# data[].attributes.body
I would invent a pencil maker so that we would not have to cut down trees.

# data[].attributes.body
I would invent emotional intelligence for everyone in order to show respect and care for the earth.

# data[].attributes.body
I would invent instant empathy for humans so that all humans would realize their impact on the Earth and understand the importance of changing their ways.

# data[].attributes.body
K5. Rodo the garbage cleaning robot ( upside down...:( )

# data[].attributes.body
K5  this is garbage for taking care of the earth.  We need lots more so people will stop littering and love nature

# data[].attributes.body
I would invent a solar powered machine that could eat garbage and instantly decompose it.

# data[].attributes.body
I would invent absolutly nothing. But i would help out and do my part by taking the bus to school, walking to were I need to go and bike where I would be needed.

# data[].attributes.body
I would invent a car that would run on air. It would have no wheels and no gas, just air. Of course, no oil.
It would be faster than a normal car. If you were to put gas in it, it would explode. If you put oil in it, it would blow sky high. If you add wheels, it will fall apart.
It will help the world, because whenever you go by trash it picks it up, and turns it into air. It would not spill oil or pollute the earth with gas.
It will help the plants and it will help you. It's going to be the best and safest car in the world

# data[].attributes.body
My invention would separate recycled objects from garbage.

# data[].attributes.body
The earth would be better than it is today if humans left the planet. Almost all cases of animal extinction have either been hunted by humans or climate/habitat changes. The Human-B-gone is the best idea for the earth.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Are humans Earth's biggest enemy? Debate over whether we have destroyed the planet since mankind's birth rages at conference

The Megafauna conference took place in Oxford last week

Experts discussed the demise of large beasts across the world

They debated the impact climate change and humans had on these animals

Scientists are using a range of methods including radiocarbon dating, climate mapping and more to establish what led to the extinction

The Earth was once populated with enormous beasts, the likes of which we have never seen - from mammoths to giant beavers, and sabretooths to horned tortoises.

Over the last two million years many of these giant beasts, known as megafauna, have either been wiped out completely, or replaced by smaller counterparts living side-by-side with an ever increasing human population.

The debate on exactly what caused this mass extinction has been raging for years - on one side of the fence, the demise is being blamed on natural climate change, on the other, humans and our carnivorous ways have 'destroyed' the world.

Earlier this week, St John's College in Oxford played host to the annual Megafauna conference.

The meeting is a chance for experts, zoologists, archaeologists and scientists to debate the demise of these mega beasts and how their disappearance has impacted on how we live today.

British environmentalist and writer George Monbiot is outspoken in his belief that humans are to blame for the mass extinction, a theory known as 'overkill hypothesis.'

DEADLY MAN: WHAT IS THE 'OVERKILL HYPOTHESIS'?

He believes there is a direct correlation between humans arriving and populating continents across the globe and the widely-seen demise of many megafauna species.

'Before Homo erectus, perhaps our first recognisably-human ancestor, emerged in Africa, the continent abounded with monsters.

'There were several species of elephants. There were sabretooths and false sabretooths, and giant hyenas,' said Monbiot.

He continued that while most people believe the beginning of the Anthropocene - the period in which we live and impact the world - began during the industrial revolution, Monbiot believes it started much earlier 'with a killing spree that commenced two million years ago.

'What rose onto its hindlegs on the African savannahs was, from the outset, death: the destroyer of worlds.'

Aside from the correlation between the arrival of humans, and the ultimate demise of megafauna, Monbiot claimed 'Homo erectus possessed several traits that appear to have made it invincible: intelligence, cooperation; an ability to switch to almost any food when times were tough; and a throwing arm that allowed it to do something no other species has ever managed - to fight from a distance.'

He added this 'could have driven giant predators off their prey and harried monstrous herbivores to exhaustion and death.'

However, a study published in January stated otherwise. Researchers from Columbia found evidence that it wasn't humans that wiped out these species and that instead the extinctions were a direct result of changes in climate.

Archaeologists have been challenging the overkill hypothesis for years.

For example, some researchers argue that of the 36 species know to have become extinct, only two, namely the mammoth and the mastodon, exhibited signs of being hunted, including cuts on their bones and bodies.

Other researchers have noticed correlations between when these animals became extinct, and significant changes in temperature as the last ice age ended.

To study these theories, archaeologists Matthew Boulanger and R. Lee Lyman of the University of Missouri, Columbia, studied the movement of megafauna in northeast of North America.

They used radiocarbon dating taken from samples of megafaunal fossils, and Paleoindian sites in the region, to establish that most of the megafauna had already disappeared before humans arrived - strongly suggesting humans had little to do with their extinctions.

They also discovered that there were two so-called megafauna crashes in the region.

One approximately 14,100 years ago, before humans arrived in the region, and another 12,700 years ago, when Paleoindians arrived in the region.

After the first crash, population numbers increased 500 years later.

They found that humans and megafauna lived side-by-side for almost 1,000 years before the animals finally went extinct, however, their numbers were already on the decline.

For example, up to 90 per cent of the northeastern megafauna were gone before humans arrived, and during the period of co-existence, the researchers found no evidence in the bones that these creatures were hunted by humans.

Equally, the second crash corresponded with the start the Younger Dryas, a cold period which was followed by the warmer Holocene period we live in today.

This led the authors to conclude that climate was predominantly responsible for the mass extinction, and although their findings only applied to the northeastern area of North America, it is likely the trend was seen elsewhere.

But Monbiot still isn't convinced: 'I have never seen a paper demolished as elegantly and decisively as this was at last week's conference.

'Archaeologists have demonstrated the mismatch is just what you would expect if humans were responsible,' he continued.

'Mass destruction is easy to detect in the fossil record: in one layer, bones are everywhere, in the next they are nowhere. But people living at low densities with basic technologies leave almost no traces.

'With the human growth rates and kill rates you'd expect in the first pulse of settlement - about 14,000 years ago -, the great beasts would have lasted only 1,000 years.'

Other speakers were more a fan of the combined theory, that both climate and humans played a role - but to varying extents.

Lewis Bartlett from the University of Exeter divided the world into 14 different zones ranging from South America, down to Tasmania and New Zealand.

He mapped megafaunal richness over 80,000 years and plotted the animals extinction. On top of this he mapped climate changes and human arrival.

'We built hundreds and hundreds of subsets of that data by randomly sampling all the ranges throughout that megafauna could have gone extinct in, and this way we can very explicitly deal with the uncertainty attached.'

Bartlett and his team randomly sampled hundreds of samples to create different data sets, and ran hundreds of models on all of these datasets so they could check the level of uncertainty.

In small islands they saw a sharp rise in extinction, before it tapered off.

But on a subcontinent level, they saw a much more prolonged and elevated period of extinction that didn't have the spike after colonisation seen in the smaller regions.

Roughly a quarter to a third of extinctions in his model were found to be uniquely caused by climate change.

However, 'a far greater proportion were uniquely ascribable by our human data and according to our models - humans are the main contributing factor.'

A 'moderate' range can then be explained by a combination of climate or humans.

In Europe, given the size of the continent, the researchers saw an elevated rise in extinction levels in the 20,000 years after humans arrived. After that, they spotted another extinction spike, this time caused by climate.

In the archipelagos, such as Tasmania, New Zealand and Madagascar, there was only one cause - humans. He said t he arrival of humans explained 'almost all' of the extinctions.

To summarise, Bartlett said: 'Our work strongly implicates humans, as part of this extinction debate, and I think using this global analysis, we've demonstrated that humans can't be dismissed as major contributors to this extinction debate.'

'Similarly, climate is a strong indicative factor, but a caveat to that is that if we undertook this sort of analysis where climate is ubiquitous in any ecological system, we'd expect it to have an effect. Any studies that found no link would make me sceptical.'

'What we can take away is the relative importance of humans, and the stark realisation is that humans contribute far, far more to our ability to predict where these extinctions occur, than climate does, even though they are both informative.'

Professor Adrian Lister from the Natural History Museum added that the reason for the disappearance is 'because large animals in Africa and south-east Asia learned to become wary of humans and decided to avoid them at all costs.

He continued: 'However, I also think climate change may have been involved in the Americas and Australia and that humans only finished off these big animals when they were already weakened by loss of habitats and other climate-related problems.'

Professor Lister has been working on this topic for the past 10 years using radiocarbon dating. Although he has studied a range of animals, his talk at the conference concentrated on the demise of the woolly mammoth.

His research is being used as part of the museum's upcoming event Mammoths: Ice Age Giants, which opens on 23 May.

In a similar way to the researchers from Columbia, Professor Lister found that the global range of the woolly mammoth contracted and expanded in line with changes in temperature.

'If we put all that together, we have very strong evidence that changes in climate and vegetation did shift and ultimately contract the range of the woolly mammoth between 14,000 and 4,000 years ago, when the mammoth became extinct.

'There are shifts and contractions that link with changes in vegetation, and although it's very difficult to establish population structure, it seems to be quite plausible.

'We may consider this tremendous contraction of the mammoth range is plausibly driven by changes in vegetation and climate - but there was also the potential factor of humans adding into the mix, perhaps hitting those last remaining populations.

'However, I don't see anywhere in these data, evidence of something the humans were doing, and certainly not the distributional density of humans, that is responsible for the disappearance of mammoths at this point.

'This evacuation is climate driven, unless people were suddenly hunting mammoths at a much greater degree.

'Archaeological data suggests that during this time, people were very much eating horses and cattle - not megafauna. I don't see in this data that the disappearance of mammoths in Europe at this time had anything to do with people. '

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are humans Earth's biggest enemy? Debate rages at conference

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Megafauna conference took place in Oxford last week Experts discussed the demise of large beasts across the world They debated the impact climate change and humans had on these animals Scientists are using a range of methods including radiocarbon dating, climate mapping and more to establish what led to the extinction The Earth was once populated with enormous beasts, the likes of which we have never seen - from mammoths to giant beavers, and sabretooths to horned tortoises.

# data[].attributes.body
a tube in your body that alowes you to not have to eat or drink

# data[].attributes.body
an eco friendly car

# data[].attributes.body
I would create a eco friendly teleporter. if we had Teleporters so we wouldn't have to have cars, planes, Bus's and other objects that thinner *cough, cough* and break the ozone layer which also will make the air cleaner

# data[].attributes.body
we need to create a machine that will keep our bees healthy so we could keep producing food

# data[].attributes.body
I would create a cloud that says don't litter on earth day.

# data[].attributes.body
a green house gas obsorber

# data[].attributes.body
I would make a machine that creates a wide amount of air so we can bring it to other planets. Such as mars. And we could breathe there and live and start the human race in other planets. (not too many or we will need to use the Human-B-Gone)

# data[].attributes.body
I would make everything compostable

# data[].attributes.body
I would make a Machine that make's plants grow quicker(or make a machine that makes something that helps plants grow).

# data[].attributes.body
Make a giant vacuum to make everyone Die DIE when its sucks them up because yes Macarther, the earth would be better without humans

# data[].attributes.body
I would make a cloning machine to double resources needed to survive including food and water it also can double factory made materials to lower pollution of smoke

# data[].attributes.body
I'd make a cloning machine for cloning bacon and animals and resources like diamonds and medicine and useful items like electric cars so they're cheap.

# data[].attributes.body
A machine that either uses items from the landfill of destroy them.

# data[].attributes.body
I would make a machine that would suck out all the pollution in the air.

# data[].attributes.body
I would make a teleporter that runs on carbon dioxide, to make the air cleaner and better for us to breath.

# data[].attributes.body
For cars we need to create a something that we have lots of for cars to run on, so we wont palout

# data[].attributes.body
I would find a way to get gas in cars without using propane to fuel ALL of the cars!

# data[].attributes.body
a habitat saver so animals can have more habitat.

# data[].attributes.headline
A machine that made different planets, that are survivable on

# data[].attributes.subject
A machine that made different planets, that are survivable on

# data[].attributes.body
you press a button then you point it in the direction where you wan the planet , then POOOOF, there is a new planet.

# data[].attributes.body
A device that will eliminate the need for batteries and powers the whole world with solar power

# data[].attributes.body
A machine that would get rid of all the people.

# data[].attributes.body
I would make a machine that can make anything Eco friendly. For example make houses be powered off solar panels

# data[].attributes.body
I would create a machine that returns something that it's natural state and removes the different  substances apart like oil and water Erato save marine animals from oil spills.

# data[].attributes.body
I would make a machine that goes over the sky every Sunday to suck up all the garbage so it keeps the earth clean and healthy for animals and all humans!!!

# data[].attributes.body
I would make a giant air conditioner to keep down global warming!

# data[].attributes.body
Create an automatic barrier that would lock in an oil spill or garbage in a small area so it's easier to clean up

# data[].attributes.body
I would make a machine that would take all of the polluted air in the world and filter it. Also I would make a machine that would change everything that is bad for the earth into something good for the earth.

# data[].attributes.body
Make a thing that gets rid of waste without having a landfill to pollute our earth.

# data[].attributes.body
make something that cures any thing.

# data[].attributes.body
It would destroy all the cars so there would be no more air pollution from them

# data[].attributes.body
Infinite clean energy generator

# data[].attributes.body
Something that recycled plastic bags faster

# data[].attributes.body
Car that runs on garbage

# data[].attributes.body
Make everything eco and wildlife friendly.

# data[].attributes.body
something that produces fresh air to things

# data[].attributes.body
My invention would create light to use for solar power

# data[].attributes.body
An invention that teaches you everything there is to know about the world in a matter of seconds.

# data[].attributes.body
Masha

# data[].attributes.body
A working  perpetual motion machine

# data[].attributes.body
Mine would take all the pollution and teleport it deep in space

# data[].attributes.body
Affordable and accessible Maximum Efficiency Solar Cells (to intercept and convert solar energy to electrical energy).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How do solar panels work? - Richard Komp

# data[].attributes.body
something that disintegrates,all waste that we throw away each year hhhhaaaaiiii

# data[].attributes.body
A machine that turns gas and natural gas into water

# data[].attributes.body
A substance that can bring dead things back to life

# data[].attributes.body
black whole that only takes garbage ( wes ).

# data[].attributes.body
A machine to help clean the earth

# data[].attributes.body
I would make something so that the whole world was peaceful

# data[].attributes.body
A seed that can immediately grow into a full size tree

# data[].attributes.body
A silent motorized lawnmower

# data[].attributes.body
Air filter for the whole world

# data[].attributes.body
The answer to life.

# data[].attributes.body
Something that reduces the amount of Co2 that goes into the atmosphere

# data[].attributes.body
Cleans pollution in the air .

# data[].attributes.body
particle creater

# data[].attributes.body
a drug that cures anything

# data[].attributes.headline
I would  make a human-B-gone because the earth would be fine if there was no humans.

# data[].attributes.subject
I would  make a human-B-gone because the earth would be fine if there was no humans.

# data[].attributes.body
Macarther

# data[].attributes.body
make a thing that doesnt produce electricity but can still power things

# data[].attributes.body
a magnetic device that pics up garbage

# data[].attributes.body
It would make the ozone layer thinner