Its partially about big wave surfing and partially about freak waves, a great read over all though.

Here's an article from the NY Times.

u/maffew12 · 3 pointsr/Damnthatsinteresting
u/PlantyHamchuk · 3 pointsr/ZeroWaste

Those wiki links all have research. The UN has written books on the matter. But a little common sense will go a long way - humans use resources, those in the Western world use the most of all. If you switch to a Prius but have 9 kids and then those 9 kids have 9 kids and they have 9 there's now 729 humans using even more resources on an already stressed planet, and that switch to a Prius didn't really do a damn thing.

Population keeps growing yet we're overfishing and acidifying the oceans, we're cutting down massive amounts of forests and not replanting them, we're destroying what little arable land we have while draining freshwater aquifers across the globe. Because humans use resources.

u/PepperoniFire · 3 pointsr/changemyview

I strongly suggest you read "The Sixth Extinction" by Elizabeth Kolbert. In short, it details a series of extinctions - some mass some minor - and weaves in the narrative of humanity's future into it. The thesis revolves largely about climate change, but we too often think of climate change as weather. Here, Kolbert goes out of her way to explain to the reader all the ways in which smalls changes in things from ocean acidity to Amazonian ecosystems can have large scale ramifications for previously dominant species.

For example:

>Since the origin of life on earth 3.8 billion years ago, our planet has experienced five mass extinction events. The last of these events occurred some 66 million years ago when a six-mile-wide asteroid is thought to have collided with earth, wiping out the dinosaurs. The Cretaceous extinction event dramatically changed the composition of biodiversity on the planet: Marine ecosystems essentially collapsed, and about 75 percent of all plant and animal species disappeared.

>Today, Kolbert writes, we are witnessing a similar mass extinction event happening in the geologic blink of an eye. According to E. O. Wilson, the present extinction rate in the tropics is “on the order of 10,000 times greater than the naturally occurring background extinction rate” and will reduce biological diversity to its lowest level since the last great extinction.

>This time, however, a giant asteroid isn’t to blame — we are, by altering environmental conditions on our planet so swiftly and dramatically that a large proportion of other species cannot adapt. And we are risking our own future as well, by fundamentally altering the integrity of the climate balance that has persisted in more or less the same configuration since the end of the last ice age, and which has fostered the flourishing of human civilization.

I strongly suggest reading the book even if this minor tidbit won't change your view. I don't consider myself much a climate science evangelist - I acknowledge it's correct and should be fixed, but I never found it especially interesting or galvanizing. After reading this book and gaining an understanding of the history of the science of extinction - which is frankly extraordinarily new - and how many minor extinctions that occur in the background can have a cumulative cataclysmic effect, I've taken a stronger interest because it will have a major impact on humanity's future on this Earth.

u/StevenAU · 3 pointsr/environment

You want to read this book then.

u/SpineBag · 3 pointsr/ecology

My two favorites, for understanding the general ideas of ecology without memorizing the nitrogen cycle, are Reading the Forested Landscape and Tracking and the Art of Seeing. Those are the books that convinced me that I wanted to study ecology in graduate school.

FWIW, I also enjoy memorizing the nitrogen cycle.

u/notseriousIswear · 3 pointsr/AppalachianTrail

For mushroom:

Edit: found a copy a couple years ago on ebay for 6 shipped so don't pay 22 on amazon

u/NoTimeForInfinity · 3 pointsr/mycology

I moved from Denver to Southern Oregon. Walking in the woods here you'll see amazing things, and you can eat almost all of them. I got a copy of All the Rain Promises and More and I was off. It helped that they were buying matsutakes for $100 a pound that winter.

These days you're lucky to get $15 for #1's and you're competing with Asian slave labor.

Now I only pick for pleasure
The variety here is amazing. Mushroom picking is one of the best ways to spend a grey winter day.

u/Edgar_Allan_Rich · 3 pointsr/whatisthisthing

You might like this book then.

u/sitesurfer253 · 3 pointsr/Portland

If you think mascaras are deathcaps, I strongly suggest not eating anymore wild mushrooms until you get a better understanding of the local varieties. here's a good guide

u/KidPix666 · 2 pointsr/Mountaineering

I have this and FOTH. I think FOTH is better and more clear and comprehensive. Honestly, if there is something to learn by reading it's in FOTH. Otherwise I would turn you to youtube, there are tons of lessons on there. Including Jeff Lowe's ice climbing technique. Just search for what you want to know and you will at the very least see it being done.

u/i-cjw · 2 pointsr/climbing

Let me see if I can put this more eloquently than @pliers below. Go and buy Neil Gresham's "Climbing Masterclass: Improve your climbing" DVDs 1 & 2. Don't torrent them, they're not wildly expensive, and the guy deserves to get paid for the quality of instruction he puts out there. You won't regret the purchase.

I'd recommend Craig Connally's "The Mountaineering Handbook" in addition to Freedom of the Hills. Neither book is perfect - compare, contrast, ask around your climbing buddies...

u/Team_Smell_Bad · 2 pointsr/climbing

Well, without going all super technical (for that pick up The Mountaineering Handbook or this one):

First thing to do is get some rap rings and some webbing and use natural protection. This way you will leave behind only the cheapest of gear.

OR...for serious nut-heads/dirt-baggers only, I present to you: The Texas Rope Trick

u/zerocharm · 2 pointsr/climbing

This book has a great chapter on nutrition. Since reading that I take mostly GU gels and gummies, some with caffeine, which gives a nice boost before a difficult pitch. They are much lighter on the stomach than cliff bars and don't require as much water to digest. I can go about 8-10hrs on those before requiring real food.

u/YoYoDingDongYo · 2 pointsr/scuba

This book describes a fatality from that very thing.

u/sapiophile · 2 pointsr/todayilearned

My assertions are axiomatic, and quite obviously so, at that. This is not a wise battle for you to pursue, unless you wish to descend into colonial European notions of manifest destiny and the white man's burden.

>>Those people are just as advanced as any other
>No, they're not.

Tell me, then: in a contest of using indigenous medicinal plants, who would prove "more advanced" - you, or these tribespeople? In determining who has superior herding techniques, which party would be the victor? In a comparison of familial kinship and relations? Spearcraft? Long-distance hiking? Animal husbandry?

There simply does not exist any way to declare any of these criteria "unimportant" without making a subjective assertion of your own personal values. And the people we're talking about would most certainly have a different class of values about those things. Why would your values be "more objective" than theirs - or anyone's? The answer is that they cannot be. It is your own opinion, and with any degree of humility, all genuinely reasonable people recoginze that, as I hope that you will, too.

>>Civilization and technology are specific types of advancements, but they are not objectively superior to any others
>Yes, they are.

Funny - there sure seem to be a great many very well-reasoned arguments against civilization and technology, even from those who have experienced the very height of their "advancement".

I certainly see no evidence for an objective declaration, even just by examing the meta-issue of the debate itself, which is undeniably still open.

>>to add "culture" in there is frankly just plain racist.
>No, it isn't.

Yes, it is. You have virtualy no notions of these people's culture. The very definition of "culture" practically prohibits the very idea of it being declared "advanced" or otherwise. It is simply the collection of common and traditional practices of a given group. I would even go so far as to say that if one were to make judgments of "advancement," surely a culture that has been largely uninterrupted and un-usurped for a period of thousands of years has matured and "advanced" far more than a culture which is ever-shifting and highly dependent on technological advances that didn't even exist a generation prior. But even to make an assertion such as that is meaningless, because the criterion "advancement" simply does not make sense when applied to culture - any culture. The only role that such a declaration can fulfill is to demean and devalue another group of people completely arbitrarily, as to support a racist or otherwise xenophobic worldview.

>By what standard are modern Western civilization, technology, and culture objectively superior to barefoot African tribesmen? By the only objective standard of value: their success at meeting the requirements of human life.

And just what are those "requirements of human life?" These tribespeople might tell you some very different things than what you would tell them. Would either of you be "right?" Absolutely not.

As for the rest of your points, they are all similarly obvious - and highly subjective, though largely incontroversial in our demographic - subjective and personal value judgments. Adding the word "objectively" to your statements does not make it so. Even such criteria as you have mentioned - lifespan, "individualism," property rights (lol), etc., are not objectively "advanced." After all, what are the "objective" benefits of a long lifespan if it is filled with ennui, alienation and oppression? What is the value of "individualism" to a person who cherishes deep bonds and shared struggle with others? How can one declare "property rights" to be an objective good when the very concept of such has only existed for a few hundred years, and has arguably led to the greatest ongoing extinction of species in millions of years?

You see? Value judgments, all of it. And for someone who might call themself a "libertarian," you certainly seem not to understand the true spirit of the credo, "live and let live."

u/Sunny_McJoyride · 2 pointsr/energy

Well I haven't read Malthus, but I have read a modern take on it.

u/GadsdenPatriot1776 · 2 pointsr/collapse

Personally, I think the American Empire is declining. Sir John Glubb had a wonderful write up of this, and I have copied his conclusion below. The full PDF can be found here and it is only 27 pages long.

Glubb looked at eleven empires over the course of history. I copied a relevant summary from the end. The pdf is online here.

> As numerous points of interest have arisen in the course of this essay, I close with a brief summary, to refresh the reader’s mind.

> (a) We do not learn from history because our studies are brief and prejudiced.

> (b) In a surprising manner, 250 years emerges as the average length of national greatness.

> (c) This average has not varied for 3,000 years. Does it represent ten generations?

> (d) The stages of the rise and fall of great
nations seem to be:

> The Age of Pioneers (outburst)

> The Age of Conquests

> The Age of Commerce

> The Age of Affluence

> The Age of Intellect

> The Age of Decadence.

> (e) Decadence is marked by:

> Defensiveness

> Pessimism

> Materialism

> Frivolity

> An influx of foreigners

> The Welfare State

> A weakening of religion.

> (f) Decadence is due to:

> Too long a period of wealth and power

> Selfishness

> Love of money

> The loss of a sense of duty.

> (g) The life histories of great states are amazingly similar, and are due to internal factors.

> (h) Their falls are diverse, because they are largely the result of external causes.

> (i) History should be taught as the history of the human race, though of course with emphasis on the history of the student’s own country.

The real question is how technology will either speed up, slow down. or prevent the same thing from happening to America.

I also recommend the following books:

The Collapse of Complex Societies, By Joseph Tainter

Collapse: How Societies Choose to Succeed or Fail, By Jared Diamond

Overshoot: The Ecological Basis for Revolutionary Change

Finally, when it comes to survival information, I highly recommend To me, they are the best of the best.

I also would like to plug Radio Free Redoubt (podcast) as well as AmRRON (American Redoubt Radio Operator's Network).

u/commanderkielbasa · 2 pointsr/mycology

Can't help or make a recommendation, but atleast the conversation is going in the right direction. Someone will probably chime in with a book rec

Would you consider yourself midwest? This seems like it may be worth considering: Mushrooms of the Midwest

u/JEdwardSal · 2 pointsr/mycology

Judging from the picture location and environment I would say CotW, but never trust us. Do yourself a favor and purchase this bad boy.

There are also a lot of classes within Michigan if you get serious.

u/DrWallyHayes · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

This book does a thorough job of answering your first and third questions.

u/myconundrum · 2 pointsr/askscience

There is actually a book (and a television series) about goes into deep detail on exactly your question... Below is the amazon link. Its a good read.


u/C12H23 · 2 pointsr/AskScienceDiscussion

I don't exactly have time to make a detailed post right now, but I recommend grabbing a copy of The World Without Us by Alan Weisman. It covers this exact subject.

u/undercurrents · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

Any book by Mary Roach- her books are hilarious, random, and informative. I like Jon Krakauer's, Sarah Vowell's, and Bill Bryson's books as well.

Some of my favorites that I can think of offhand (as another poster mentioned, I loved Devil in the White City)

No Picnic on Mount Kenya

Guns, Germs, and Steel


The Closing of the Western Mind

What is the What

A Long Way Gone

Alliance of Enemies

The Lucifer Effect

The World Without Us

What the Dog Saw

The God Delusion (you'd probably enjoy Richard Dawkins' other books as well if you like science)

One Down, One Dead

Lust for Life

Lost in Shangri-La


True Story

Havana Nocturne

u/mackstann · 2 pointsr/environment

A very cool book that is similar in style to this article is The World Without Us.

u/32ndghost · 2 pointsr/worldnews

Right, let's expand and destroy the life support eco-systems we depend on in order to... survive?

A much saner strategy would be:

a) limit human encroachment on the natural world by setting aside ecologically viable areas that we are not allowed to touch/enter. 20% of the world, 50%, 90%? pick a number, maybe start low and as time goes on add to it. Beautiful things happen when mankind gets out of the way - see [The World Without Us]
( by Alan Weisman. This would decouple our civilization's fate from that of the natural world's. Aren't you glad the Romans didn't take out 90% of exisiting wild species when their society collapsed? Their preindustrial technology wasn't up to the task, but ours certainly is.

b) realize that an economic system that requires exponential growth on a finite planet is madness, and move towards a sustainable, steady-state system. Western economic theory is rooted in a period when Europeans were colonizing the world and unlocking vast, seemingly limitless, areas of undeveloped land and resources. There are no more frontiers of unexplored natural wealth to unlock to kick the can down the road a little longer, we desperately need a system that works with what we can sustainably harvest today.

u/transprog · 2 pointsr/AskScienceDiscussion
u/PhiloHunter · 2 pointsr/ZombieSurvivalTactics

I think maybe the book "The World without us" might be what yoyr looking for:

Its a really interesting read but can be a bit dry at times. I know one of the "learning channels" did a miniseries based on it, but i can't remember what it was called.

-edit cause i can't type for shit on my phone-

u/Rexutu · 2 pointsr/masseffect

If you're interested in the topic, I highly recommend The World Without Us by Alan Weisman.

u/BreckensMama · 2 pointsr/ifyoulikeblank

Late to the game, but people always need more books...

The World Without Us was great, really interesting read about humanity's effects on the planet, with lots of references to expand on if you wanted to do that.

A Year of Living Biblically was interesting, even if you aren't a Christian or a Jew, if you find religion interesting.

And last but not least, Rocket Boys by Homer H. Hickam. This was made into the movie 'October Sky', and it's a memoir, one of the best I've ever read. But all the science of the rockets is in there too, I learned a lot about propellants and DeLavalle nozzles lol.

u/dagens24 · 2 pointsr/thelastofus

[This book inspired a lot of the world of The Last of Us. It's a great read.] (

u/seattlejc · 2 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

I couldn't speak to the quality of the science but it all seemed pretty plausible to me. I believe it was based on (and an expansion of) the book "The World Without Us".

u/Anwhaz · 2 pointsr/forestry

A New Tree Biology and Dictionary by Alex Shigo was used in 3 or 4 of my college classes. But it depends on what you want to learn about (e.g. Mensuration, Silviculture, log grading/scaling, etc). A New Tree Biology will at least give you a good basis for most things, and it's not too bad in terms of being a "dry" textbook. (For example, the first sentence of chapter 2 is "Trees are large, heavy plants that can kill you if they fall on you")

If you're looking for less technical information, and more stories then check out The Forest Unseen: A Year's Watch in Nature by David George Haskell and A Sand County Almanac by Aldo Leopold (another book used numerous times while in college). If you want a bit of a mix The Hidden Life of Trees: What They Feel, How They Communicate by Peter Wohlleben is fantastic. While they might not be all information, they do give you a lot to think about when considering ecosystems and provide interesting ethical perspectives.

u/MrApophenia · 2 pointsr/books

If you like that style, I really recommend Last Chance to See which is Adams writing nonfiction in that same rambling but immensely entertaining style, in which he traveled around the world to see a bunch of near-extinct animals while they still exist.

u/imperfect5th · 2 pointsr/pics

That's too bad. There's a chapter about them in Douglas Adams' (Author of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) book Last Chance to See. It's actually a really good read, if you liked his other works I would definitely recommend taking a week and reading this.

u/lauralately · 2 pointsr/gifs

I can't believe this sub exists and I didn't know about it. I have a dancing rescue parrot of my own. Thanks, random redditor - have an upvote!

Also, the species of head-humping bird in that gif is really fascinating. Here's "Hitchhiker's Guide" author Douglas Adams' book about themm. The co-author of the book is the guy whose head the bird is humping in that gif.

u/MinervaDreaming · 2 pointsr/science

Make sure to read his book, "Last Chance to See".

u/Wastesofa · 2 pointsr/Ornithology

I agree with everyone else, Sibley is one of the best out there today.

u/BRN83 · 2 pointsr/videos

If you're the reading type, this book by sports writer Susan Casey follows Laird and a number of other surfers (and scientists) as they track down some monster waves around the Pacific.

u/retarredroof · 2 pointsr/AskAnthropology

Look into the "Tucson Garbage Project". Since the mid 1980s, William Rathje and his students at the Univ..of Arizona have been working in modern landfills. The seminal publication is here. The project applied traditional archaeological techniques to the excavation of modern garbage dumps.

u/LostMyCannon · 2 pointsr/Permaculture

This book represents everything about what "reading the landscape" means to me. Though it's centered on New England the author's primary goal is how to achieve an understanding of the specific natural history of a specific place by observing and analyzing what we can see in it. Reading the landscape means interpreting what you see and understanding what has happened to it, how humans have lived in it, what are it's tendencies, what storms and fires have passed through, and on and on.

In Japan, ancient groups inscribed stones along the coast with warning that said more or less "do not build your house below this point." They were historical markers (perhaps someday to be rendered irrelevant) of tsunami-driven tide waters. In most of North America we have no record of multi-century, multi-generational knowledge and so interpreting and analyzing the natural landscape is the closest we can come to having an approximate understanding of what has taken place here and what will be borne out in the future.

u/rafiki530 · 2 pointsr/WildernessBackpacking

Tom Harrison map, Tenacious tape, wool hiking socks, leather man multi-tool.

You could go a diffent route that's a bit more personal you could make a personal backing meal or go with some sort of premade backpacking meal like mountain house (a bit on the heavier side) or astronaut ice cream (a bit better), perhaps a dehydrator like an Excalibur model if you want a big luxury gift.

Books; some picks for foraging, all that the rains promises and more , Stalking the wild asparagus, the foragers harvest ,

u/lard_pwn · 2 pointsr/mycology

Love your typo!

All That the Rain Promises and More: A Hip Pocket Guide to Western Mushrooms, by David Arora is definitely a good place to start. For people in the U.S.

There are good edible Russula, Lactarius and Amanita mushrooms, but the species you've listed are not commonly eaten. I do believe A. rubescens is edible, but I would not suggest anyone who is new to mushrooming even pretend to think about eating any species of Amanita until they have familiarized themselves with the genus and the Amanitas in their harvesting areas. Stick with the numerous other edible genera for a season or two, and learn all you can. Russula and Lactarius are great places to start; very delicious and often abundant.

Good luck. If you wanna come back and post pics of your finds, make sure to get them in focus and get shots of all parts, including the gills and their attachment to the stipe. Try to get into the habit of making spore prints of unknown specimens, as this can narrow down considerably the number of potential genera your specimen could belong to...

Have fun!

u/edmdusty · 2 pointsr/mycology

This is a fun book to start to learn how to ud mushrooms

u/lobster_johnson · 2 pointsr/me_irl

I believe that guy's name is David Arora. (Not sure if he's the guy on the cover, though.)

u/bauski · 2 pointsr/videos

Often times mycology societies have events for mushroom picking as well as classes you can take. Ther are also more general foraging classes that happen in your local nature area. If you would like a wonderful book to get you excited and knowledgeable try it's a wonderful full colored pocket book with great encyclopedic knowledge for many species. Often times, if you're in the US, you might have to get a permit to pick, so that you don't destroy the ecology by over picking and such.


As they say the video, be extremely careful about what you pick. Always good to double check with experts.

u/hamburger666 · 2 pointsr/Seattle

Unless of course you are properly trained in the local mycology. All The Rain Promises and More is a great start, as is joining the Puget Sound Mycological Society

u/fomentarius · 2 pointsr/mycology

Look into local chapters of the mycological society or mushroom hunting groups/clubs in your area. This site lists a few options. Looks like the one in Albion may be near-ish to you.

I've also found many of the links in the sidebar helpful, especially mushroom observer and the mushroom hunting and identification forum on The Shroomery. The Shroomery's ID forum is where I go to confirm my suspected ID's after keying out specimens on my own.

I use Mushrooms Demystified, by David Arora, as a my post collection ID book. It's both huge and dated (i think it's latest edition is from the early or mid 80's) so it's functionality as a field guide or the final word in ID is lacking. Even so, it is good to learn to work through dichotomous keys like the ones that it employs and it usually gets you headed in the right direction. Other guides like Rogers Mushrooms, All the Rain Promises and More, and The National Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mushrooms are good resources, too (I'm sure other folks can add to this list, I'm just dropping the names that first come to mind).

As much as I clash with some of his professional/ethical decisions, Paul Stamets has contributed a ton to the accessibility of Mycology to the masses. Check out Mycelium Running and Growing Gourmet and Medicinal Mushrooms as introductions to the Fifth Kingdom.

I'm also really enjoying Tradd Cotter's new book, Organic Mushroom Farming and Mycoremediation

Fungi for the People and The Radical Mycology Collective have also been hugely influential in my personal growth as an amateur mycologist. If you ever get a chance to attend any of their events, I would recommend doing it.

Best of luck and enjoy your journey!

u/Gullex · 2 pointsr/Survival

FYI, this book is super awesome.

u/Jimbo571 · 2 pointsr/mycology

I feel like I've seen him before too, but not in the MEME. I feel like maybe he's somewhere in this classic book!

u/chilighter · 2 pointsr/OkCupid

I love mushroom picking and pick a bunch of different kinds. The spot I'm going is usually full of boletes, chanterelles and hedgehogs, which are my favorites.

I pick for culinary use, yeah. I dry them for the rest of the year. It's not hard to learn how to pick mushrooms because there is a system that's essentially a dichotomous key for identification - basically, you go down the list of basic characteristics and can identify many types that way. It's just a matter of being diligent and never eating anything of which you're uncertain. It's great if you want to learn to go with someone experienced to get a primer. Also, this book is the field guide I've used for fifteen years and it fits in my pocket and is the best beginner's mushroom guide I've seen.

u/es_macro · 2 pointsr/mycology

You should get All That The Rain Promises and More by David Aurora. It's 3x as cheap and probably has loads more personality than that California Mushroom book. Just look at that cover! The book is a field guide (small enough for a back pocket) for western mushrooms with tons of mushroom pictures for ID and pics of the generally quirky/interesting people interested in mycology holding specimen, etc. I don't even live on the West Coast but it's still an enjoyable book. I have one in hand, let me know if you have any questions.

u/TheSweatyCheese · 2 pointsr/mycology

One of my favorite books to take hunting is All That Rain Promises and More. It's pocket-sized and the pictures are clear (plus the cover is great). The author also has some interesting recipes and narratives in the book. As far as not poisoning yourself, I suggest starting with species that are very unambiguous in whether or not they are another poisonous mushroom. Morels, chanterelles, and hen/chicken of the woods have solid identifying features unlike some stalked white mushrooms. Know the lookalikes though! False morels can be very poisonous, so know how to tell the difference between the two (hollow stem of morel).

Know the season/habitat of what you're looking for, it will save you time and help you ID. When you do find your first shrooms, there are methods to ensure you don't poison yourself, like chewing a bit and spitting it out before ingesting the whole thing. I believe there is information about that in the book and of course more online.

Happy hunting!

u/Azabutt · 2 pointsr/mycology

My book All that the rain promises and more suggests this is a bolete, but I don't think I can pick one that suits it. Perhaps someone can help me figure it out?

I did not have a knife to cut it with, because I am a failure! Just kidding, I mean, I wasn't prepared to find mushrooms that evening, we were chasing waterfalls. But I hacked it in half with a stick and was delighted to see my first blue bruising mushroom! I tried not too touch it too much (I'm not sure why, I usually do), but when I did touch the top, my fingers were stained yellow.

I didn't think my non-mycology-fascinated friends would like me bringing any home, so I only managed low light photos which aren't as crisp. My phone is wonderful in the daylight but not so much at dusk.

u/eurodditor · 2 pointsr/france

> Elle a perdu parce qu'elle a été victime d'attaques incessantes contre les démocrates pendant des mois, des attaques infondées et risibles.

Non. Si c'était ça qui faisait perdre une élection aux États-Unis, Obama n'aurait jamais pu être président. Trump non-plus d'ailleurs.

> Est-ce que c'est les démocrates qui écrivent des livres intitulé

Sans dec, tu crois que les démocrates sont des anges ou bien tu viens de découvrir que la politique aux US c'est encore plus violent que chez nous ? Bien-sûr que les démocrates écrivent aussi des horreurs sur les Républicains. Comme The Republican Brain, Idiot America, après l'élection de Trump on a déjà sorti Insane Clown President, Too dumb to fail, et autres bouquins écrit parfois par des élus Démocrates et contenant des illustrations telles que des images "dépeignant les républicains comme des éléphants rouges maléfiques portant une crosstika" (mélange de croix chrétienne et de swastika)...

Si tu crois que les démocrates sont tendres avec les républicains et que seuls les républicains tapent fort sur les démocrates, tu planes à 10 000. Mais tout ça c'est pas grave, ça n'a pas vraiment d'importance : les attaques contre tel ou tel bord politique, ça ne trigger que les militants convaincus de chaque bord. Or c'est pas ceux-là qui font une élection, puisqu'ils votent à peu près toujours pareil.

Le problème des démocrates, c'est pas qu'ils ont attaqué les républicains.

C'est qu'ils ont attaqué des tas de gens qui n'étaient pas spécialement politisés et qui à vrai dire auraient pu pencher du côté démocrate, mais que les élites démocrates méprisaient profondément parce qu'ils avaient le tort de pas penser comme il faut ou de manquer d'éloquence face au titulaire d'un PhD en liberal arts, et que ces petites gens, de dépit, alors qu'ils auraient dû être défendus par les démocrates justement parce que ce sont des petites gens (ce qui ne veut pas forcément dire leur donner raison sur tout hein, mais déjà chercher à les comprendre plutôt que de les traiter de débiles et de racistes/sexistes/homophobes/xénophobes/etc. ça aurait été un bon début) sont allés se réfugier dans les bras des républicains. Qui les ont accueilli à bras ouvert parce qu'ils ont bien compris, eux, que c'était ces gens là qui allaient faire pencher l'élection d'un côté ou de l'autre. Et ça n'a pas manqué.

u/Mormolyke · 2 pointsr/politics
u/AndAnAlbatross · 2 pointsr/atheism

As a brief matter of convention, I like that definition of indoctrination and it is functionally very close to the way I intended to use the word in my previous post.


> Yes ... They have not given up.

All scientific inquiry is driven by a lack of knowledge of a subject that is suspected to be adjacent to either known information or theorized information. Everything beyond that adjacency is speculation and unscientific.

That process can be thought of as the scientist's puzzle drive. To translate your statement into these terms, you're saying an agnostic who claims unknowability can't possibly have a puzzle-drive. This is incorrect.

The agnostics puzzle drive is just one level abstract from the scientist's puzzle drive. The agnostic could be driven by a presumed lack of knowability of a subject that is adjacent to either verifiable evidence or epistemological theory. Everything beyond that adjacency is absurdity and gnostic.

>Well, intensity is a feature of all education ... to attend a regimen of Sunday School and so forth.

>Ideally, we humans would be presented with a proposition ... more likely he is to be persuaded.

That is a lot of discussable/disputable information, but since I agree with most of it, I suggest we save it for a different conversation. Very interesting stuff.

> (1) the relatively automatic filtration by cognitive bias ("your GF is cheating on you." "Impossible! She's much too pretty to cheat on me!") based on previously known information

> (1), and they get better at it as they gather more reference material.

This is called motivated reasoning and it models and predicts the smart idiot^Mooney effect very well. I would definitely be an audience to the argument that there is some overlap with critical thinking (in practice).

> Aside from religion, they become poor marks for conspiracy theories, magical cures, horoscopes, ghost sightings and so on

Again -- have you seen the way popular media co-opts skeptical language to these ends!? Ghost Hunters, popular conspiracy theories etc... these groups draw power from ridiculing religion just like we do. If it's a religious thing, the anecdotal precedence is not readily available to me, and I would feel more comfortable deferring to topical data.

I agree, teaching actual critical thinking skills is vital, but I'm not so sure (read: convinced) the lack of critical thinking skills offers a significant in-religious correlation when you adjust for population. Maybe the subtext here is people are fucking stupid, but I'd rather make that as a global claim than a religious claim. /rant (sorry.)

> Err no, that's most likely type (1) processing, it's more cognitive bias than "real" critical thinking.

I don't completely disagree, but I've got several different models of this to compare it to, so I'm going to challenge it. Can you demonstrate this? What are you thinking of?

Also there's something I call the chaos theory of religious world-view which basically holds the following:

  • The earlier in a world-view system that spooky thinking is integrated, the more capacity for cohesion and reason that system has. (This helps me empathize with people like Bill Craig)

  • The later in a world-view system that spooky thinking is challenged, the more that challenge needs to explain in order for it be seen as a useful world-view component. (This helps us understand why paradigm shifts are so difficult inside a generation.)

    Let me know if you're interested in hearing about that.

    > In science education, at least as far as through grade school, any claim can usually be supported, if questioned, by referring to and explaining the historic experiments by which it was arrived at.

    But, practically these is superficial regress. You explain the experiments but if the explanation is questioned you can only fall back on the concept. If the concept is rejected, the instructor can't really be expected to demonstrate further. The model still supports fabrication, it just shifts it. Can we demonstrate that it shifts it to a point where fabrication is too difficult? (Maybe... I would argue this is the importance of peer review and try to demonstrate it's relevance.) Your thoughts?

    The rest of that paragraph I readily agree with (even if your terms are usually far more graphic than I would use).

    > After being made to swallow that the Bible is God's word and therefore necessarily true (that establishes its authority once and for a long time), pretty much the first lesson is "questioning is inappropriate in a religious context."

    Again -- this assumes a certain type of Christianity. The kind that is employing this method of inculcating. There are two things here, a cautionary message and a disagreement.

    (1) If the religious group was not doing this, then you would need to move goal posts to re-establish their badness or look elsewhere. Don't do that.

    (2) The religious groups who aren't doing this are probably not doing this for a reason! Could there be any reasons you would agree with? As a call back to the original discussion, wouldn't that make them sort of viable candidates to being on your side?

    > I don't have good backup material for the claim that critical questioning is discouraged in Sunday School. If you have a problem with that claim, I'll have to retract it.

    No, it can stay. Just as a matter of contingency, imagine if that factor was removed -- so too would your problem with sunday school. I never get too bent out of shape over contingent conclusions because somewhere, somehow, they won't apply and then I'll need to go back to the drawing board.


    > But it’s not just global warming where the “smart idiot” effect occurs. It also emerges on nonscientific but factually contested issues, like the claim that President Obama is a Muslim. Belief in this falsehood actually increased moreamong better-educated Republicans from 2009 to 2010 than it did among less-educated Republicans, according to research by George Washington University political scientist John Sides.

    > The same effect has also been captured in relation to the myth that the healthcare reform bill empowered government “death panels.” According toresearch by Dartmouth political scientist Brendan Nyhan, Republicans who thought they knew more about the Obama healthcare plan were “paradoxically more likely to endorse the misperception than those who did not.” Well-informed Democrats were the opposite—quite certain there were no “death panels” in the bill.

    Chris Mooney, The Republican Brain
u/prairiebean · 2 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

A great book on this if you want more info, "The Sixth Extinctio: An Unnatural History" It covers the previous answers here in more detail, and goes into the history/discovery of the extinctions, and modern implications of human activity leading a sixth.

u/PRbox · 2 pointsr/ChapoTrapHouse

Thanks for the recommendation. I've got a lot of "left-leaning" books (well, some of them) on my list now that all sound interesting, and Debt is definitely a high priority because people keep recommending it.

Have you read any of his other work? Bullshit Jobs sounds really interesting but a couple reviews said the original article he wrote on the topic pretty much sums the book up in a much lower word count.

A few of the books on my to-read list in case anyone sees this and is interested:

u/librariowan · 2 pointsr/suggestmeabook
u/bryancostanich · 2 pointsr/ClimateNews

seems to be missing another key point, however. Many planktons are calcium fixers; they "fix" calcium to themselves as a protected shell. however, the ocean is the world's largest carbon sink, and as it absorbs carbon, it acidifies, causing calcium fixing to become more expensive. as such, many calcium fixing organisms will likely go extinct as the ocean acidifies. The Sixth Extinction devotes an entire chapter to this phenomenon and is an excellent read.

u/NoWordOfALie · 2 pointsr/videos

If this video fascinates anyone, you might be interested in reading The Wolf's Tooth or Where the Wild Things Were. Both are entertaining, easy to read, and super informative.

Edit: Downvoted for helping others broaden their knowledge on the subject at hand? :(

u/ollokot · 2 pointsr/environment

On this particular topic, here are some books that I have read (sorry, mere comments from them will not do them justice):

u/kmc_v3 · 1 pointr/bayarea

For mushrooms in general (not specifically psychedelic ones) I recommend All That the Rain Promises and More by David Arora. If you like that then check out Mushrooms Demystified which is his famous tome. Two newer books with beautiful color photographs are Mushrooms of the Redwood Coast by Noah Siegel and Christian Schwarz, and California Mushrooms by Desjardin, Wood, and Stevens.

The best way though is to go foraging with someone who knows what they're doing. Check out MSSF or one of the other clubs in the area. If you join MSSF now, you can still get a spot on the Mendocino Woodlands camping trip, which is an absolute blast.

u/ElfinPrincessMarlene · 1 pointr/Random_Acts_Of_Amazon
u/slippy0101 · 1 pointr/AskReddit

Depending where you live, mushroom hunting.

Edit to add that it can be good exercise and an excuse to get out of the house.

u/pizzabunnie · 1 pointr/mycology
u/squidboots · 1 pointr/todayilearned

Np :) A good place to start is Tom Volk's website. It's very 1998 in its format but he's a very knowledgeable (if not quirky) guy. There's a lot of hidden gems on there!

I also recommend "Magical Mushrooms, Mischievous Molds" by George Hudler and "All The Rain Promises and More" by David Arora. Hudler's book reads more Stammet's books in format, but Arora's book is more of a field guide with neat articles interspersed.

Most of the other people I suggested are academics and are only published in peer-review journals. Have fun!

u/penguining · 1 pointr/funny

Now, try not to crash Amazon with your rush to buy it.

u/restanna · 1 pointr/Anarchism

Biology doesn't work that way. Selection is not the single factor in evolution and selection doesn't operate at the level of the gene.

There's no "selfish gene", Neo-Darwinists like the asshole Dawkins are just arrogant pricks and not actual scientists.

I recommend you take a look at this paper:

And this:

I also would recommend at the work of biologists like:

The famous physiologist Denis Noble and his two books:

"Dance to the Tune of Life: Biological Relativity":

"The Music of Life: Biology Beyond Genes":

James A. Shapiro's "Evolution: A View from the 21st Century":

What it Means to be 98% Chimpanzee: Apes, People, and their Genes:

u/jadenton · 1 pointr/worldnews

I'm not projecting, you're just a fucking filthy liar.

The letter is a hoax. You've admitted that is doesn't exist, and yet your somehow still defending it. Here the book that really explain why you do this :

Unlike your source, which is just one quake ranting about his political opponents, the author of this book pulls togther study after study after study into neroscience to present his thesis about how cognitively defective and morally deficent right wingers are. Funny enough, it's a branch of study that got started back in the 1950s as people tried to figure out how so many Germans could be made to go along with the Nazis. Turns out, 30% of the population is just evil, right wing filth that really really has a hard time confronting reality.

u/MrOrdinary · 1 pointr/IAmA

I just heard there is a new book out about the Republican Brain. About how differently Reps and Dems think. Sounded interesting on the radio review. It may enlighten some.

edit: ok it's due out this week. link

u/Benegger85 · 1 pointr/trump

Bestselling author Chris Mooney uses cutting-edge research to explain the psychology behind why today’s Republicans reject reality—it's just part of who they are.

From climate change to evolution, the rejection of mainstream science among Republicans is growing, as is the denial of expert consensus on the economy, American history, foreign policy and much more. Why won't Republicans accept things that most experts agree on? Why are they constantly fighting against the facts?

Science writer Chris Mooney explores brain scans, polls, and psychology experiments to explain why conservatives today believe more wrong things; appear more likely than Democrats to oppose new ideas and less likely to change their beliefs in the face of new facts; and sometimes respond to compelling evidence by doubling down on their current beliefs.  

Goes beyond the standard claims about ignorance or corporate malfeasance to discover the real, scientific reasons why Republicans reject the widely accepted findings of mainstream science, economics, and history—as well as many undeniable policy facts (e.g., there were no “death panels” in the health care bill).

Explains that the political parties reflect personality traits and psychological needs—with Republicans more wedded to certainty, Democrats to novelty—and this is the root of our divide over reality.

Written by the author of The Republican War on Science, which was the first and still the most influential book to look at conservative rejection of scientific evidence. But the rejection of science is just the beginning…

Certain to spark discussion and debate, The Republican Brain also promises to add to the lengthy list of persuasive scientific findings that Republicans reject and deny.

u/jonathan881 · 1 pointr/videos

have you read this? disregard the politics it's worthwhile for the psychology.

u/Exsanguinatus · 1 pointr/politics

So, what you're telling me is that you're not biased, don't think it's possible to search for the statistics around the topic at hand, believe that everyone abuses the welfare system, yet when presented with evidence gathered by the federal agency responsible for the welfare program that contradicts your non-biased view of the matter, you dismiss it immediately as preposterous without needing to provide any counter-examples proving that it is indeed preposterous?

There's a book out I think you should read.

It cites all sorts of lovely studies. Studies that "show conservatives more likely to defend their beliefs against new evidence and highly-educated conservatives are even more prone to do so." (Kulinski is the name of the guy who ran the study, but I'm having trouble finding a link to the paper at the moment, and I have to get to work)

But nobody's trying to tell you you're not biased at all. No. I'd never tell you to your face that you're not, in fact, in possession of the truth (big T, or little t - take your pick).

edit - started on a cell phone, and the damned thing thought it was time to post half-way through my comment.

u/QEDLondon · 1 pointr/atheism

Here is another source for the claim conservative and progressive brains/personalities are different:

The Republican Brain, Chris Mooney

u/shadmere · 1 pointr/politics

This is a great book about that very subject.

It's not that Republicans are mentally wrong, but they do tend to think differently than liberals in many areas. Many of those differences, while they might be useful in certain situations and contexts, are pretty awful when dealing with a modern, free society.

u/Dvout_agnostic · 1 pointr/Futurology

I don't know. Read the Sixth Extinction - humans have been driving animal species to extinction since long before capitalism or even written history. Capitalism probably just accelerated what we were already doing.

u/Goosebaby · 1 pointr/investing

I don't understand what is nutty about questioning if the US will continue to grow over the next several decades.

The US is facing serious long term problems with demographics, debt, deflation, and income inequality. There's a robust case to be made for pessimism, even though people in this sub don't want to hear it.

EDIT: Even more serious than what I mentioned above is global warming, which I think will present serious geopolitical instability over the coming decades. Plus, our legacy as the human race is to be the cause of the sixth mass extinction on the planet. As plants and animals around the world go extinct, who knows what the impact will be on ecosystems, cropland, forests, fish, etc. This is bad, and it's happening.

u/ClimateMom · 1 pointr/IAmA

If I may hop in, there is a most excellent book on the critical role top predators play in keeping ecosystems healthy, though it talks more about otters and killer whales than sharks per se:

It has a whole chapter on the deer situation in the Eastern US, though.

u/mook201 · 1 pointr/todayilearned

Where the Wild Things Were is a great book that touches on what happened at Yellowstone, along with other places.

u/avogadros_number · 1 pointr/GlobalClimateChange

Hi /u/reversejellyfish that's an excellent question. Unfortunately a large portion of my knowledge is based from courses and materials (scientific articles, lab experiments, etc.) during my degree. Further, I would cast myself as an outlier preferring to read actual text books, and peer-reviewed studies to gain insight. In other words I believe my preference choice for materials would also have members of your book club 'sawing logs.' That being said, I would recommend x-posting your question to a couple of other subreddits that typically see far more activity from its subscribers than /r/GlobalClimateChange. Try /r/environment and /r/climate.

As far as what I would recommend, quickly off the top of my head...


u/The-Bunyip · 1 pointr/videos

I didn't make outlandish claims - I am relaying the work of the worlds most highly regarded scientist on the issue - Dr. Richard Hansen.

Do some reading.

u/Muddlesthrough · 1 pointr/Mountaineering

The Mountaineering Handbook has a good, readable, and practical discussion of mountain weather.

u/veryblessed123 · 1 pointr/creepy

As part of my Rescue Diver certification the instructor recommended we read Michael Ange's Diver Down. Its a collection of real life diving accidents and how to avoid them.

This poor fellow must not have taken this advice...

u/Legal_Disclaimer · 1 pointr/dayz

Realistically yes.

I read an awesome book which talks about this, though it's covers the broader hypothetical of what would happen if all humans disappeared from the planet tomorrow.

The World Without Us.

u/serenne · 1 pointr/AskReddit

The World Without Us by Alan Weisman painted a pretty interesting picture of what would happen if humanity were to disappear. Our longest lasting achievements were pretty much all the nuclear accidents that would occur without us to maintain them- many things will last a very long time (like bridges), but nature quickly envelopes them all.

u/drunkbynoon · 1 pointr/books

A little off-topic, since this one doesn't speculate on society (its premise is that humanity has suddenly disappeared), but it still gives a good idea of what the world would look like should a catastrophic event wipe out civilization:

The World Without Us

u/esmifra · 1 pointr/Futurology

Alan Weisman wrote a book explaining what would happen to the infrastructures and world as we know it if we disappeared over night.

It's one of my favorite books.

u/skydivinghuman · 1 pointr/NoStupidQuestions

Read this a few years ago. Discussed exactly that. The World Without Us

u/dsfgdfbhcvxsdf · 1 pointr/pics

> And look how much damage we have done in the tiny amount of time we've been here.

What damage? What impact have humans had on Earth that will still be here a million years later? Here's an interesting book, if you are interested. It describes what would happen to a major human city if all humans suddenly vanished from the Earth.

> do you truly believe that it wouldn't be morally wrong for humans to try to make every species extinct - because species die out anyway?

But we are not actively trying to make every single species out there go extinct. And even if we were there is no way we would be able to do that. The fact that there are a handful of endangered species out there is not a sign of the end of the world. And this really isn't a question of what's morally right and wrong. Life doesn't care about right and wrong, it cares about survival.

You seem to be missing my point. I'm not saying that we have the right to go and exterminate every single thing on this planet. What I am saying is that nature is not frail and weak, and we are not as powerful as we like to believe. Look at all the natural disasters through out history. Earthquakes, floods, volcanic eruptions, and fires. All of these have destroyed major cities in mere hours.If the Earth was some sort of huge sentient being out to destroy us we wouldn't be able to last a week on this planet.

And things like global warming is no big deal for nature. Dramatic climate changes happen all the time. It might cause a global mass extinction. But in the end the Earth will be fine. We won't be however. That's why we shouldn't be worried about saving the planet, we should be worried about saving ourselves.

u/synapsecollapse · 1 pointr/AskReddit

OP should read The World Without Us. Awesome book explaining how long it would take for nature to reclaim the world when all humans are gone.

u/hso · 1 pointr/pics
u/nightbiscuit · 1 pointr/AskReddit
u/Xantodas · 1 pointr/

Reading this right now. Has been a popular subject with me lately, the early US space missions that is, not necessarily just the moon landing. It's old and written by a magazine team, but seems alright.

Some other non-fictions I've read over the last 2-3 years that scream out at me are Ice; the Nature, History and Uses of an Astonishing Substance. Basically everything you could ever want to know about ice. The World Without Us. What would happen to our world if people disappeared completely tomorrow? Fascinating and quick read, plan on rereading it again soon. A Long Way Gone. Story of an African boy soldier. Grim, yet fascinating topic. Guitar; An American Life. History of guitars, how they're built. I'm a player, and so this was great. And lastly, A Crack in the Edge of the World. All about the 1906 SF earthquake, which is my neck of the woods, so was good local history reading.

u/HomeNucleonics · 1 pointr/AskReddit

There's also an excellent book by Alan Weisman on the topic.

u/TheChanger · 1 pointr/books

To add something to the list that others might enjoy, The World Without Us is a fantastic thought experiment of what might happen if humans disappeared overnight. The book delves into a a brief history of human artifacts and how long they could withstand the test of time.

u/schpdx · 1 pointr/worldbuilding

This book is useful for your scenario: The World Without Us. After 40 years, not much city infrastructure will be left usable. Especially since nature has had a chance to play with it for 40 years. Trees get pretty big in 40 years, and there was no one to pull out the saplings. Concrete buildings will still have most of their basic structure recognizable, albeit full of cracks and spalling all over. Wood buildings...might be recognizable as a hill of vegetation. The wood (even pressure treated wood) won't last for 40 years under those conditions. I suppose you might find occasional wood buildings in protected areas that might still be recognizable as a building. Expect leaks if it rains, though.

u/face-on-the-head · 1 pointr/mildlyinteresting

Not totally sure - maybe 100 years or less? That’s a total guess.
this book might be ideal for you

u/lilmookie · 1 pointr/AskScienceDiscussion

I can offer a general layman's overview of you like (global studies ftw)

I'm not sure if this is what you're getting at but:

"Humans comprise about 100 million tonnes of the Earth's dry biomass, domesticated animals about 700 million tonnes, ..."

I think human lifestyle might be a bigger issue. If you include indirect human usage like domesticated animals (and the resulting sewage pools) etc.

You might really like this book:

Edit: hopefully as technology progresses we can be less disruptive towards our environment. I'm convinced that bio diversity will be a huge scientific/economic boom in terms of finding out what kind of genetic/mathematical/physical models work well as trial tested by time/evolution (granted they're not all winners but...) A lot of solid architecture and medicine has come straight out of nature. Seems like a shame we're just pissing it away for short term goals/benefits.

I also look forward to the day all science merged into one and there's something better out there to run society than what humans/computers/programs are limited to at the moment.

u/Wildcatb · 1 pointr/gifs

Very welcome :-)

The speed with which nature will take over if left to its own devices is amazing.

For a really good read on the subject, check out The World Without Us.

u/PkSLb9FNSiz9pCyEJwDP · 1 pointr/answers

Check out the book by Alan Weisman, the world without us. Pretty good read. link

u/SmellyWetDawg · 1 pointr/evolution

Anything by Richard Dawkins is great for a general overview. If you wanted to drill down into human evolution, I'd recommend Last Ape Standing: The Seven-Million-Year Story of How and Why We Survived. For fun if you wanted to read an author's hypothesis on a world without humans, I'd recommend The World Without Us. Spoiler alert: cats thrive, dogs die.

u/roontish12 · 1 pointr/askscience

I don't understand why would the US be exempt? But you can take a look at The World Without Us for an idea of what would happen if every human being on earth died or disappeared at the same time.

u/kleinbl00 · 1 pointr/books
  • Legacy of Ashes: A History of the CIA by Tim Wiener. Chapter and verse how a small cadre of adventuresome elitists ended up shaping the post-War world into what it is today.

  • The Cold War: A New History by John Lewis Gaddis. A balanced look at the effects upon the world of the economic systems of capitalism and communism, and an analysis of how the Soviet loss of the Cold War does not mean an American win.

  • Blood Brothers: The Criminal Underworld of Asia by Bertil Linter. As much a socioeconomic history of the Pacific Rim as a flashy expose of Triads, the Yakuza and the Tongs, Blood Brothers delves into the philosophy of crime in Asia and how the Western paradigm of Law/Crime is inadequate when describing the Eastern mindset of quasi-governmental organized "crime."

  • The World Without Us by Alan Weisman. Discusses the overall impact of mankind on ecology, geology, and the future of the planet, whether or not we happen to be here.

  • The Joke by Milan Kundera. A lyrical, heartbreaking look into the workings of Soviet Czechoslovakia. The allegations that Milan Kundera may have been an informant himself throws a stark and surreal light on the book.

  • The Evolution of Useful Things by Henry Petroski. Starting with the fork and working his way through the paperclip, Petroski illustrates that the oft-repeated platitude "necessity is the mother of invention" is completely wrong - luxury is the mother of invention.

  • Ishmael by Daniel Quinn. Oversimplified and infuriating, Ishmael is, however, a pretty good overview told in a semi-entertaining way of Conrad Lorenz's argument that the modern lifestyle is fucking stupid and we were all better off as hunter-gatherers. If condescending sophistry isn't your bag, go to The Source.

  • Watchmen. Fer real.
u/Lost_Afropick · 1 pointr/askscience

The book you want to read is this one

It's very detailed and very good.

u/nikovich · 1 pointr/biology

Aldo Leopold's A Sand County Almanac.

u/Zankabo · 1 pointr/atheism

I also encourage:

"Last Chance to See"

"The Deeper Meaning of Liff"

Both are excellent books. Honestly he was a great writer, and greatly missed.

u/drwicked · 1 pointr/travel

Last Chance to See by Douglas Adams is a fantastic travelogue. I love it so much.

Also Michael Palin's books, Around the World in 80 Days and Hemingway Adventure are especially fine.

u/ForgettableUsername · 1 pointr/pics

Haha, they're among my favorite books. If you haven't read it, you should also check out Last Chance to See, which Adams wrote with Mark Carwardine, about a project to travel around the world and see various rare animals on the edge of extinction. I've always felt it was a bit under-appreciated.

u/hamstock · 1 pointr/askscience

While it isn't strictly a science book, Douglas Adam's "Last Chance to See" Is a really great book on a few endangered species he toured around the world to go and try to find. Its short and hilarious and also does a really wonderful job at showing you how silly humans can be and how our silliness actually has pretty detrimental effects on the other animals we share this world with.

If you know anything about Douglas Adams and his Hitch Hikers Guide book then you will probably really enjoy this. It's an overlooked gem in his body of work.

u/kommando208 · 1 pointr/eldertrees

I'd also suggest Last Chance to See.

It's really interesting to see Adams blend his humor into such a different subject as endangered species.

u/readingarefun · 1 pointr/travel

Maybe something like Last Chance to See by Douglas Adams and Mark Carwardine

u/anmoyunos · 1 pointr/AskReddit

Last Chance to See, starring Stephen Fry and Mark Carwardine.

The series is based off the book of the same title, written by Douglas Adams, 20 years prior on his travels with Mark Carwardine.

The series is excellent on its own, and Mark talks plenty about his previous trip with Douglas, but it is even better having read the book as well.

u/Purplebuzz · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

I think we are on the same page but you don't realize it and I am not offended. Choosing to be offended is silly, you can use less energy and just not be.

Though the third one is a work in progress.

u/Dirt_Sailor · 1 pointr/navy

There's a really good book, called The Wave, appropriately enough, about these:

u/UWwolfman · 1 pointr/AskScienceDiscussion

Initially I'd avoid books on areas of science that might challenge her (religious) beliefs. You friend is open to considering a new view point. Which is awesome but can be very difficult. So don't push it. Start slowly with less controversial topics. To be clear, I'm saying avoid books that touch on evolution! Other controversial topics might include vaccinations, dinosaurs, the big bang, climate change, etc. Picking a neutral topic will help her acclimate to science. Pick a book related to something that she is interested in.

I'd also start with a book that the tells a story centred around a science, instead of simply trying to explain that science. In telling the story their authors usually explain the science. (Biographies about interesting scientist are a good choice too). The idea is that if she enjoys reading the book, then chances are she will be more likely to accept the science behind it.

Here are some recommendations:
The Wave by Susan Casey:

Fermat's Enigma by Simon Singh:

The Man who Loved Only Numbers by Paul Hoffman:

I also recommend going to a book store with her, and peruse the science section. Pick out a book together. Get a copy for yourself and make it a small book club. Give her someone to discusses the book with.

After a few books, if she's still interested then you can try pushing her boundaries with something more controversial or something more technical.

u/haihaole · 1 pointr/surfing

Always gets me pumped before winter season.

u/schulajess · 1 pointr/booksuggestions

I just finished The Sixth Extinction
Exciting, startling, readable and current.

u/SwedishFishSlut · 1 pointr/OkCupid

I'm currently reading baby books... but my backburner book that I want to be reading but am only 50 or so pages into is The Sixth Extinction and I'm really into it. But more into learning how to not kill my baby.

u/DurangoOfTheRiver · 1 pointr/technology
u/minibuster · 1 pointr/changemyview

That's why I made the remark at the end about separating the signal from the noise. If you get to n = 200, at that point, you need to start questioning your sources. That shouldn't be conflated with questioning the event itself, which of course can be done, but it should be a separate effort.

If you read the book about disasters I listed above, the problem wasn't with people making mistakes because n was 200, but that people stopped listening even when n = 2 or 3. That's a human nature problem, and we should all be aware we have that potential blind spot when we find ourselves digging our heels in.

And finally, I don't know why people don't see climate change as n = 1 at this point, to be honest. This is unlike anything in the past - there is so much evidence out there, so much consensus, so many ecosystems falling apart so quickly right now (here's one book on it), and so many economic and social impacts we're already dealing with, it seems dated to be discussing if. In scientific circles at least, the conversation has long ago moved on to how we can respond to it, but at present it doesn't seem like things will end well.

u/Unoriginal-Pseudonym · 1 pointr/the_meltdown

ITT: People who are trying to argue with people without trying to change their minds.

I'm no expert, but I'll paraphrase words from people who are.

The single best piece of material I've ever seen on the mass extinction we are living in (not the mass extinction that's coming; the one we are currently witnessing) is this. The Sixth Extinction (well, mass extinction) does a really good job of simplifying complex stuff into what normal people like myself can digest. Yes, by definition, this is a mass extinction; the rates of background extinction are currently hundreds to thousands of times higher than before significant human activity and approaching that of the fallout of the comet/asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs. Please search up background extinction rates and read some material before attempting to argue about this.

Climate change is tremendous, but it is only part of a series of problems that are about to fuck us in the butthole mouth ear bellybutton set that includes all of our orifices. Ocean acidification, habitat fragmentation, flora/fauna trying to migrate and failing (yes, flora. Tree populations spread up slopes faster than down slopes with climate change, especially around warmer climates). The loss of megafauna that comes with poaching and habitat fragmentation.

On top of that, by spreading around the whole globe, we spread life and disease in places where the environment has not evolved to place density-dependent limiting factors on them. We have new invasive species coming into California every week.

I understand your concern that we have more pressing matters, and that we have more time to solve this issue. But we don't. The youngest generation will witness significant changes. Last time we had this much CO2 in the atmosphere, the oceans were about 100 feet higher.

We are currently past the point of being able to solve the problems. We would need a way to cleanse the atmosphere, cut our population, stop expansion, shut off the car, and end globalization if we are to have the people five generations from now not worry about how to survive.

There is no happy ending to our story. There is only a later ending. We release the most carbon emissions in the world. And we just elected Donald Drumpf.


u/sdonaghy · 1 pointr/evolution

Shout out to Elizabeth Kolbert's book The Sixth Extinction pretty good read about evolution,extinction and the anthropocene. Full of cool info but keeps it very narrative.

u/lettuce · 1 pointr/environment

Glass is incinerated along with other waste in incinerators. Again, depending on where you live. My waste goes to an incinerator.

You don't understand what happens to waste in a landfill. Glass will not become sand. It won't settle to the bottom. It shouldn't serve as a means for leachate to escape out to the water table. Glass is not entirely made of sand and will leach out its other ingredients over time unless it is recycled.

Material settles in landfills only because gases form, and escape through collection, leaching, or explosion. Glass will not get crushed over time.

There's a funny story in this book about a time they dug into a 50 year old landfill and picked out a hot dog that was in the same condition as when it was put there.

Again, you obviously haven't done any research on the subject beyond posting your first search result based on your hunches and calling it an argument.

u/FeralCalhoun · 1 pointr/history

In no particular order:

More like a journalist's POV: Garbage Land by Elizabeth Royte

A Better version of Royte's book: Waste and Want by Susan Strasser

This is just a good read: Gone Tomorrow

My Objective Favorite (has the story about the 50 year old hot dog):
Rubbish!: The Archaeology of Garbage by William Rathje

About personal hygiene with some intersecting stories: The Dirt on Clean by Katherine Ashenburg

I have not read but I'm including because I cannot find my Primer on Recycling and this book is on my wish list: Garbology by Edward Humes

u/Pays_in_snakes · 1 pointr/whatisthisthing

This book helps answer a lot of these kinds of questions

u/jestopher · 1 pointr/hiking

I like to practice reading the forest. Check the book out; it's fantastic. It's fun to try to "read" the woods and think about what formed the forests I'm exploring.

u/I-be-pop-now · 1 pointr/forestry

Read this book
It explains how to figure out the history of a forest based on current subtle physical features. Might be neat to incorporate some of this CSI type of info into your book.

u/pedanticist · 1 pointr/IAmA

I used to do the Shroomery quite a bit... grew up some. Not to disparage, but some of them damn kids! Ugh.

Too northern? I'm not sure about that. Season's coming up for winter stuff in northern climates...

Are you asking for a "shroom" guide, or a mushroom guide?
This for the former.
This and this for the latter.

Can you tell me where you are, generally, so that i can help?

u/that_cachorro_life · 1 pointr/foraging

This is my favorite mushroom guide! all the rain promises and more

Make sure you learn the deadliest mushroom types so you can avoid look alikes, and remember to positively ID each mushroom type you find from a guide and to make sure it is not a similar looking type that may be poisonous. For example, the shaggy parasol and green spored parasol look very very similar, but one will make you very sick. You could also look into joining a local mycological society.

u/skysoles · 1 pointr/SeattleWA

Quinault and Hoh rainforests are definitely worth your time. I've haven't been to the Queets or Bogacheil yet, so I'm not sure about them but I've been told the Queets is amazing even though there was a fire a ways into it a couple summers ago.

The Quinault valley has many largest of type trees in it. You can hike to the end of the valley to a place called "The Enchanted Valley" that has an old abandoned lodge in it and during the snow melt season has hundreds of waterfalls cascading down the cliffs behind it. It's truly beautiful. I went late spring last year and missed the most impressive melt time, but there were still tons of waterfalls and it was amazingly beautiful. The Olympic coast is also an exquisitely beautiful place to camp. I find the coastal spruce forests to be very magical, if somewhat ominous. My favorite plant book states that "the sharp needles of spruce were believed to give it special powers for protection against evil thoughts." There is definitely something very protective about them. Both the Quinault (some parts, check with the ranger to see if your specific campsite requires) and the coast (all areas) require bear cannisters which you can get for a couple dollar deposit at the Quinault ranger station or in Port Angeles.

The Snoqualmie Middle Fork area is also really awesome and much closer, however it's been mostly logged so the trees aren't massive like they are in ONP.

I also strongly recommend doing some mushroom hunting. In the spring, east of the mountains you can find Morels. I haven't been out morel hunting yet because I don't have a car, but I know they grow on burned areas. In the fall you can find tons of delicious edibles. Chanterelles abound. Make sure you have a good guide.

Closer in is Cougar, Squak and Tiger Mountains in Issaquah. We call them the Issaquah Alps. There're over 100 miles of trails and all three mountains have access within ~1 mile of a bus stop.

Not having a car I don't get far out as often as I'd like so I'm always looking for opportunities to go on nature adventures! Hit me up if you're ever interested.

u/BeamTeam · 1 pointr/foraging

"All That The Rain Promises and More" is pretty much THE pocket sized mushroom foraging book. Its technically not specific to the US west coast, but in reality it's very west coast oriented.

All That The Rain Promises and More

u/HunterSThompson_says · 0 pointsr/TrueReddit

The best introductory book I can think of offhand is called "Overshoot".

It can be purchased here:

Additionally you can find many resources relating to this topic by searching for "human carrying capacity of Earth" or terms around "population overshoot," "resource overconsumption" and the like.

From an ecological perspective, one species consuming more than 50% of the bio-available energy is a clusterfuck of catastrophic proportions. It is no accident that the rise of humans has led to the mass extinction of millions of species and the population collapse of nearly every non-domesticated species. The exceptions are those scavengers able to survive in the wastelands created by mankind.

The best source is to go outside, and search for a natural environment. If you find one, let me know. The entire earth is overrun with humans and since humanity relies upon non-human species for survival, the table is set for a massive collapse. If you aren't human, things fell apart a long time ago. If you're poor, they're falling apart right now. It is only the rich nations which are not seeing the immediately devastating effects of human overconsumption, and that is largely due to indoctrination, propaganda, and the use of violence to push the "negative externalities" onto those who cannot defend themselves.

Look at the CIA's predictions for future world stability. Worldwide revolutions over food and water by 2030, and they've been saying that for over a decade.

Most of us alive today were born after the collapse became inevitable. It is only because of the effective, pervasive lies we are fed from birth that most people cannot see the damage. Or more accurately, refuse to admit to seeing the damage.

u/willies_hat · 0 pointsr/AskReddit
u/maetrix · 0 pointsr/pics

A mycology post would be incomplete without this treasure:

u/LaserDinosaur · 0 pointsr/mycology

I'd either find a guide specific to your locale or read up on something more broad. Anyway, for the "basics" I'd recommend Arora's works.

The pocket guide:

The bible:

u/myvegandaily · 0 pointsr/climateskeptics

Thanks for sharing and our consumption has to do with it too. Eating animal products is a form of consumption. Like consuming plastic, or a new Iphone every year. It all affects the balance of nature which is about to tip over. Check out this book. There are a lot more like this. I am studying this in one of my classes for my masters degree.

u/ru-kidding-me · -1 pointsr/Liberal

I am not questioning their methodology, I am questioning their motives. Reading the citations at the end sounds like a reading list for young progressives. I am sorry, but it sounds like AGW believers that conservatives are irrational and here, we have the "hockey stick" (i.e. heart rate) to prove it.

Check out the Republican Brain book which basically says conservatives don't have the empathy gene, so they are emotionally inferior to the morally superior liberals.

It really smacks of 1984 to prove a political point more than research designed to show some innate difference.

Sorry if you wrote the study. Did you base your thinking on the book?

u/Mistbeutel · -1 pointsr/worldnews

>but I will say that most conservatives I know at least understand the liberal position and disagree with it, while lots of people like the redditor above you seem to have trouble grasping the idea.

It's quite undeniably the exact other way around.

What do you believe do I not understand about the right wing position?
You see, understanding a position doesn't mean you agree with it.

Because you commented on my personal position: I understand right wing positions quite perfectly. Which is why I fundamentally disagree with it. I have thorough debates about politics every day. I have a thorough education about these topics. I discuss my views and those of others every day. I constantly improve my views and reject ideological reasoning. If I am confronted with evidence, I will change my views. In fact, I won't even express views that I haven't already seen evidence of.

And one of the problems with right wingers is that they don't do these things. As becomes evident by their type of argumentation and the way they conduct debates alone. If right wingers understood their own position, they would stop supporting it. And if they understood the left wing position (not liberal, by the way) they would start supporting it.

As you might have notice: I am literally am asking people to justify their right wing position. Because that way they themselves have to critically think about the things they believe and have to formulate falsifiable statements so I can be convinced by them or refute them. But it turns out that most of the time they can't even do that. Unlike left wingers they don't even provide falsifiable arguments and aren't really willing to debate in the first place. And it's not that they won't for whatever reason they tell themselves (e.g. "The evil libtards never listen to me or tolerate my valid opinions anyway!"). It's that they simply just can't. Even if you can get them to actually discuss their views, ultimately always abandon rational debate and start blindly dismissing arguments of others or attacking people personally (see: your own comment).

In the meantime: Ever saw a right winger try and understand positions that differ from his/her own? Because I sure didn't. Just look at all the replies I get here. Non of them is actually interested in reasonable conversation or understanding what I said. They just got enraged by my criticism and become defensive and attack me personally or blindly dismiss what I said. No serious questions, no serious attempt to answer mine. They aren't interested in understanding things and choosing what is better based on evidence and arguments. They make their choice first and then spread relativism to justify their position. "My position is just as valid as yours, it's all just different opinion." That's simply not how logical reasoning works.

>For more reading look at research done into confirmation bias, the difference between the values of conservatives vs liberals, and egalitarian communitarianism vs heirarchal individualism.

Yes, please do.

You will notice that left leaning people are far more open to discussing ideas and considering the views of others. They are also more rational and base their opinions on reason and logic rather than emotions and ideology. That doesn't mean they are more accepting of opinions that are evidently bad for society. Which right wing views simply quite often are (if they were evidently good for society, left wingers would immediately adopt them).

You will also notice that there is a positive correlation between the level of intelligence and education and left wing thought. While the dumber and less educated you are the more likely you are to fall for right wing propaganda.

The problem with what you said is that it's flawed based on a very fundamental level of definitions: Left wing politics is inherently open-minded. The entire purpose of left wing politics is to do what's best for society and the people and the planet as a whole. It is based on evidence and reason. It stands directly in contrast to right wing politics, which is based entirely on establishing hierarchy and doing what's best for an elite (e.g. nationalist, religious, economic, etc.).

Research shows us that, on average, left wingers are: Significantly more empathetic, educated, intelligent, open-minded and unbiased. Left wing politics is inherently more evidence based and progressive. These things are thoroughly confirmed through evidence (and, as was already said, are a consequence of the very definitions of these tenets).

Sorry, but reality doesn't support your views and relativism.

Politics isn't about left vs. right and the truth being somewhere in the middle. It's pretty much about the people who care about society as a whole (i.e. the left) fighting against people who put themselves or elitist groups over the general population and the planet (i.e. the right). Centrists are simply people who try and find a middle ground because they implicitly believe the elites in power can't be stopped in their quest to consolidate it and the left wing won't stop defending the interests of the general population and the planet, either, so they "compromise" regardless whether or not one side is objectively superior to the other. Seriously, look up what left and right mean, understanding the definitions of these terms alone should already do away with most of your opinions.

Edit: Notice how right wing apologists are making blind accusations and unsubstantiated claims and when met with evidence of them being wrong and thorough and falsifiable explanations, they just downvote and refuse to even expose themselves? It's always like that. Right wingers are simply never demonstrating reasonable behaviour. I haven't met a single reasonable right winger in my life (if they were reasonable, they wouldn't be right wingers). Yet here we had a person making excuses and actually accusing the left of not being open-minded. What /u/chintzy claimed was effectively a lie and instead of fessing up to it and apologizing or deleting their comments, they keep up their lies. It's impossible to reason with people that display such behaviour and that's why right wing thought keeps existing.

u/weshallrise · -1 pointsr/progressive

You would do well to read the book The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science - and Reality by Chris Mooney. You may be able to find it at your local library. If not, it is worth the price to purchase it, especially if you have lots of Right Wing folks in your family. I learned so much reading this book and cannot recommend it highly enough!

And thanks for the link at the end of your post! I've been laughing my ass off for the last 15 minutes!