I love that some commenters below have pegged this video as being pro-capitalist while others are sure it is pro-socialist. Makes me think that maybe it is simply pro-plants and pro-people and the commenters are projecting a bit of themselves onto the video.
Wolf They also turned the word "politics" into a buzzword they slap on to any topic they don't like talking about, regardless on whether or not we really need to talk about it. And often times, we really do.
- I think you should put more diversity in your food and not eating corn only. -No, hell, no! Corn is from 'Murica..., I wont touch those commie potatoes!
*Diversity is great, even if we need to impoverish ourselves to get there, lol.* The "alt right" can make a stupid, inflammatory strawman too, assholes. The only difference is that I'm not a huge, establishment tool. BTW, this is only pro-socialism if you _really_ twist your brain around. Its directly explaining a correlation between poverty with diversity, and very little more. If you think it's socialism-positive, that's some serious freudian slip shit that you wish you could be one of the poor, yet sympathetic ugandan fly magnets. Its okay though, lots of people who grew up surrounded with white guilt, and hating daddy feel this way. You just have to get over yourself.
You know what, good for you man. Good for you. I researched Guyana once, and read that it has the largest suicide rate. I'm glad some one from there is more optimistic about life there and is expressing their happiness for what they have. I hope you have a wonderful day after reading this.
I moved to USA from Nepal. Back home, it is rather easier to start your own small business than find a job . Here in USA almost everyone work for someone else.
If you own your own business you get to decide how to run it. If you work for someone else, you have to follow their rules. Sounds like less freedom to me. Also, having less choice of companies and less products to buy from is also less freedom. I didn’t think we needed to establish this.
I don't know if you've noticed or not, but its somewhat of a tradition among humans, and especially in the west to either ignore or deride politically or religiously or ideologically inconvenient science. Witness: Birth control, condoms, evolution, vaccines, climate change, examples of homosexuality in non-human animals, the relative newness of patriarchal society, the fact that "races" dont actually exist except as a social construct, the many examples of non-binary systems of genderedness in ancient societies, the total lack of evidence for extraterrestrial or spiritual visitations, etc, etc, etc.
***** _"How are your comments any more relevant to this video?"_ It's not. The comments are just opposing a stance that others seem to be making. It creates awareness in that the video is open to interpretation in a number of ways, regardless of the video's intent. The comments in this video are so diverse (no pun intended). Since relevance is out the window (yours included by the way LOL) I may as well board the irrelevance train ... ... I'm glad this video left the comment section open so hidden agendas (real or not) could be exposed :D /sarcasm
Connection terminated. I'm sorry to interrupt you Elizabeth, if you still even remember that name. But I'm afraid you've been misinformed. You are not here to receive a gift, nor have you been called here by the individual you assume. Although you have indeed been called. You have all been called here. Into a labyrinth of sounds and smells, misdirection and misfortune. A labyrinth with no exit, a maze with no prize. You don't even realize that you are trapped. Your lust for blood has driven you in endless circles, chasing the cries of children in some unseen chamber, always seeming so near, yet somehow out of reach. But you will never find them, none of you will. This is where your story ends. And to you, my brave volunteer, who somehow found this job listing not intended for you. Although there was a way out planned for you, I have a feeling that's not what you want. I have a feeling that you are right where you want to be. I am remaining as well, I am nearby. This place will not be remembered, and the memory of everything that started this can finally begin to fade away. As the agony of every tragedy should. And to you monsters trapped in the corridors: Be still and give up your spirits, they don't belong to you. For most of you, I believe there is peace and perhaps more waiting for you after the smoke clears. Although, for one of you, the darkest pit of Hell has opened to swallow you whole, so don't keep the devil waiting, old friend. My daughter, if you can hear me, I knew you would return as well. It's in your nature to protect the innocent. I'm sorry that on that day, the day you were shut out and left to die, no one was there to lift you up into their arms the way you lifted others into yours. And then, what became of you. I should have known you wouldn't be content to disappear, not my daughter. I couldn't save you then, so let me save you now. It's time to rest. For you, and for those you have carried in your arms. This ends for all of us. End communication.
After seeing this video I had this hunch that people in the comment section are gonna read some political ideologies into this video. I wasn't disappointed.
+SomethingIronic The most effective propaganda is that which misinterprets facts to paint a distorted picture, or states facts but selectively omits specific bits of information. This kind of behavior is actually what has earned CNN and MSNBC the most backlash as of late. They don't simply lie to you, instead they throw you a piece of the truth in such a manner as to lead you to draw incorrect conclusions. That combined with a healthy helping of appeal to emotion and some confirmation bias is why we have so many delusional fuckwits running around lately. As it so turns out, it's far more effective to get people to lie to themselves than it is to lie to them personally.
The comparison to companies was really interesting. Nature makes a nice explanation for the creation of monopolies in capitalism in that sense. If you have enough resources to maintain your position any extra resources are spent on aggressively killing your competition. After that is done no one will be able to start-up again. This is only possible if you are able to ever get a stable position though and so you need a resource-rich environment.
Brilliant video. As an environmental scientist in South Western Australian, I love the WA plant life. So diverse, unique and filled with with amazing shapes and colours. Lets just hope that the government wakes up and stops destroying it.
While there are aspects of this video that might be debated, I would still say this is an incredibly impressive piece of writing. This piece should win an award. Connecting science with social structures and issues is difficult to do, and even more difficult to do well. (Note: Agreeing or disagreeing with the point they're making is irrelevant to my comment.)
+Levo GAMES I cant remember the video, but theres one that draws a paralel between niche product sales and big trees and shrubs. they were talking about craft been I believe
yeah but there's a difference between similarities and paralels. Like this is showcasing how a lack of resources makes diversity flourish, and this happens in the same way in both nature and society. It's just interesting
mickeynotmouse but thats exactly what im saying, that you can find similarities/parallels between any two things, there are also many different things, for instance, many of the man made structures in such cultures are virtually identical in the material and design, while in these rainforests the exact opposite is true
I love Minute Earth. I wrote an article reviewing the research for this video. I came to some interesting conclusions, but do not believe it's propaganda. fthisup.squarespace.com/blog/2015/3/11/analysis-why-poor-places-are-more-diverse
***** Yes! Don't listen to bigballsgame, he doesn't know, he knows not! By the way, Artemis, is that you? I only read about you and I thought you died like 2 000 years ago. What's up girl?
Not entirely sure that this holds true for humans at all scales. Coastal cities tend to be both richer and more culturally diverse than do inland communities. Then there are countries that are dirt poor and homogeneous because of oppressive governments prohibiting migration and trade, like North Korea. There are also rich countries that are extremely diverse because they have more skilled immigrant workers per-head than do other countries, like Canada and Singapore. Edit: I realize now that they were talking about diversity of businesses as well as cultures. So lets not forget that the most densely populated settlements are also the ones with the highest incomes and largest number of retail outlets. I guarantee that there are more stores in New York than in Colorado Springs. Sure there are rich countries that are dominated by one corporation, usually a state owned oil company like Qatar. But there are also rich countries with multiple successful businesses in various fields like Japan and Germany.
Free markets lead to concentration of wealth, specially if the means for production (land and machinery) are owned by a very few. Why grow food for your country when the USA and China pay more for Soy and starch and stuff? Hell, the USA became the industrial superpower it once was with staunch protectionism. It now pushes "free market" everywhere because they know free markets lead to concentration of capital and they have the most.
Joaking Free-markets do lead to concentration of wealth. In a market economy the scarcest input must receive the highest remuneration in order to attract it into production. However, protectionism persisted for so long not because it was good economics, but because it was good politics. The contributions of factory owners and the votes of factory workers can swing elections. Granted, there are some cases where a nation can benefit from protectionism, as in the infant industry argument and the optimal tariff argument. However, that only holds true if other countries do not simultaneously engage in protectionism. When everyone restricts trade at the same time, no one benefits because all that happens is economic output declines across the board. That is why free-trade agreements like NAFTA and economic unions like the EU exist. The best case scenario for each individual country is for them to strategically restrict trade while everyone else practices free trade. But everyone's second best scenario is uniformly free trade.
I've seen and am seeing what liberalization of my country has done to its economy. It's no use to me if our GDP went up because the 20 families that own almost all the agricultural land pushed for liberal reforms, either with propaganda or sometimes by CIA-backed military coup, if that growth if offset by the total destruction of industrial enterprise and the jobs that came with it. So forgive me if i don't buy the narrative which, coincidentally, used to be all about local enterprise in the USA (i presume you live there or at least in a country from NATO, the world's enforcer of imperialism), back when it was convienient to the capital owners. Free markets always lead to concentration of wealth. both across countries and within the country itself. You'll see that even tho we become more and more labor-efficient, the urban working class is not able to afford housing and education like our grandfathers did. How come? where is all the capital going? where is all the value we're adding? it'll only get worse.
Joaking Here in the U.S. we have 12 families who own all the farm land. But they are the ones who oppose trade liberalization, because agricultural goods are pretty much the only goods that the government still protects from foreign competition. Also, university education really did not become available to anyone besides the rich in this country until after the second world war, and therefore after the formation of the world trade organization. So I guess the politics of trade liberalization and which sectors of the economy reap the majority of the benefits are region specific. One way we may explain this is the HO model of trade, which predicts that the relatively abundant factor gains from liberalization and the relatively scarce factor loses from liberalization. Maybe in your country labor is relatively scarce and farmland is relatively abundant. My point is we really do know from economic theory that free-trade is the way to maximize output in most cases. However, I concede that what you are describing could happen, because whether total output is maximized or not and who reaps the majority of the benefits are separate issues.
I love in Southern Western Australia, and we have huge diversity in native terrestrial orchids and they are so gorgeous, there are small plots of native bushland scattered around the suburban sprawl of Perth and in august-october you can find around 100 different species of orchids in just these little oasises. Every year I visit the various reserves between perth and albany collecting photos of these little gems and theres something magical about walking through what looks from a distance like harsh, spikey, grey, dry bush only to find that if you look around your ankles you are surrounded by 10+ individual speicies, some you haven't seen before, some strange hybrids that are hard to identify. The Caladenia Flava (Cowslip) or a member of the Duiris genus (Donkey&Bee orchids) tend to be almost everywhere, but some are more rare apparenting only on specific granite outcrops or in a narrow geographic area. My favorite find came wheni was walking down a beach and crossing some largerocks only to find a group of Grantie Spider orchids within 20m of the ocean in tiny dirt patches on large granite rocks, apparently they only live in a small area around that national park and seem to like shallow patches of dirt
if you visit perth between august and october make sure you visit wireless hill or star swamp bc they're the most accessible places to find native orchids, kings park has some but the bush is choked by weeds and the orchids don't do as well in the cultivated botanical areas,
There are alot of plants. I guess those shrubby ones and cacti. There's a bunch of lower classes. And also alot of desert animals.. Or atleast, that's what I always see
I'm from Perth and I love that out of the handful of "biodiversity hotspots" in the world, the only one in australia is in the south west of WA. I did field surveys as part of my botany units at UWA and the diversity is amazing. highest diversity of carnivorous plants in the world.
Interesting comparison between societal diversity and biodiversity. Put me deep in thought about my own country with both very diverse society and biota, Indonesia.
Thank you MinuteEarth! Not only are your videos always really interesting, they also always have a fun twist to them! It's nice that you're showing that science can be fun and that it can relate to our personal lives in many ways!
This is completely WRONG!!! In poor countries the primary occupation for most of the families is to make its own food. This means - far LESS DIVERSITY in PROFESSIONS!!! Because if we start some analogy between different plant species and humans - the only correlations will be the way(tactics) the individual humans keep living - and this is professions! if the theory "Poor Places Are More Diverse" was true - then on the streets of poor countries we can stumble on some professional, narrow specialized - engineer, architect, doctor, actor, artist, chemist, physicist, biologist, cook, sportsman, teacher, astronaut, programmer and so on. But in reality in poor countries - we have less professions! "there are many more different food stores in poor places than richer places" brings nothing to the argument! This is due to the fact that in poor places the primary occupation of the people is farming. The best tactic to survive. This is not diverse! If few pictures of food market is an argument - then look at cities supermarket shells - so many brands! Look at areal photography of big cities! Or just walk on the streets of big cities to see the greater ethnic and cultural diversity - far greater than in poor places !!! MinuteEarth what was you thinking!??
***** Of course I realize it - but MinuteEarth make false statement!!! if we start some analogy between different plant species and humans - the only correlations will be the way(tactics) the individual humans keep living - and this is the profession he/she practice! "there are many more different food stores in poor places than richer places" brings nothing to the argument! This is due to the fact that in poor places the primary occupation of the people is farming. The best tactic to survive. This is not diverse. And you get me WRONG about "greater ethnic diversity" - there is little such thing in poor places - I was talking about greater ethnic and cultural diversity in the big cities - far greater than in poor places !!! When I was in France I have seen people from all around the WORLD and many cultures. I live in poorer country - still in the capital - actually may argue - a better geographical place for diverse culture(?) - not in the center of Europe. But here the ethnic and cultural diversity is poorer - just like the country. Nothing close from what I have seen from Paris for instance. I doubt thousands of tribes means something. Because they are from the same place and culturally they are so entangle - that they actually look and do the same at the end.
***** The anecdote is not ridiculous - my point is that in poor places people do not even start a business. The poorer the place - the smaller the demands. So why to have business diversity at all???????????????! There is many poor regions here with one main shop for two-three villages - Where is the so called diversity?! Do you know how diverse the food in this shop is?
Can someone please tell me how this relates to muliculturalism being positive, at all? So many people in the comments are talking about it, but i really don't understand how this video takes a political stance in any way. I am serious, please tell me.
Multiple cultures are great. They give us the Chinese, italian, and Mexican restaurants. They brought us italian and French art..... The problem is when we confuse multi culturism with incompatible civilisations. These people do not believe I our way of life was frankly are a threat to it. The commies, Islamists, nazis (or any supremacist group), and vegans to name a few 😒. Ps the vegan comment was just me trolling 😉
Hi. I am a fan of his videos, of biology and a researcher at the Universidad Panamericana (Mexico) in the faculty of business sciences. I am really interested in the relationships of biology and how companies and the market work. Hopefully you can give me the sources of this video and the relationship between wealth and diversity. Thank you
Warning: I have no professional qualifications or expertise and this is just my hypothesis based off what I know. I have a hypothesis that ethnically, culturally and linguistically diverse areas are also poor because those differences lead to conflict and misunderstandings between the groups which leads to more conflict. Diversity does not always lead to war but it can. Especially when the groups have been there for a very long time so many conflicts have happened, and people often remember and care about the bad than the good which applies to good and bad interaction also. As these groups are so tightly packed, conflict can spread easily just like disease in pop. dense areas. One example of this is WW1 starting from one assassination. In WW1 conflict spread through a web of enemies and allies. In tightly packed groups these webs are more intertwined and stronger. Also, every distinct group may not have the amount of people and economy size to govern themselves. Even if they can not, other groups may not be able to survive or not be very well off without them so they will fight to rule them. Often times many groups may lay claim to an area causing conflict which is seen in the baltics and the israeli-palestinian conflict. In summary, culturally, ethnically and linguistically diverse groups that want to govern themselves may not all be able to govern themselves fight over that right, land which multiple groups claim and other things, and those conflicts can spread through tightly packed webs of allies and enemies which can build up memories of past conflicts leading to more animosity between groups. Conflict (which can come in the form of economic sanctions, war, etc.) often causes economic hardship. Also: remember that you can disagree over a piece of someones argument without bashing the whole thing and please be respectful to each other when arguing.
Ben Lash I realise you aren't necessarily saying diversity is bad... But some people will definitely take that from this. This may be sometimes true, but it is like saying a diverse ecosystem is what causes the soil to go poor. Differences in beliefs within countries are indeed what commonly causes civil war at present, however in the past war between nations was much more common. So I don't think we can attribute poverty to diversity when poverty is affected by factors from centuries before. Many rich countries are very diverse, Melbourne Australia has a rich multiculture, and the populace is much stronger than in America for instance because of the open mindedness of people, and the multitude of perspectives.
You're attempting to reverse the correlation. The correlation proved here is that poverty results in diversity. You get that "rich diversity", when nobody can fucking grow.
@@shoopoop21 correlation doesn't equal causation. Correlation wasn't proved either way. He simply suggested the correlative relationship might be an opposite causal relationship to the one hypothesized by the video.
@@owlblocksdavid4955 _Correlation wasn't proved either way._ It has been proven. The biodiversity did not magic away the nitrogen content of the soil, so this correlation proves only one way, it is not how this works. Areas with poor soil produce biodiversity, not the other way around. It would not even make sense, and like saying nitrogen vanishes from reality when speciation happens. While OP is just wrong, you're fucking stupid. _correlation doesn't equal causation._ And this how I know you're stupid, spending precious post space browbeating me with shitty platitudes you memorized in an infantile demand for respect and attention.
Loved your video (and always have loved all of your channels). I work in Bachajon, outskirts of the Lacandon Rainforest, with indigenous tseltal poor people. Outsiders always (always!) think that tseltal people are lazy since they live in a Rainforest they should have rich soils and easy agricultural projects. Your video will help explain this ALOT. Thanks / Hocolawal
+Combinemon Far better then living in sweden or so... Its always cold and rains or snows. In the winter there is only sunlight for like two hours a day. Only june, july and august are okay, the rest of the year you simply hope the winter will be over soon. Many people suffer from depression because of the weather/darkness.
Poor places aren't always more diverse. All the poor people in North America and Western Europe live in ethnic ghettos while wealthier people live in integrated communities. Plus, a wealthy city is always going to be multicultural these days while a declining small town (or even large place like Detroit) tends to be homogeneous.
It's talking about nation/region wide not areas within a country or neighborhoods. USA for example considered as a rich country compare to Zimbabwe. Doesn't mean USA doesn't have poor people but in general it's wealthier country.
I think that in politics diversity means zero percent white people, it seems to be that way because basketball usually wins diversity awards when it is by far dominated by africans?
@@YHWHsam Just because someone is not white, doesn't mean they are all the same. Africa has an order of magnitude greater diversity in humans than all of humanity outside of Africa. I don't know about Zimbawe specifically, but I wouldn't be suprised if they had multiple langages, ethnic groups and genetic groups.
This video made me so happy. Then I scrolled down. Always remember, never scroll down. This should be shared in Geography classrooms across the world. Both human and bio geographers will enjoy it as long as they never scroll down.
In other words, if theres a lot to go around, the difference between more and less successfull is huge. If theres little to go around, the difference between rich and poor, in comparison, is much smaller. However, it still very much is there.
Industrialization is one person taking their good ideas and having it spread all across similar areas. Its harder for ideas to spread in areas of extreme linguistic diversity like Papua New Guinea, Myanmar, Amerindian societies, and Nigeria and thats why the industrial revolution happened in "low diversity" Europe which was sort of merged together by the Romans some time ago.
Also since more diverse ecosystems are more stable( due to there being more relations that can help adjust to changes ) there could be a pressure in inherently unstable regions(like places with extreme weather conditions) to become more diverse or die out .
I don't get this at all. Is it about populations of people or vegetation? In Europe (and particularly) the UK there is a MASSIVE diversity of cultures but in the UK we are one of the richest countries in the world. Same for the USA and most of europe. This seems to be totally wrong, although I get the Rich get richer and poor get poorer reference. Feel free to educate me if I have misinterpreted the video, was it actually about people or was it supposed to be about plants??
Yeah, you seem to have misinterpreted a lot since 98% of the video except a hint at the end was about wealth and resource distribution (not culture) having plants and societies analogous (therefore about both). So pretty much the the other way around what you think was just referenced and what the major content was. In regards to cultural diversity that also applies to some extent. I think you overestimate how diverse the UK is overall btw. Which you can realize with simple question/s: How many languages do you speak in everyday life because of this so strong "diversity", or change your customs/greetings depending on the others culture in your region? And how culturally different are the people you interact with mostly/generally in everyday life? Having a majority of some culture/or very similar culture and minorities that differ is not "that much diversity" as when there´s differences between a wide part of a population (as is the case in many poorer regions)...one is somewhat diverse the other can be considered generally diverse. Or we can look at it globally in terms of research done on ethnic diversity: www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/05/16/a-revealing-map-of-the-worlds-most-and-least-ethnically-diverse-countries/ Here the source this is based on: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=319762
***** It´s an emotional thing, people just apply confirmation bias "thinking" what feels right for them since diversity as a word "feels good". And if people hear a part of the world is more diverse which they don´t belong to because reason a+b, they don´t actually hear that and reason objectively about the facts. They take it as an personal insult and shut down. "I wonder what might change about the "cultural diversity" charts if they were derived strictly from genetic variance data, rather than from the hilariously unreliable self-reports of humans to pollsters..." Not possible I think, genetics have nothing to do with culture. It´s a social to personal perceived construct and learned cognitively not genetically inherited, so there´s not much to derive from genes and their variance in this regards. (You basically can´t determine cultural difference with a genetic test just as you can´t determine genetic variance with asking people about it, these are 2 pretty different things...while both are of course variance who would ad to overall diversity :P) If I go to Japan and live there 20 years and change my customs and behavior being more similar to theirs... I didn´t change my genetic makeup, but mindset and perception. And I doubt testing my genetics would derive much or any information regarding the changed cultural behavior...while asking me about things could do the trick^^
Boom Stick True, the UK seems to have a "Come one, come all" attitude to immigration, despite being one of the countries with the smallest amount of available space. I'll never understand why we have to be so welcoming (to all and anyone). Countries like Canada and Australia have the right idea, letting in people (of ALL faiths including whites) ONLY if they can support themselves and only if they have a useful purpose to the country. That's the attitude we should have here, allowing in anyone regardless of culture - only if we need them for the betterment of our economy and only if we have the space. (bring on the comments about UK workers being lazy and not wanting the jobs - there are those, but we all know there's plenty of UK citizens that would dearly love to work - but can't because there aren't enough jobs to go around) It's not a racist attitude, I do actually feel that diversity breeds tolerance - as long as the tolerance is mutual of course!! - Example here is sharia law being forced in places in the UK by those who do not feel they need to follow UK law......
George Smith It's nice to see people who have an open mind about immigration. Although I do agree with the whole thing about only allowing people who are clearly going to work and be able to support themselves, it's shown that on average more immigrants pay tax than UK nationals (or I guess less avoid tax and claim benefits). I like that Britain is one of the more tolerant nations to multiculturalism, especially with more of the open younger generation and less of the OAP form back in the day when racism was okay... Although I have to call you on the fact that Sharia Law isnt being forced in any UK places... It's essentially just an Islamaphobia scare myth...
You can't compare the variety of skyscrapers in New York with the variety of shacks somewhere in Mexico. So are the huge trees of the tropics with tundra weeds. You can only compare things of equal value.
James Oldfield race rās noun a group of people sharing the same culture, history, language, etc.; an ethnic group. But yes, Xenophobia would also work.
SomeoneBeginingWithI translate.google.com gave me something similar. Apparently the autodetected source language is 'hick' Though as per usual, running it through several iterations gets successively more hilarious
This is actually more or less entirely about capitalism, and how it impacts different regions based on other factors, EG: tending towards monopolies in wealthy areas, and diversity in less wealthy ones.
seigeengine You mean like how governments are monopolies and monopolies don't exist without protection from governments and totally don't thwart the wealth created by capitalism? Monopoly on roads, schools, military, arbitrary creation of law, printing funny money. You mean this is why there's always a golden age of relative free trade before everything turns socialism style communist style big government toad sucking bureaucratic bullshit? How is this free trade aka capitalism?
VIGILANTIA do you really think that monopolies can only exist with government protection? Or have you just redefined the word "monopoly" to only include ones that are created as a result of government force?
The comparison with the human "landscape" is totally misleading. Yes, there is a reasoning for bigger economic poverty in some places on earth, but that have little to do with universal nature laws.
yes, that's true, but the reasons are similar, and so the video is comparing both of them. It doesn't say they're the same, just that they have some similarities.
@@helloiamenergyman except they don't. The reasons that dictates biodiversity and soil richness are so much different than that of human socio economic development.
@@MsLukinhas29 You mean that big corporations and mega markets (trees) do not hog the ressources (shoppers) from the soil (society) so that small mom&pop stores (other plants) can access them to grow?
Here in South Africa we have a saying... It goes: "daar is meer biodeversitied op tafelberg as in England" Translated into English the saying goes: "There is more biodiversity on top of table mounten then there is in England"
the last fact is BS. for example india might be poor now but during the middle ages was very rich due to the spice trade and it was still very culturally diverse.
could that also explain why the biggest empires came from the nothern half of the globe, where resources are plentiful and an empire or business can expand rapidly by soaking up ress afap? What comes to mind would be of course the Portuguese, Spanish, British, Dutch and maybe the French as well - and more iffy the romans and Huns, although that might be something else?
Be careful when trying to import lessons from biology into understanding human societies. Both conclusions drawn in the video are incorrect. Poor places have more small businesses because large businesses require governmental stability and legal support. Picture your local big chain supermarket. There is a big boss manager in there. What prevents the manager from -- you know-- declaring himself or herself to be the owner? The manager does the job of an owner already, and the true owner is a large invisible non-human "person" that itself has ownership divided into thousands of stockholders. Much as it is politically unpopular to treat large corporations as people who can sue and be sued and have rights, it is precisely this attitude that allows them to exist at all. Introduce corruption into the system in the form of judges and police who take bribes for instance, and those assets of the corporation will simply be taken by employees and the officers of the corporation just as easily as an employee walks home with extra post it notes. Poor places retain the cultural diversity that was lost wherever nationalism had taken root in the past. Nationalism took root in Europe, America, Australia, and Japan in the 19th Century. Before that, there was tremendous cultural diversity everywhere. Once lost, this cultural diversity isn't regained easily.
Stable institutions are the socio-economic counterpart of good soil. The analogy seems to explain your argument. Glaciers are probably world wars or plagues. When imperialism destroys countries, that seems to be introduction of an invasive species of animal (moving) unknown to the biodiverse ecosystem (poor diverse country) that eats up the institutions and makes the soil poor and then goes away, but not returning the nutrients to the soil.
You do know there is nationalism in poor countries too, right. Its not a "rich" thing. It happens all over the world, from Africa and the colonial independence movments, to Bolivian Indigenous nationalism, and so forth.
Wow. I think I've found the worst comment section on a youtube video ever. It's like their comment algorithm filtered out anyone who doesn't use their knuckles to assist them with walking.
The corals of the Kimberleys coast in North West Australia have greater diversity of corals than the Great Barrier reef on the other side of the continent. This is because of the strong tides in Kimberleys due to its uneven and jagged coast causes more sand and soil to be suspended in the water column, thereby increasing phosphoris and decreasing light... both these properties are detrimental to coral and inhibit growth... hence coral species are more diverse there.
I liked that jump at the end as well. The narrator literally just stated that factually, diversity in plant life requires a poor soil. Should any of those sections of land become enriched, the dominate plants would be those that grow faster. You'd think we could learn something from this but nah. Let's just scream racist
There's a computer simulation study that I read about years ago that supports the first half of this video; it was an evolution simulation, and in situations where the simulated organisms had access to infinite resources, one "species" would evolve. But when resources were limited, diversity would develop to fill available niches.
Individuals do not care about diversity for diversity's sake. They care only about not being poor: i.e. about not having nutrient-poor soil. Diversity is an abstract mathematically-global concept.
Hypothesis: Different plants rely on different nutrients. So when the concentration of some of the nutrients are exceptionally high, the plants adapted to those nutriens battle with one and a nother and the most succesfull few survives and compete out other species that rely on the less common nutrients. In places with balance nutrients you will find that the plants can all compete in a stable fassion.
It was more about the amounts. Some plants are good at quickly absorbing those, and immediately expanding, but others are good at surviving without as much, though they cant expand as quickly.
I love that some commenters below have pegged this video as being pro-capitalist while others are sure it is pro-socialist. Makes me think that maybe it is simply pro-plants and pro-people and the commenters are projecting a bit of themselves onto the video.
Ryan Salvatore You just changed my mind on the evils of scrolling down.
Nick Dawg The alt-right gets easily triggered when they read the word "diversity" no matter the semantics it's used for.
Wolf They also turned the word "politics" into a buzzword they slap on to any topic they don't like talking about, regardless on whether or not we really need to talk about it. And often times, we really do.
- I think you should put more diversity in your food and not eating corn only.
-No, hell, no! Corn is from 'Murica..., I wont touch those commie potatoes!
*Diversity is great, even if we need to impoverish ourselves to get there, lol.*
The "alt right" can make a stupid, inflammatory strawman too, assholes. The only difference is that I'm not a huge, establishment tool.
BTW, this is only pro-socialism if you _really_ twist your brain around. Its directly explaining a correlation between poverty with diversity, and very little more. If you think it's socialism-positive, that's some serious freudian slip shit that you wish you could be one of the poor, yet sympathetic ugandan fly magnets. Its okay though, lots of people who grew up surrounded with white guilt, and hating daddy feel this way. You just have to get over yourself.
im from guyana! i feel so proud to see my tiny country on the map for having so many plant species, and boy do we have alot!
You know what, good for you man. Good for you. I researched Guyana once, and read that it has the largest suicide rate. I'm glad some one from there is more optimistic about life there and is expressing their happiness for what they have. I hope you have a wonderful day after reading this.
Kyle Dean thanks dude! hope you enjoy life!
nz has a lot aswell
The inverse relationship between population density and suicide rate contributes as well
Hi fellow Guyanese:)
I moved to USA from Nepal. Back home, it is rather easier to start your own small business than find a job . Here in USA almost everyone work for someone else.
And they call it "freedom".
MARIN i didnt know working for others makes you a slave
@@randomriku6774 It depends on what kind of someone else you are working for.
MARIN most people work for normal people so i dont see a point
If you own your own business you get to decide how to run it. If you work for someone else, you have to follow their rules. Sounds like less freedom to me. Also, having less choice of companies and less products to buy from is also less freedom. I didn’t think we needed to establish this.
I live in Alaska and there are like 5 types of trees.
Edit: I hate you guys, it has been 4 years and people are still commenting :|
i live in antarctica and there are like 5 trees
I live on Mars there are like 5 types of aliens
I live in a pentagon and there are like 5 sides
I live in California, there are like 5 genders
Roland Ramos W O W !
I have to admit, when reading the title of this video, I did not expect it would be about plants. lol
Edit: Ah.. there it is! I spoke too soon.
If there were a song about watching the video before commenting, I'd recite it now.
Jonathan Greco Go write it, you could be famous!
Haha! 😁
What a twist
Your comment isn’t edited... yet you said edit
What people fail to understand is, he isn't putting a political agenda to the video. He's stating facts.
I don't know if you've noticed or not, but its somewhat of a tradition among humans, and especially in the west to either ignore or deride politically or religiously or ideologically inconvenient science. Witness: Birth control, condoms, evolution, vaccines, climate change, examples of homosexuality in non-human animals, the relative newness of patriarchal society, the fact that "races" dont actually exist except as a social construct, the many examples of non-binary systems of genderedness in ancient societies, the total lack of evidence for extraterrestrial or spiritual visitations, etc, etc, etc.
Making-a-Mulligan I guess that I expected more from a fucking science channel. Where smart(er) people are supposed to be.
Alex Jones it's the internet; and comments sections tend to be cesspools.
also thanks for being one of the like 1% of good commenters.
***** _"How are your comments any more relevant to this video?"_
It's not. The comments are just opposing a stance that others seem to be making. It creates awareness in that the video is open to interpretation in a number of ways, regardless of the video's intent.
The comments in this video are so diverse (no pun intended).
Since relevance is out the window (yours included by the way LOL) I may as well board the irrelevance train ...
... I'm glad this video left the comment section open so hidden agendas (real or not) could be exposed :D /sarcasm
Making-a-Mulligan "the fact that "races" dont actually exist except as a social construct," I assume you think the same thing about gender as well?
0:02
MUST.
USE.
ANYTHING.
NOT.
METRIC.
Pretty sweet analogy! So cool
Connection terminated.
I'm sorry to interrupt you Elizabeth, if you still even remember that name. But I'm afraid you've been misinformed. You are not here to receive a gift, nor have you been called here by the individual you assume. Although you have indeed been called.
You have all been called here. Into a labyrinth of sounds and smells, misdirection and misfortune. A labyrinth with no exit, a maze with no prize. You don't even realize that you are trapped. Your lust for blood has driven you in endless circles, chasing the cries of children in some unseen chamber, always seeming so near, yet somehow out of reach.
But you will never find them, none of you will. This is where your story ends.
And to you, my brave volunteer, who somehow found this job listing not intended for you. Although there was a way out planned for you, I have a feeling that's not what you want. I have a feeling that you are right where you want to be. I am remaining as well, I am nearby.
This place will not be remembered, and the memory of everything that started this can finally begin to fade away. As the agony of every tragedy should. And to you monsters trapped in the corridors: Be still and give up your spirits, they don't belong to you.
For most of you, I believe there is peace and perhaps more waiting for you after the smoke clears. Although, for one of you, the darkest pit of Hell has opened to swallow you whole, so don't keep the devil waiting, old friend.
My daughter, if you can hear me, I knew you would return as well. It's in your nature to protect the innocent. I'm sorry that on that day, the day you were shut out and left to die, no one was there to lift you up into their arms the way you lifted others into yours. And then, what became of you.
I should have known you wouldn't be content to disappear, not my daughter. I couldn't save you then, so let me save you now.
It's time to rest. For you, and for those you have carried in your arms.
This ends for all of us.
End communication.
@@donquavioussquintillioncor2261 look I love Henry’s speech to but that was so out of place
After seeing this video I had this hunch that people in the comment section are gonna read some political ideologies into this video. I wasn't disappointed.
Ya, no doubt eh. They always do,
one2play4 It was pretty clear that the maker was not exactly fond of the free market.
Welcome to human nature my friend
If it has facts in it that don't support my worldview, its propaganda!
+SomethingIronic
The most effective propaganda is that which misinterprets facts to paint a distorted picture, or states facts but selectively omits specific bits of information. This kind of behavior is actually what has earned CNN and MSNBC the most backlash as of late.
They don't simply lie to you, instead they throw you a piece of the truth in such a manner as to lead you to draw incorrect conclusions. That combined with a healthy helping of appeal to emotion and some confirmation bias is why we have so many delusional fuckwits running around lately. As it so turns out, it's far more effective to get people to lie to themselves than it is to lie to them personally.
The comparison to companies was really interesting. Nature makes a nice explanation for the creation of monopolies in capitalism in that sense. If you have enough resources to maintain your position any extra resources are spent on aggressively killing your competition. After that is done no one will be able to start-up again. This is only possible if you are able to ever get a stable position though and so you need a resource-rich environment.
Brilliant video. As an environmental scientist in South Western Australian, I love the WA plant life. So diverse, unique and filled with with amazing shapes and colours. Lets just hope that the government wakes up and stops destroying it.
LET'S BUILD A WALL
to protect us from giant ice sheets and promote biodiversity.
They would just freeze and out grow the wall
Let's build a wall and make the glaciers pay for it.
Attack on titans
I already live there -_-
Che8t ur a trump supporter cuz trump will build a wall
HE WILL BECUZ OF U
2:47 I love how they’re talking in sine waves
None of them are sine waves???
2:15 Dat "Ice Age" reference.
; )
Saw it too!
The pine corn
@@hamdaanchalky7724 It's actually an *ACORN*
While there are aspects of this video that might be debated, I would still say this is an incredibly impressive piece of writing. This piece should win an award. Connecting science with social structures and issues is difficult to do, and even more difficult to do well.
(Note: Agreeing or disagreeing with the point they're making is irrelevant to my comment.)
Damn, they parallel each other so hard it's spooky.
Right?
It's almost as if we were a part of nature ;)
+Levo GAMES I cant remember the video, but theres one that draws a paralel between niche product sales and big trees and shrubs. they were talking about craft been I believe
im not saying that theres nothing in what he saying, but if you look hard enough, you can find similarities between any two things
yeah but there's a difference between similarities and paralels. Like this is showcasing how a lack of resources makes diversity flourish, and this happens in the same way in both nature and society. It's just interesting
mickeynotmouse but thats exactly what im saying, that you can find similarities/parallels
between any two things, there are also many different things, for instance, many of the man made structures in such cultures are virtually identical in the material and design, while in these rainforests the exact opposite is true
I like how they mentioned my country Guyana. It feels great to be remembered.
Guys, maybe the comparisons are just meant to make it easier to visualize instead of be taken as an actual political stance.
what would be so bad about a political statement?
@@georgplaz By itself none; however, a lot of people don't like being told about such.
This was beautiful. I'm new to minute Earth, but had no idea you did this type of stuff! Definitely coming back for more :)
Thrust me, there's no need for coming back. This kind of scientific propaganda gives scientists a bad name.
I love Minute Earth. I wrote an article reviewing the research for this video. I came to some interesting conclusions, but do not believe it's propaganda. fthisup.squarespace.com/blog/2015/3/11/analysis-why-poor-places-are-more-diverse
Don't listen to bigballsgame he doesn't know what he is talking about lol
*****
Yes! Don't listen to bigballsgame, he doesn't know, he knows not!
By the way, Artemis, is that you? I only read about you and I thought you died like 2 000 years ago. What's up girl?
bigballsgame It was more then 2000 years ago but not much bro. Just fighting with my brother Apollo. lols
Not entirely sure that this holds true for humans at all scales. Coastal cities tend to be both richer and more culturally diverse than do inland communities. Then there are countries that are dirt poor and homogeneous because of oppressive governments prohibiting migration and trade, like North Korea. There are also rich countries that are extremely diverse because they have more skilled immigrant workers per-head than do other countries, like Canada and Singapore. Edit: I realize now that they were talking about diversity of businesses as well as cultures. So lets not forget that the most densely populated settlements are also the ones with the highest incomes and largest number of retail outlets. I guarantee that there are more stores in New York than in Colorado Springs. Sure there are rich countries that are dominated by one corporation, usually a state owned oil company like Qatar. But there are also rich countries with multiple successful businesses in various fields like Japan and Germany.
LagiNaLangAko23 Most trade occurs between rich countries and other rich countries. So I don't think that having less resources encourages trade.
Free markets lead to concentration of wealth, specially if the means for production (land and machinery) are owned by a very few. Why grow food for your country when the USA and China pay more for Soy and starch and stuff?
Hell, the USA became the industrial superpower it once was with staunch protectionism. It now pushes "free market" everywhere because they know free markets lead to concentration of capital and they have the most.
Joaking Free-markets do lead to concentration of wealth. In a market economy the scarcest input must receive the highest remuneration in order to attract it into production. However, protectionism persisted for so long not because it was good economics, but because it was good politics. The contributions of factory owners and the votes of factory workers can swing elections. Granted, there are some cases where a nation can benefit from protectionism, as in the infant industry argument and the optimal tariff argument. However, that only holds true if other countries do not simultaneously engage in protectionism. When everyone restricts trade at the same time, no one benefits because all that happens is economic output declines across the board. That is why free-trade agreements like NAFTA and economic unions like the EU exist. The best case scenario for each individual country is for them to strategically restrict trade while everyone else practices free trade. But everyone's second best scenario is uniformly free trade.
I've seen and am seeing what liberalization of my country has done to its economy. It's no use to me if our GDP went up because the 20 families that own almost all the agricultural land pushed for liberal reforms, either with propaganda or sometimes by CIA-backed military coup, if that growth if offset by the total destruction of industrial enterprise and the jobs that came with it. So forgive me if i don't buy the narrative which, coincidentally, used to be all about local enterprise in the USA (i presume you live there or at least in a country from NATO, the world's enforcer of imperialism), back when it was convienient to the capital owners.
Free markets always lead to concentration of wealth. both across countries and within the country itself. You'll see that even tho we become more and more labor-efficient, the urban working class is not able to afford housing and education like our grandfathers did.
How come? where is all the capital going? where is all the value we're adding?
it'll only get worse.
Joaking Here in the U.S. we have 12 families who own all the farm land. But they are the ones who oppose trade liberalization, because agricultural goods are pretty much the only goods that the government still protects from foreign competition. Also, university education really did not become available to anyone besides the rich in this country until after the second world war, and therefore after the formation of the world trade organization. So I guess the politics of trade liberalization and which sectors of the economy reap the majority of the benefits are region specific. One way we may explain this is the HO model of trade, which predicts that the relatively abundant factor gains from liberalization and the relatively scarce factor loses from liberalization. Maybe in your country labor is relatively scarce and farmland is relatively abundant. My point is we really do know from economic theory that free-trade is the way to maximize output in most cases. However, I concede that what you are describing could happen, because whether total output is maximized or not and who reaps the majority of the benefits are separate issues.
Live in Western Australia. Can confirm that pretty much everywhere north of Mandurah looks like that. 0:31
hey I live near there :D. High five!
I live here too!!
Neurological Adventure
WOO
BUDDIES! =D
*****
:'( Y u do dis
I love this channel's analogies. They make science more familiar ❤️
Great animations! The visual information really drives home the point, unlike more or less random image flashes in so many other videos. Nice work! :)
I’m back for nostalgia, I love you, Minute Earth. Y’all made my early years and gave me useless facts to bring up. Six year old me ate this up.
I love in Southern Western Australia, and we have huge diversity in native terrestrial orchids and they are so gorgeous,
there are small plots of native bushland scattered around the suburban sprawl of Perth and in august-october you can find around 100 different species of orchids in just these little oasises.
Every year I visit the various reserves between perth and albany collecting photos of these little gems and theres something magical about walking through what looks from a distance like harsh, spikey, grey, dry bush only to find that if you look around your ankles you are surrounded by 10+ individual speicies, some you haven't seen before, some strange hybrids that are hard to identify.
The Caladenia Flava (Cowslip) or a member of the Duiris genus (Donkey&Bee orchids) tend to be almost everywhere, but some are more rare apparenting only on specific granite outcrops or in a narrow geographic area.
My favorite find came wheni was walking down a beach and crossing some largerocks only to find a group of Grantie Spider orchids within 20m of the ocean in tiny dirt patches on large granite rocks, apparently they only live in a small area around that national park and seem to like shallow patches of dirt
if you visit perth between august and october make sure you visit wireless hill or star swamp bc they're the most accessible places to find native orchids, kings park has some but the bush is choked by weeds and the orchids don't do as well in the cultivated botanical areas,
Told this to my mum and she was like:
"Well the desert is pretty poor why isn't it very diverse?"
Sigh...
It is diverse biologically, I think.
Leo Liu it actually has alot of shit, like lizards, snakes, shrubs, and also cacti
That is a good question though. Are deserts diverse? And if not why not?
There are alot of plants. I guess those shrubby ones and cacti. There's a bunch of lower classes. And also alot of desert animals.. Or atleast, that's what I always see
This involves a different factor which is precipitation.
I loved how you turned the w in Walmart sideways to not get copyright :)
Great video! I loved learning about how plant diversity could relate to human diversity as well!!
Keep on making awesome videos! 😁
I'm from Perth and I love that out of the handful of "biodiversity hotspots" in the world, the only one in australia is in the south west of WA. I did field surveys as part of my botany units at UWA and the diversity is amazing. highest diversity of carnivorous plants in the world.
1:03
*soviet anthem starts to play*
Interesting comparison between societal diversity and biodiversity. Put me deep in thought about my own country with both very diverse society and biota, Indonesia.
Thank you MinuteEarth! Not only are your videos always really interesting, they also always have a fun twist to them! It's nice that you're showing that science can be fun and that it can relate to our personal lives in many ways!
Every side has its pros and cons.
This is completely WRONG!!! In poor countries the primary occupation for most of the families is to make its own food. This means - far LESS DIVERSITY in PROFESSIONS!!!
Because if we start some analogy between different plant species and humans - the only correlations will be the way(tactics) the individual humans keep living - and this is professions!
if the theory "Poor Places Are More Diverse" was true - then on the streets of poor countries we can stumble on some professional, narrow specialized - engineer, architect, doctor, actor, artist, chemist, physicist, biologist, cook, sportsman, teacher, astronaut, programmer and so on.
But in reality in poor countries - we have less professions!
"there are many more different food stores in poor places than richer places" brings nothing to the argument! This is due to the fact that in poor places the primary occupation of the people is farming. The best tactic to survive.
This is not diverse!
If few pictures of food market is an argument - then look at cities supermarket shells - so many brands! Look at areal photography of big cities! Or just walk on the streets of big cities to see the greater ethnic and cultural diversity - far greater than in poor places !!!
MinuteEarth what was you thinking!??
***** Of course I realize it - but MinuteEarth make false statement!!!
if we start some analogy between different plant species and humans - the only correlations will be the way(tactics) the individual humans keep living - and this is the profession he/she practice!
"there are many more different food stores in poor places than richer places" brings nothing to the argument! This is due to the fact that in poor places the primary occupation of the people is farming. The best tactic to survive.
This is not diverse.
And you get me WRONG about "greater ethnic diversity" - there is little such thing in poor places - I was talking about greater ethnic and cultural diversity in the big cities - far greater than in poor places !!!
When I was in France I have seen people from all around the WORLD and many cultures. I live in poorer country - still in the capital - actually may argue - a better geographical place for diverse culture(?) - not in the center of Europe.
But here the ethnic and cultural diversity is poorer - just like the country. Nothing close from what I have seen from Paris for instance.
I doubt thousands of tribes means something. Because they are from the same place and culturally they are so entangle - that they actually look and do the same at the end.
***** The anecdote is not ridiculous - my point is that in poor places people do not even start a business.
The poorer the place - the smaller the demands. So why to have business diversity at all???????????????!
There is many poor regions here with one main shop for two-three villages - Where is the so called diversity?! Do you know how diverse the food in this shop is?
Nebelom thanks for writing down your analysis. It's well thought out
So glad fynbos is getting some attention! They’re really cool plants
1:42 i propose you change "greedy" to successful
Can someone please tell me how this relates to muliculturalism being positive, at all?
So many people in the comments are talking about it, but i really don't understand how this video takes a political stance in any way.
I am serious, please tell me.
i dont understand it either
It doesn't. The internet is just a toxic environment in this way.
Multiple cultures are great. They give us the Chinese, italian, and Mexican restaurants. They brought us italian and French art..... The problem is when we confuse multi culturism with incompatible civilisations. These people do not believe I our way of life was frankly are a threat to it. The commies, Islamists, nazis (or any supremacist group), and vegans to name a few 😒.
Ps the vegan comment was just me trolling 😉
Cuz...
Uhhh idk
The only thing that might suggest it is the end statement "poor places are actually rich." But that's like rich in cultural variation
Hi.
I am a fan of his videos, of biology and a researcher at the Universidad Panamericana (Mexico) in the faculty of business sciences. I am really interested in the relationships of biology and how companies and the market work.
Hopefully you can give me the sources of this video and the relationship between wealth and diversity.
Thank you
There’s a list of references in the description. I didn’t look through them so idk if they have it. Hope that helps
Beautiful video! Love the upgrade in quality your videos have now!
I've watched this a number of times over the years and it's better every time.
Human Poverty, corporate greed, artificial scarcity, and wage slavery is not analogous to natural resource scarcity in the environment
Loved this video. I think the poor climate/poor culture comparison is genius, really. It has a good message and perfectly illustrates both counts.
Warning: I have no professional qualifications or expertise and this is just my hypothesis based off what I know.
I have a hypothesis that ethnically, culturally and linguistically diverse areas are also poor because those differences lead to conflict and misunderstandings between the groups which leads to more conflict. Diversity does not always lead to war but it can. Especially when the groups have been there for a very long time so many conflicts have happened, and people often remember and care about the bad than the good which applies to good and bad interaction also.
As these groups are so tightly packed, conflict can spread easily just like disease in pop. dense areas. One example of this is WW1 starting from one assassination. In WW1 conflict spread through a web of enemies and allies. In tightly packed groups these webs are more intertwined and stronger.
Also, every distinct group may not have the amount of people and economy size to govern themselves. Even if they can not, other groups may not be able to survive or not be very well off without them so they will fight to rule them.
Often times many groups may lay claim to an area causing conflict which is seen in the baltics and the israeli-palestinian conflict.
In summary, culturally, ethnically and linguistically diverse groups that want to govern themselves may not all be able to govern themselves fight over that right, land which multiple groups claim and other things, and those conflicts can spread through tightly packed webs of allies and enemies which can build up memories of past conflicts leading to more animosity between groups. Conflict (which can come in the form of economic sanctions, war, etc.) often causes economic hardship.
Also: remember that you can disagree over a piece of someones argument without bashing the whole thing and please be respectful to each other when arguing.
Ben Lash I realise you aren't necessarily saying diversity is bad... But some people will definitely take that from this.
This may be sometimes true, but it is like saying a diverse ecosystem is what causes the soil to go poor.
Differences in beliefs within countries are indeed what commonly causes civil war at present, however in the past war between nations was much more common. So I don't think we can attribute poverty to diversity when poverty is affected by factors from centuries before.
Many rich countries are very diverse, Melbourne Australia has a rich multiculture, and the populace is much stronger than in America for instance because of the open mindedness of people, and the multitude of perspectives.
You're attempting to reverse the correlation. The correlation proved here is that poverty results in diversity. You get that "rich diversity", when nobody can fucking grow.
I aint reading that, but here, have a like for your time.
@@shoopoop21 correlation doesn't equal causation.
Correlation wasn't proved either way. He simply suggested the correlative relationship might be an opposite causal relationship to the one hypothesized by the video.
@@owlblocksdavid4955 _Correlation wasn't proved either way._
It has been proven.
The biodiversity did not magic away the nitrogen content of the soil, so this correlation proves only one way, it is not how this works. Areas with poor soil produce biodiversity, not the other way around. It would not even make sense, and like saying nitrogen vanishes from reality when speciation happens. While OP is just wrong, you're fucking stupid.
_correlation doesn't equal causation._
And this how I know you're stupid, spending precious post space browbeating me with shitty platitudes you memorized in an infantile demand for respect and attention.
another example is the ocean floor. extremely diverse specialist species in a nutrient poor habitat.
Loved your video (and always have loved all of your channels). I work in Bachajon, outskirts of the Lacandon Rainforest, with indigenous tseltal poor people. Outsiders always (always!) think that tseltal people are lazy since they live in a Rainforest they should have rich soils and easy agricultural projects. Your video will help explain this ALOT. Thanks / Hocolawal
I live in a place with jungles and stuff, dunno exactly how to say it in english... and it sucks Q_Q
+Combinemon Too many bugs trying to kill me in the jungle
The weather bothers me the most :
+Combinemon Far better then living in sweden or so... Its always cold and rains or snows. In the winter there is only sunlight for like two hours a day. Only june, july and august are okay, the rest of the year you simply hope the winter will be over soon. Many people suffer from depression because of the weather/darkness.
mamf0815 I get why people wouldn't like it but seems like a perfect place to me.
its hot enough to dehdrate you but humid enough to just barely keep you alive :D
Poor places aren't always more diverse. All the poor people in North America and Western Europe live in ethnic ghettos while wealthier people live in integrated communities. Plus, a wealthy city is always going to be multicultural these days while a declining small town (or even large place like Detroit) tends to be homogeneous.
It's talking about nation/region wide not areas within a country or neighborhoods. USA for example considered as a rich country compare to Zimbabwe. Doesn't mean USA doesn't have poor people but in general it's wealthier country.
Ah, what a small world you seem to live in. Places exist else of America.
BleachRush “diverse” does not mean “less white people”
Diverse means DIVERSE
Zimbabwe is not very diverse
I think that in politics diversity means zero percent white people, it seems to be that way because basketball usually wins diversity awards when it is by far dominated by africans?
@@YHWHsam Just because someone is not white, doesn't mean they are all the same. Africa has an order of magnitude greater diversity in humans than all of humanity outside of Africa. I don't know about Zimbawe specifically, but I wouldn't be suprised if they had multiple langages, ethnic groups and genetic groups.
Wow, those trees are so cute, nice drawings!
This video made me so happy. Then I scrolled down. Always remember, never scroll down. This should be shared in Geography classrooms across the world. Both human and bio geographers will enjoy it as long as they never scroll down.
0:13 You forgot to draw the border between Sudan and South Sudan !
economics and nature in one video.
Did anybody else notice Scrat's acorn at 2:15? Give this comment a like if you did.
Ice Age is a good movie series.
lol me
lol i thought that was a house
it kinda also looks like one
I saw that today
Compared to The Room, sure.
You see comrade, if no food, everyone can prosper equally!
In other words, if theres a lot to go around, the difference between more and less successfull is huge.
If theres little to go around, the difference between rich and poor, in comparison, is much smaller.
However, it still very much is there.
I actually used the information here for a lab that I was writing up. Very helpful.
Wow!.. That was amazing....
industrialization is less common in economically poor regions, thus supporting proliferation of hyper diversity
Industrialization is one person taking their good ideas and having it spread all across similar areas. Its harder for ideas to spread in areas of extreme linguistic diversity like Papua New Guinea, Myanmar, Amerindian societies, and Nigeria and thats why the industrial revolution happened in "low diversity" Europe which was sort of merged together by the Romans some time ago.
2:05 oh well life's a beach.
Also since more diverse ecosystems are more stable( due to there being more relations that can help adjust to changes ) there could be a pressure in inherently unstable regions(like places with extreme weather conditions) to become more diverse or die out .
This is an amazing report; I love the correlation and connected ideas...and the cute little plants too...
How about singapore?? Singapore is home for very diverse people but their economy is still high..how about that???
For humans it's not universal, Canada and Australia to an extent is also like that.
I heard Singapore is ruled top-down rather than bottom-up though. Singapore has volcanic soil hmm.
poor places are op
PGE Game leaks and news ،whats mean by op???? 🤔
PGE Game leaks and news did you mean by "op" over powered?
Maybe he meant overpopulated.
Joking he meant overpowered
Op means over powers
mAtef egypt www was
I don't get this at all. Is it about populations of people or vegetation?
In Europe (and particularly) the UK there is a MASSIVE diversity of cultures but in the UK we are one of the richest countries in the world.
Same for the USA and most of europe.
This seems to be totally wrong, although I get the Rich get richer and poor get poorer reference.
Feel free to educate me if I have misinterpreted the video, was it actually about people or was it supposed to be about plants??
Yeah, you seem to have misinterpreted a lot since 98% of the video except a hint at the end was about wealth and resource distribution (not culture) having plants and societies analogous (therefore about both). So pretty much the the other way around what you think was just referenced and what the major content was.
In regards to cultural diversity that also applies to some extent. I think you overestimate how diverse the UK is overall btw. Which you can realize with simple question/s: How many languages do you speak in everyday life because of this so strong "diversity", or change your customs/greetings depending on the others culture in your region? And how culturally different are the people you interact with mostly/generally in everyday life?
Having a majority of some culture/or very similar culture and minorities that differ is not "that much diversity" as when there´s differences between a wide part of a population (as is the case in many poorer regions)...one is somewhat diverse the other can be considered generally diverse.
Or we can look at it globally in terms of research done on ethnic diversity:
www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/05/16/a-revealing-map-of-the-worlds-most-and-least-ethnically-diverse-countries/
Here the source this is based on:
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=319762
***** It´s an emotional thing, people just apply confirmation bias "thinking" what feels right for them since diversity as a word "feels good".
And if people hear a part of the world is more diverse which they don´t belong to because reason a+b, they don´t actually hear that and reason objectively about the facts. They take it as an personal insult and shut down.
"I wonder what might change about the "cultural diversity" charts if they were derived strictly from genetic variance data, rather than from the hilariously unreliable self-reports of humans to pollsters..."
Not possible I think, genetics have nothing to do with culture. It´s a social to personal perceived construct and learned cognitively not genetically inherited, so there´s not much to derive from genes and their variance in this regards. (You basically can´t determine cultural difference with a genetic test just as you can´t determine genetic variance with asking people about it, these are 2 pretty different things...while both are of course variance who would ad to overall diversity :P)
If I go to Japan and live there 20 years and change my customs and behavior being more similar to theirs... I didn´t change my genetic makeup, but mindset and perception. And I doubt testing my genetics would derive much or any information regarding the changed cultural behavior...while asking me about things could do the trick^^
***** kudos to you, one of the few people who actually seemingly understood the entire video, lol
Boom Stick True, the UK seems to have a "Come one, come all" attitude to immigration, despite being one of the countries with the smallest amount of available space.
I'll never understand why we have to be so welcoming (to all and anyone).
Countries like Canada and Australia have the right idea, letting in people (of ALL faiths including whites) ONLY if they can support themselves and only if they have a useful purpose to the country.
That's the attitude we should have here, allowing in anyone regardless of culture - only if we need them for the betterment of our economy and only if we have the space.
(bring on the comments about UK workers being lazy and not wanting the jobs - there are those, but we all know there's plenty of UK citizens that would dearly love to work - but can't because there aren't enough jobs to go around)
It's not a racist attitude, I do actually feel that diversity breeds tolerance - as long as the tolerance is mutual of course!! - Example here is sharia law being forced in places in the UK by those who do not feel they need to follow UK law......
George Smith It's nice to see people who have an open mind about immigration. Although I do agree with the whole thing about only allowing people who are clearly going to work and be able to support themselves, it's shown that on average more immigrants pay tax than UK nationals (or I guess less avoid tax and claim benefits). I like that Britain is one of the more tolerant nations to multiculturalism, especially with more of the open younger generation and less of the OAP form back in the day when racism was okay... Although I have to call you on the fact that Sharia Law isnt being forced in any UK places... It's essentially just an Islamaphobia scare myth...
You can't compare the variety of skyscrapers in New York with the variety of shacks somewhere in Mexico. So are the huge trees of the tropics with tundra weeds. You can only compare things of equal value.
The little faces on the plants made my day ^.^
holy shit, all the racism in the comments O.O
It's about culture not skin color
That's still kind of racism no?
James Oldfield Your point? That would still, by definition, be racism.
personwhoesrandom123 Xenophobia
James Oldfield
race
rās
noun
a group of people sharing the same culture, history, language, etc.; an ethnic group.
But yes, Xenophobia would also work.
Dis raight her be som daym communizzm! Geddatta her with dat librul agennduh!
TRANSLATION: This right here be some damn communism! Get out of here with that liberal agenda!
(I think)
SomeoneBeginingWithI
translate.google.com gave me something similar. Apparently the autodetected source language is 'hick'
Though as per usual, running it through several iterations gets successively more hilarious
This is actually more or less entirely about capitalism, and how it impacts different regions based on other factors, EG: tending towards monopolies in wealthy areas, and diversity in less wealthy ones.
seigeengine You mean like how governments are monopolies and monopolies don't exist without protection from governments and totally don't thwart the wealth created by capitalism? Monopoly on roads, schools, military, arbitrary creation of law, printing funny money.
You mean this is why there's always a golden age of relative free trade before everything turns socialism style communist style big government toad sucking bureaucratic bullshit? How is this free trade aka capitalism?
VIGILANTIA do you really think that monopolies can only exist with government protection? Or have you just redefined the word "monopoly" to only include ones that are created as a result of government force?
The comparison with the human "landscape" is totally misleading. Yes, there is a reasoning for bigger economic poverty in some places on earth, but that have little to do with universal nature laws.
THANK YOU. Finally someone noticed the obvious.
yes, that's true, but the reasons are similar, and so the video is comparing both of them. It doesn't say they're the same, just that they have some similarities.
@@helloiamenergyman except they don't. The reasons that dictates biodiversity and soil richness are so much different than that of human socio economic development.
@@MsLukinhas29 You mean that big corporations and mega markets (trees) do not hog the ressources (shoppers) from the soil (society) so that small mom&pop stores (other plants) can access them to grow?
@@Tenajeh No. I mean that this doesn't explain poverty.
Here in South Africa we have a saying... It goes:
"daar is meer biodeversitied op tafelberg as in England"
Translated into English the saying goes:
"There is more biodiversity on top of table mounten then there is in England"
This completely blew my mind. Thank you!
theirs and ice age the movie reference in the video
+hi how are you what is theirs?
lol, i saw that acorn tooo
+hi how are you There's an Ice Age, the movie, reference in this video.
the last fact is BS. for example india might be poor now but during the middle ages was very rich due to the spice trade and it was still very culturally diverse.
You can find exceptions to anything if you look for them. They even listed some exceptions themselves in this video.
Beautifully summed up ending
If what this video says it's true and mars had life...
It would be the most diverse life ever, since it's basically Australia on top of the Himalayas
could that also explain why the biggest empires came from the nothern half of the globe, where resources are plentiful and an empire or business can expand rapidly by soaking up ress afap?
What comes to mind would be of course the Portuguese, Spanish, British, Dutch and maybe the French as well - and more iffy the romans and Huns, although that might be something else?
Why do Americans drop the H on herb?
+Alexandra “Boolybong” Wilson-Newman It depends on regional dialects. In the state of Maine it is 'Herbs'. :P
How about Hurbs
Why do Brits drop the r at the end of words?
Be careful when trying to import lessons from biology into understanding human societies. Both conclusions drawn in the video are incorrect.
Poor places have more small businesses because large businesses require governmental stability and legal support. Picture your local big chain supermarket. There is a big boss manager in there. What prevents the manager from -- you know-- declaring himself or herself to be the owner? The manager does the job of an owner already, and the true owner is a large invisible non-human "person" that itself has ownership divided into thousands of stockholders. Much as it is politically unpopular to treat large corporations as people who can sue and be sued and have rights, it is precisely this attitude that allows them to exist at all. Introduce corruption into the system in the form of judges and police who take bribes for instance, and those assets of the corporation will simply be taken by employees and the officers of the corporation just as easily as an employee walks home with extra post it notes. Poor places retain the cultural diversity that was lost wherever nationalism had taken root in the past. Nationalism took root in Europe, America, Australia, and Japan in the 19th Century. Before that, there was tremendous cultural diversity everywhere. Once lost, this cultural diversity isn't regained easily.
Here here!
We must regain our cultural diversity in Europe.
th-cam.com/video/1_T6XMDg53g/w-d-xo.html
Stable institutions are the socio-economic counterpart of good soil. The analogy seems to explain your argument. Glaciers are probably world wars or plagues. When imperialism destroys countries, that seems to be introduction of an invasive species of animal (moving) unknown to the biodiverse ecosystem (poor diverse country) that eats up the institutions and makes the soil poor and then goes away, but not returning the nutrients to the soil.
emawerna Your paragraph have bothing to do with video
You do know there is nationalism in poor countries too, right. Its not a "rich" thing. It happens all over the world, from Africa and the colonial independence movments, to Bolivian Indigenous nationalism, and so forth.
Who wrote the script, Marx or Engels?
Neither.
apburner1 Was GOD
If you find life plants nature and happynees somewhere then that place is not poor.
One of the best videos explaining the "injustice" of plentyfulness.
Ah yes my favorite store
*[REDACTED]*
Stop donating money to poor people! They are already rich!
Its pronounced guy-ah-na, but this is so good that I'll allow it.
South west Western Australia getting some love. Couldn't be prouder.
"richest" and over populated.
Wow.
I think I've found the worst comment section on a youtube video ever.
It's like their comment algorithm filtered out anyone who doesn't use their knuckles to assist them with walking.
Google's algorithm has really advanced in leaps and bounds!
Haha your (OP) comment is funny 😀
You haven't seen the comment section of bad apple undertale version english
we need more glaciers to solve world poverty
I live in Western Australia, and I had no idea our plant diversity was so high!
The corals of the Kimberleys coast in North West Australia have greater diversity of corals than the Great Barrier reef on the other side of the continent. This is because of the strong tides in Kimberleys due to its uneven and jagged coast causes more sand and soil to be suspended in the water column, thereby increasing phosphoris and decreasing light... both these properties are detrimental to coral and inhibit growth... hence coral species are more diverse there.
It is in fact the other way around: more diverse places are poorer
I liked that jump at the end as well. The narrator literally just stated that factually, diversity in plant life requires a poor soil.
Should any of those sections of land become enriched, the dominate plants would be those that grow faster.
You'd think we could learn something from this but nah. Let's just scream racist
Yay! My first First!
Congratulations!
But the first first was first?
Mind blown
as of now, also your last first!
Don Williams no, their last first first. They may in the future have other firsts, but they will never have another first first!
1:55 I am trying to think what this blue store is a parody of. Hmmm....Calmart? Sigma-mart? Trump-mart?
Are you stupid its IKEA
What a thoughtful topic this is! Thank you,
There's a computer simulation study that I read about years ago that supports the first half of this video; it was an evolution simulation, and in situations where the simulated organisms had access to infinite resources, one "species" would evolve. But when resources were limited, diversity would develop to fill available niches.
Individuals do not care about diversity for diversity's sake. They care only about not being poor:
i.e. about not having nutrient-poor soil. Diversity is an abstract mathematically-global concept.
Thank you for indonesian subtitle!
Wealth inequality is worse in poorer countries than rich ones so the comparison is not apt.
Hypothesis:
Different plants rely on different nutrients. So when the concentration of some of the nutrients are exceptionally high, the plants adapted to those nutriens battle with one and a nother and the most succesfull few survives and compete out other species that rely on the less common nutrients.
In places with balance nutrients you will find that the plants can all compete in a stable fassion.
From what we have seen, all plants require nitrogen and phosphorus.
Paul Mahoney But I guess there are more nutrients than simply those two elements :o... Not realy my field though haha :)
It was more about the amounts. Some plants are good at quickly absorbing those, and immediately expanding, but others are good at surviving without as much, though they cant expand as quickly.
2:16, Ice Age reference on the glaciar, the acorn from Scrat :D
oof that title , MinuteEarth based and red pilled