• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

We're bound to go extinct by 2050, scientists say

UberScout said:
the world is definitely going to end one day and the world is definitely eventually going to be destroyed, but we never see it actually happen on the days we predict it to happen.
Click to expand...
Most doomsday predictions are not scientifically based. Rather it is a mass belief that usually begins
around some unusual incident such as the alignment of the planets or someone's psychic prediction and such.
Even if there are scientifically sound reasons due to the world's climate, no one could predict the exact
day. Just a generalization of approximate time span.

It is true that the planet and it's inhabitants will one day be destroyed. Somehow.
So why or perhaps I should say what creates such a strong drive to stop the inevitable in
the human race? To the point of living under domes on the moon or terraforming a dead planet
when we are no where near being able to create such an undertaking.
Fear?
That seems to be the main reason the individual person does everything to prevent death even though
that is inevitable also.
Ever stop to examine why we feel this way about the perpetuation of the species?
The genetics of our DNA perhaps?
 
Rexi said:
It shouldn't require obvious citations since the data is constructed from research results done by actual scientists. The article already specified that there has been new data announced by the scientists that is more accurate and points to a shorter time-span which will be needed for uninhabitable conditions to be formed (by 2050).

But if you insist,
(warning! this content might present alarming ememes) make sure you skim slowly
Citation:
Climate change report: Human civilization at risk by 2050, according to new Australian climate change analysis - CBS News
Click to expand...
All good scientific work should include citations. The site claims to relate scientific facts, it should therefor provide citations so that those facts can be checked.

Anyway, the linked news article is reporting on this policy paper:
Existential climate-related security risk: A scenario approach which gives a good overview of the most likely inevitable impacts of climate change on humanity, but does not in any way suggest that we will be extinct by 2050.

Rexi said:
Beats me how you could keep up with all the world's scientific data posted daily to say there is little chance you missed any. Where do you read it from?
Click to expand...
I'm a climate scientist, keeping up to date on the latest research (and doing the latest research) is my job. I read it from research journals.
 
The whole site is filled with nothing more than lies and delusional thinking from decades ago that has proven to be false. Earth can support 2 billion people? It can support over 100 trillion, easily. When people make these predictions they never take into account the technological advances that will be made. Even now the Earth can probably support over 10 billion, so there's no calculations involved (they wouldn't be that far off if there were), it's just propaganda.

Here's the kicker: They say we need to reduce fossil fuel use, but the reason fossil fuel use is going up, is due to all the things they say we need to do. 3rd world aid, social security, refugee immigration towards wealthier nations. Literally everything the UN says we need to do, is leading towards this. And then they whine and complain about climate change.

In reality there is nothing to worry about. At all. If things are going to get as bad as they state in the first place, people are going to die and fossil fuel use will be reduced. Problem solved. Either you are going to reduce fossil fuel use out of your own free will, or nature is going to start culling the herd. That's how it works for deer, lions, bears and tigers. And that's how it works for people. And technology can still put a stop to this. Phytoplankton, trees? All just machines. You can build things that do the same thing, machines that take CO2 out of the air, and turn it into good ole Oxygen while filtering out the Carbon. It's such a trivial thing to do... if you want to be even more primitive... just plant more trees. You can just live in your apartment completely filled up with plants and you'll do just fine as long as the sun keeps shining. There are people in this world living completely off the grid. You think a bunch of hardened bearded guys living in the Alaskan cold are going to die from a little climate change? Come on. You have to be pretty stupid to not figure out: Less oxygen = plant more trees.

Climate change is a giant scaremongering tactic used to increase government (and UN) influence and the transfer of wealth to politicians. You are going to pay more for energy and food, but everything is just going to keep going the same direction.
 
oregano said:
Me myself, I'm maybe a year away from moving to the area of the 42 North parallel and adopting a primitive life. There's a year round river in the area, with fish. There are oak trees, meaning edible acorns. Then I can raise chickens and potatoes. By the time it becomes impossible to do even that, I'll likely be elderly and I'll just die, alone, never to be discovered.
Click to expand...
Strangely enough I have read potato plants are not very resistant to high temperatures. May need shadowy areas, but if forest or mountain is close, it might be more cooling.

A small guide & quiz about feeding habits that produce greenhouse gases
Eat Low Carbon

Amount of ghg per person:
7.19 for high meat-eaters (≥100 g/day)
5.63 for medium meat-eaters (50–99 g/day)
4.67 for low meat-eaters (<50 g/day)
3.91 for fish-eaters
3.81 for vegetarians
2.89 for vegans
 
Last edited:
Rexi, I personally think that switching from high impact meats such as cow to low impact meats such as poultry would be quite significant in reducing the carbon footprint. Even goat and sheep are lower impact than cow. Lately in my area sheep (lamb) meat has become popular, possibly in part due to its lower carbon impact and its popularity among immigrants from West Asia (Middle East) who have settled here, prompting mainstream Americans to try it. I have yet to see goat meat enter the mainstream here, but I would be happy if it did. And then there is fish meat, another low impact meat, yes there is overfishing but it is possible to buy farmed or sustainably caught fish.
 
SusanLR said:
Most doomsday predictions are not scientifically based. Rather it is a mass belief that usually begins
around some unusual incident such as the alignment of the planets or someone's psychic prediction and such.
Even if there are scientifically sound reasons due to the world's climate, no one could predict the exact
day. Just a generalization of approximate time span.

It is true that the planet and it's inhabitants will one day be destroyed. Somehow.
So why or perhaps I should say what creates such a strong drive to stop the inevitable in
the human race? To the point of living under domes on the moon or terraforming a dead planet
when we are no where near being able to create such an undertaking.
Fear?
That seems to be the main reason the individual person does everything to prevent death even though
that is inevitable also.
Ever stop to examine why we feel this way about the perpetuation of the species?
The genetics of our DNA perhaps?
Click to expand...
For me I think the amount of time and luck it takes for a civilization to evolve to the stage we're at and not have encountered planet extinction event as it's usually rare for the planet to have none for so long, be able to leave the planet and explore such useful concepts as air conditioning, heat and uv light systems for plants, things that help us survive in unlikely environments, it would be a disaster for such a civilization to go extinct. They can go out in the space and make a safe living and explore more wonderful concepts, they may become close to independent and invulnerable, mine planets and ice, discover the secrets of the universe and evolve more.

Humanity is very special and if it doesn't survive and try to assure its own safety, then all the evolving and luck was in vain.

Cool stuff

Stephen Hawking's predictions of how we will all die
 
Last edited:
Not to hijack the thread but the extinction concept made me think about what some possible future alien archeologists would make of our civilization based on what they found.

Like this odd thingy. I bet they would say it must be some ritual object.

PLUNGER.jpg
 
Just to get your hopes down about a society at that time:
  • A 90% drop in population would make it unlikely to maintain an industrial society even under the historically best conditions
  • The population drop would happen as a total shock, it would likely happen in less than 10-20 years - to compare, the human population was 90% less than now 300 years before 2050. If people say it's hard to keep up with the human population going 10 times larger in 270 years, imagine what happens if it drops back to the same level in just 20 years.
  • Forced mass migration on this scale will completely destabilize everything.
  • Climate change consequences will strongly destabilize weather and make a wide variety of natural disasters a lot worse. Additionally a lot of migrating or dead species will really worsen the ecosystem and introduce loads of new diseases (for plants too). Potential survival and agriculture is badly decreased by that.
  • More direct human causes have made a lot of land unsuitable for agriculture or toxic, living space deforestation etc.
  • All of our technology and infrastructure (and knowledge and expertise) is hopelessly reliant on the existence of readily availible advanced highly specialized technology with neither simplicity, sustainability or longevity being a priority. If this will not change (it won't) it means that once the tech cycle collapses that people would have to redo and in big parts reinvent everything from the start, which looking at the next paragraph might be much harder.
  • Resources required to maintain basic and advanced technology have been removed from reach, almost all resources were easy to harvest and extract the first time our technology developed, but now the accessible recourse deposits are used up and require going to much greater length to get them, as such the resources required to maintain our technology, require our technology because they've become inaccessible
  • Most of our peoples knowledge, expertise and experience are based on an era that has strayed completely from most of what has been known in human history, the majority of vital information to survive and sustain a society within any human era 100+ years back is absent within the human population and in some chunks completely lost.
Combine all of that again.

Basically, a 90% reduction in human population by 2050 could rather mean that humans will have small hopes of surviving at that point, or humans will get another decent try to thrive in probably over hundred millennia.
 
Tom said:
Not to hijack the thread but the extinction concept made me think about what some possible future alien archeologists would make of our civilization based on what they found.

Like this odd thingy. I bet they would say it must be some ritual object.

View attachment 55828
Click to expand...

It's called the hiccupinator, or the Moose Heimlich of Doomsday.
 
Rexi said:
It's called the hiccupinator, or the Moose Heimlich of Doomsday.
Click to expand...

Or perhaps a holder for votive offerings. And what of the porcelain water contraptions nearly always found with them? There is a cut out in front. Probably where the supplicant placed his head for ritual cleansings
 
Change is the rule of life. What comes next no man can say. The world is ever changing.
The future is a mystery. For instance if Yellowstone blows. Global warming is mute point. Instead ice will cover the world. Or comet could hit with the same result. Tomorrow is not a promise for the world or mankind.
 
Rexi said:
Humanity is very special and if it doesn't survive and try to assure its own safety, then all the evolving and luck was in vain.
Click to expand...

The evolution of the planet has been rough and volatile.
Exploring new concepts and the secrets of the Universe seem wonderful, but, are subjective to each
individual's views and the human lifespan is so short, it is quickly gone.
If we could step outside of that mindset and ask the question what is it all about in a neutral,
emotionally detached way, perhaps it is all in vain.
We can not know why biological life was created.
We don't really know why the urge to perpetuate it is so powerful since
it IS a fact that it will all be destroyed in the grand scheme of the Universe.
As if it never even happened.

That has always been a mystery to me.
 
If something much more likely hasn't killed me by then, then I'll probably be too old to care. I guess I should feel bad for the younger generation, but... no not really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Top Bottom