Confirm or Deny: Humanity is doomed.
Posted on: November 20, 2009 - 1:54am
Confirm or Deny: Humanity is doomed.
A recent conversation with Hamby has sparked this question:
Is humanity doomed? Will we self-destruct and kill each other?
I say yes.
- Login to post comments
I guess self destruction and killing each other are 2 different roads to the same bad place.
I hope not but can't be sure. There's a lot of negetavism in the world today but in terms of wars between democracies of which their are many, I don't think there's been much of one yet (correct me some one, if need be).
I can see special interest groups - friendly neighbourhood muslims, for instance, detonating improper weapons to kill masses of people but a deliberate conflagration between nations is harder to imagine.
Climate change? Mmmmm. A more likely scenario. Supposedly 6 degrees C increase will do the trick and send us on a downward spiral to doom with methane fireballs and god knows what.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
If we continue as we did until now, we're doomed in several different ways at the same time. Fortunately, as I'm trying to make known, we are not alone and thanks to the greatest men behind history and evolution of humanity we will overcome these growing pains. And in further centuries we will create the most brilliant civilization ever seen, very different from this one and based on justice and global brotherhood. There is already much of benevolent activity going on around the world, the forces for and against the change of global disorder are roughly equal and the side of life and change will eventually succeed. We have the power to save ourselves and the principles of that are well known and simple indeed. We will survive, though it will surely be close.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
I think it would be difficult to kill off all 7 billion of us. We're the roaches of the mammals.
Run away global climate change leading to venus like conditions would do it though. Anything other than that, including a near global nuclear exchange, I doubt would succeed. Our phenotype plasticity is too varied.
Even before we developed agriculture we already had tribes living from the sahara desert to the arctic ranges. If we fucked up the world so bad it killed us, it would be the worst mass extinction this planet had ever seen. Even worse than the Permian-Triassic extinction event.
"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci
I say no. I think we will be spreading out into space though.
Depends on your definition of destroy.
Will humans wipe the human race out? I doubt it...besides a grey goo scenario I don't see how we could kill every human on the planet. If some new weapon emerges that can easily sterlize the planet though, sure.
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
I will confirm that humans are indeed DOOMED.... to be human...
A fate far worse than death...
China:
100-200 warheads.
Holy crap, aren't the thousands of warheads enough? That's approximately 90 nukes per every greater country. And they're also the new weapons you mean. Compared to some of the modern nukes, Little boy and Fat man were just sparklers. Modern nukes can be built with 100 megatons, (4000x stronger) though the Emperor bomb was downgraded on 50 megatons later. 20 megaton bombs are common. The bomb in Hiroshima had about 15 kilotons. So yes, I think that our nuclear arsenal is capable of sterilizing the land completely and most probably capable of destroying all life on the planet, except of bacteria.
And yet, there are even more dangerous things on this planet. Commercialization and environmental pollution.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
The question is: can nukes wipe out the human race?
I say no, because our leaders are smarter than that. I'm sure the first nuclear holocaust will happen as soon as the next nuke is launched, now that everyone has nukes we can't simply recreate the Hiroshima bombing without dire consequences. But the thing is; we're so terrified of a domino effect that we won't launch nukes, but maybe some other country might start the train going in the future (cough... North Korea). Now we also need to keep this in mind; I highly doubt we'll aimlessly launch nukes like mindless ogres yelling "AMERICA ANGRY!! AMERICA SMASH!!" Even Bush wasn't that stupid. We'll likely target nuclear arsenals within enemy countries to stop the charade.
But now this brings up another question: what new weapons will arrive in the future?
Well, chances are that in the future we'll successfully find a way to develop anti-matter bombs which are 100% more effective than nukes. Anti-matter is definitely something to fear, let me put it this way; I live in Massachusetts, if I were made of anti-matter, I and the ground under me would be entirely converted into energy causing an explosion that would probably be felt in Illinois, more or less. Although we can create anti-matter today it costs billions of dollars to do so in small amounts, we probably will be terraforming Mars by the time we can make cheaper anti-matter bombs.
"I do not think it is necessary to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon their use, giving us by some other means the information that we could gain through them." ~Galileo Galilei
I am aware that Nukes exist. I consider the possibility of the nuclear superpowers MADing each other is minimal, and I don't think nukes will ever be easy enough to make where a small state or non-state actor can cause enough damage with nukes to imperil the human race.
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
How we think we are different, even as atheists, as any other species is absurd. We will die out, and so to the planet and sun. The difference between theism and atheism is that we accept that there is no magic involved in stating that the ride will end.
WHERE we as atheist do fall into the same trap, which I am pesemistic for humanity in general, is that we still have yet to recognize collectively, as a species, that being the alpha male is our goal. Our problem is as Dawkins rightfully states, is that having that sense of control, while giving us safty in numbers short term, is more often than not the moth mistaking the light bulb for the moonlight.
I am positive that we can overcome this flaw in humans filling in the gaps. The issue is WILL WE. The way things look now, we wont do anything differently than a colony of ants that finds a fertile land and defeats all rival colonies to get to it, not knowing they have settled into a riverbed only to be wiped out by the seasonal rains.
As long as our alpha male status divides us and is always a priority, problem solving wont help our species.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Humanity doomed?? i don't think so. Civilisation? well that just depends on how the cards fall. Either way we have nothing to worry about.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
I dunno, I think the fact that the EU exists is proof that humans are able to overcome those instincts at some level.
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
We then we better get busy killing everyone else before they kill us.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
Have other species traveled to the moon and/or sequenced their genome? I need to brush up on my natural history...
"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci
That is not the point. I think you missed my recognition of our evolved brain capacity. I was just at the same time recognizing that AT THIS POINT, I don't see using it as wisely as I think we are capable of.
Individually there are plenty of problem solvers who rise above tribalism. BUT collectively we still have in our evolution an alpha male mentality, even our species, as brainy as we are. I have yet to see how we are overcoming that and to me, at this point, it doesn't look good.
The people who put us on the moon are not the same people who run governments that want to spread their ideology Alpha maleness around the world. Just like a Olympian can identify with another person in the common love of the sport, I am sure the "problem solvers" of the world have that in common too. But most of our species is involved in tribal warfare based on label, not problem solving. We are out to be on top so we can get resources. What we should be doing is allowing for these tribes, but not putting them above problem solving.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Is humanity doomed ? I can only hope so.
I hope humanity isn't doomed. Think of all the people who set up their Tivo's already. It's a shame to think of all that time and quality programming going to waste.
There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft
D'you really think that? I've had moments where I've thought the planet would be better off with no people at all.
Ah, hell - you're right. Things would be fine without people to screw it up.
Anyway, I guess we're all doomed, one way or another.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
Of course we're doomed. But then, so is the universe.
The question is, can we survive more than a few hundred years longer? Perhaps we'll be around log enough to evolve into something else not entirely classifiable as "humanity."
"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers
It's a fact that the sun produces enough energy to maintain 2 billion people on earth. As you all know, we have 6. The fact that we are so over-populated is probably the reason for our demise. Plus the fact that religious groups firmly believe that it's god's will for us to be fruitful and multiply. This is not helping things at all. We're getting very crowded and if we don't do something about this soon, then we will surely perish. Almost all of our problems can be traced back to over-population. There are more people alive now than has ever died in all of our recorded history. That's an astonishing fact and one that needs our immediate attention.. I very much think that nothing will ever be done to counter this because of the religious community feeling that it's their god-given right to have as many children as they can.
"There is no God higher than truth." -Mahatma Ghandi
Yes, humanity is doomed. Regardless of our activities on earth, the earth will eventually become uninhabitable, and humanity will die, if it is still in existence at that time. The other possibility is that by the time the earth becomes uninhabitable, humans will be an extinct predecessor of some new species. Evolution, and all that, you know...
No, humanity is not "destined" to destroy itself. I think it's relatively (maybe highly) likely that we'll make life really miserable for ourselves or drive ourselves extinct, but it's not inevitable.
For one thing, our energy supply is not unlimited. It's possible we'll descend into a lower level of consumption and production because we have to. I'm not sure most people realize just how difficult the task of replacing the carbon economy will be. If we fall below the production/consumption level of industrialization, the planet will get a reprieve, lots of humans will die, but many will live. It will be not too dissimilar from humanity before industrialization, and will be stuck there until or unless we discover a new source of energy.
For another thing, humans are unlike most animals in that we can eat damn near anything. It would be very difficult for us to completely destroy all possible food sources. So even if humans really fuck up the environment, there will be enough food for some to survive.
Basically, what I'm saying is that it'll be damn difficult for us to drive ourselves completely extinct.
Having said that, I do think it's basically inevitable that we will run the carbon economy to its bitter end, and that the environment (and consequently, the average standard of living) will suffer horribly for it. But honestly, humans have suffered for most of human existence. We have had a nice blip on the radar screen where technology and energy allowed us to live very easy lives. We're the lucky ones, I think.
I don't have the knowledge to predict how long we can sustain an information age existence. My gut tells me we have at least a few more generations.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
One thing we all need to consider is that if we survive long enough to spread to other planets and become a type two or even type three civilization, we'll be by far more advanced than we are today. Today we hardly know anything, yet our technology is progressively growing more advanced. Today we have peripherals to allow us to control our computers at home with our minds, for not knowing much that's pretty good don't you think? Anyway what I'm saying is that progressively we'll grow more advanced, as will we adapt to our surroundings in other environments. In the distant future, we will perhaps discover ways to intertwine parallel universe and cross over to other realities in which our universe has not have died. Although this is all highly theoretical my point to get across is that; it is plausible that we may not die with the universe, assuming we don't die earlier.
Now regarding the death of the Earth: the Earth will die in millions, even billions of years most likely when the Sun does, and yes, I know cosmological collisions cause a lot of damage but to demolish the entire Earth it would take one big ass meteor. Plus, we have people every day looking into the cosmos for asteroids we have to fear ahead of time, years before they'd collide into us, and they have found some things we have to fear, but it's all chance and won't be a worry for roughly 30 years. We already have people working on defenses for such predicaments as well.
Now runaway stars is another worry, there's nothing we can do about these, but the chances of such a thing happening is so unlikely you'll probably win the lottery 10 times in a row before it happens.
Now global warming is another worry; well, by the time global warming is causing massive havoc across the entire planet killing everything in sight we'll probably be well into terraforming Mars and perhaps even have small civilizations there.
Now regarding the death of the Sun: the Sun is going to die out in millions of years. And just to give you the jist of how long a millions years is, let me put it this way; the USA is a bit over 200 years old, we went from Puritans on a ship going around yelling "WITCH!" to semi-intelligent people with devices that allow us to fly, be anywhere in the world, be in more than one place, gaze upon the cosmos, and even enter the cosmos. That's 200 years. What will happen in another 200 years? 400? 1,000? 1,000,000? With the progressions since then one can only imagine the possibilities.
"I do not think it is necessary to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon their use, giving us by some other means the information that we could gain through them." ~Galileo Galilei
Well the sun has about 5 billion years left to live. But the thing is that it's getting hotter as it ages. Within a billion years it will be so hot that no life above or below land that we know of will be able to survive on Earth.
Here's the thing that gets me pondering. Life began on this rock probably about 4 billion years ago. And it took this long for a species to show up that had the ability and inclination to develop science for things like space travel and whatnot. If we kill ourselves off, what are the chances that another species will show up in the remaining billion years?
Maybe not as low as you would at first think. Multicellular life only evolved around 670 million years ago. Evolution itself is evolving. And there are numerous other candidates currently around that could replace us within the near future perhaps. The only thing is, that anything that kills us off will probably kill all of them in the process as well. So...
We may be the only chance that Earth-life has for it to survive the heat death of this planet.
"I am an atheist, thank God." -Oriana Fallaci
Barring the Singularity, every human alive in 2009 will have died by 2140, at the latest. So the current batch faces doom, certainly.
Our chances aren't great, but they aren't horrible either. We may survive long enough to call our ancestor humans extinct.
Regarding the sun, its hourly output could sustain a population in the hundreds of trillions. It is Earth that has a cap. But even that cap can be streched much further than two billion if we manage things well enough.
Even if they had the time, which I rather doubt, they wouldn't have the resources. We have collectively drained a massive amount of oil from the planet, which took a good 3 billion years to save up. And metals are even worse, since they would require cosmic collisions to rain new sources upon us, as we've used up most of the rare metals to be found. Even our own window to the stars is shrinking. Possible, maybe, but more unlikely every day.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
Is that a challenger to replace 2012 as the next "doomsday"?
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
Actually according to TED, several speakers have said there that everyone <30 years in age could very possibly live to be over 900, through recurring life extensions at the current rate of development in the fields of medicine and biotechnology.
Of course, that isn't to say that the increasing number of breakthroughs would keep you entirely organic either. Time will tell if their predictions are correct.
Here is one of them.
Theism is why we can't have nice things.
How horrible! The death rate is the only thing stopping exponential population growth.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
.... we need world war 3
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Eventually... Yes I think so. Isn't there like a heat death of the universe... I am pretty sure that will kill off humanity if something else doesn't before that.
Sounds made up...
Agnostic Atheist
No, I am not angry at your imaginary friends or enemies.
no no... Tapey, you're doing it wrong, its...
.... we need world war 3
What Would Kharn Do?
It's all a matter of protecting our DNA. When our DNA is damaged small things can happen, or big things, like cancers. If we can protect our DNA we can live forever excluding disasters, and you won't age in a sense either. Age is only a result of damaged DNA, gray hair for example, we only get gray hair because the information in our DNA that knows our hair color is gone therefor we cannot produce eumelanin and phaeomelanin giving off the colors we see. The questions is; How can we protect our DNA? We have to fear all kinds of things like bacteria, radiation, viruses, physical damage, etc.
"I do not think it is necessary to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon their use, giving us by some other means the information that we could gain through them." ~Galileo Galilei
The makings of a convert to Doom. > >
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
True, but i personally feel that EXC is coming along faster... ahaha
What Would Kharn Do?
well if you are going to put it that way... ther are far more exciting ways to use population control... do we really want to have a third world war? they are getting a little old. what we need is new and exciting ways... or else we will end up with people saying another world war... been ther done that... who cares instead of screaming in terror. May I suggest we invite some friendly intergalacitic population reducers
aka the dark eldar?
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
No no Tapey... see, this is why your still in training
1. Do we want another world war? the answers always YES
2. Never consort with Elves... EVER, Eldar are just space elves, and Dark Eldar being just space elves who like to rape, kill, pillage, and torture... ergo, still elves
3. If you want something right... Do it yourself! We can manage our own population control, without resorting to hiring out, and its cheaper!
4. While i appreciate the effort to inspire mass rape, torture, slaving, and killing... One must never take pleasure in it, for that empowers Slaanesh... its meant to be a Duty, a Duty in the name of Khorne!
What Would Kharn Do?
All makes sense except point 3.... outsourceing is always cheaper... there is a reason all call centres are in India.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Pure logic would say that the planet has never sustained a species in an unchanged form for more than a few million years. Dawkins states that 99.9% of all previous species have gone extinct, and the future does look rather grim for the rest of us: Evolution and refining the gene pool is the only road to go down, but that´s a rather slow process with a species that only reproduces every thirty years. If you look at certain bacteria you´ll find that they rapidly respond to changes in their environment simply by the sheer numbers: Creating an incredible amount of generations and diversities in what is a microsecond in "evolutionary" time. There might, of course, be some sort of animal with a human ancestry surviving up until that day when the sun expands out to our orbital circle and devours us, but that is almost certain to look as different to us in four billion years than we look to our former ancestors four billion years ago. We´ll have to see a few million generations down the line. A huge problem is that we our rate of change is much slower than the rate of change in the environment around us that we create...Which means that if we finally do change one necessary condition for living fast enough, there´s no way we can evolve fast enough to endure it: Meaning fresh air, clean water, a certain temperature corridor, a certain access to different nutrients and so forth. There is just no way that´s gonna hold up in the unforseeable future!
Oh yes: We´re doomed - especially on the statistical level
Ah, but conscript and slave labour is even better! Look at the Death Star. Not one construction worker was ever paid during its construction.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
In relation to the Death Star, why the fighters had wings. Of course there's no lift, no value in flight surfaces. There'd need to be multiple jetlets all over the place. I was watching Starship Troopers the other day and aside from
enjoying the Denise Richards thing (when she wasn't acting) I noticed that during her training flight she came out with the line: "Deploying wings".
Dumb.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
Since when would you ever have to pay CLONES in the first place?
edit; Let alone robots...
What Would Kharn Do?
Well, X-Wings were quite often employed in atmospheres.
TIE design was more to do with intimidation and cheap production than effectiveness, and TIE fighters were never much more than cover for bombers and interceptors in atmosphere, both of which were more aerodynamic.
Starship troopers...no argument. But at least she's hot. > >
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
Actually, the primary workforce was two-fold:
1: Slave labour from Kashyyk (Wookies).
2: Political and general prisoners sequestered on the world of Despayre, a death trap prison planet for dangerous criminals pre-Empire. It also had the distinction of being the test shot(s) for the super laser.
Clones had been mostly replaced by conscripts by the time construction had begun in earnest.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
Is humanity(homo sapiens) overrated? I say yes.
Is Our Next (theoretical) Step In Evolution (Homo Superior) overrated? I say no...
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
Oops, I made a bump...
I can't see us wiping ourselves out altogether.
I can see our civilisation taking some serious damage, quite possibly a huge amount of deaths, but complete extinction?
That would take quite some doing indeed!!
Source??
Here's a few:
1. We all live in domed cities living a life of leisure with mandatory death by age 30.
2. Soylent green.
3. Have intelligent apes take over.
4. Evolve into Eloi and Morlocks.
5. Evolve into homocidal virus infected albino mutants and be "The Family"
. . . . . . . . .