Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

These ads will disappear if you register on the forum

Photo

Reminder: If We Fail, That's It

human extinction failed civilization

  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#21
voluntaryist

voluntaryist

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 501 posts
  • LocationNew Hampshire

http://www.livescien...pport-life.html

 

This link says 1.75-3.25 billion years.

 

Regardless, civilization could still form after just 250 million years.

What lineage would it most likely come from?  Cephalopods?  Other vertebrates?



#22
Erowind

Erowind

    Psychonaut, Aspiring Mathematician and Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 523 posts
  • LocationInside some convoluted formula I don't actually understand.

 

I have to disagree with you, Pisiu369, I think WWIII is much more likely today than it has been since the last Cold War, and that the risk will only increase over time, at least until or unless things change drastically. Between NATO vs Russia, US vs China, India vs Pakistan, North Korea vs South Korea, Israel vs Iran et al, and psychotic terrorist cells, someone's gonna hit the Big Red Button sooner or later. Especially as the world continues to suffer extremes of economic and ecological strains.

 

 

 

Not going to go into the rest of it because it would take too long today. I'm sure we will discuss it though Recyvuym, me and you always have interesting conversations. ;)

 

NATO vs Russia = the cold war's little brother. Sure we squabble and shoot down a jet here and there, but this is no cold war and certainly not worst than the cold war. NATO nations still trade with Russia, citizens of both sides of the coin freely travel between the two sides and we are all connected via the internet which creates friendships that transcend borders. The icing on the cake is that both sides are democracies and democracies rarely fight one another.

 

USA vs China = the media demonizing the Chinese and countries bickering over islands. China is our biggest trade partner and there is to much money to be made on both sides for war to break out. China has even seemed more cooperative lately on certain issues for example their condemnation of North Korean nuclear armament. To top this all off the Chinese have a great respect for western culture and are rapidly westernizing (Did you know that Caucasian expats can be paid to be a white man in China!). War doesn't break out under these conditions either and in a worse case scenario if something were to break out I think due to globalization there would be such an outcry from citizens of the world that peace would be brokered before things got to bad. USA vs China is like saying Germany vs France, both sides don't want this to happen and love each other even if they don't always show it.  

 

India vs Pakistan = Two nations that used to hate each other and now are working to get along quite well, but are still in a cold war. I encourage you to read the "Talks and other confidence building measures" section of the Wikipedia page as well as the "Response to natural calamities" and "Social Relations" section. I agree India and Pakistan are in a cold war, but so was the western world 50 years ago. India and Pakistan despite being in a cold war still have inter country marriages, a really similar culture and an attitude towards increasing friendly relations. All in all a regional conflict could break out but I highly doubt that it would escalate to a world wide nuclear conflict. The powers at be like the USA, EU, Russia, China, and so on would not be compelled to launch their nuclear arsenal unless they were under threat. Pakistan and India are not going to lob nukes at anyone but each other and they would take care not to anger China as that would mean having two countries bombing them instead of one. https://en.wikipedia...istan_relations

 

North Korea vs South Korea = Staring contest. North Korea could invade the south, but I find it more likely that they fall to internal pressures before that happens. In the event of conflict I doubt China would back them for the reasons mentioned in the China response above. In a worst case scenario we would have another regional conflict akin to the India vs Pakistan scenario the only difference being that a superpower would likely be involved (USA).

 

Israel vs Iran = They don't have nukes and at worse if powers backed them it would turn into a proxy war.

 

Terrorists with dirty bombs = even as an optimist I do see at least one western city being hit by this in my lifetime. However, I don't see this sparking a world war, the countries that could react with nuclear armament are well aware of the difference between a nation state backed attack and a terrorist bombing. They would likely not launch any warheads in response as their is no target to hit seeing as terrorist organizations do not belong to any nation.


Current status: slaving away for the math gods of Pythagoras VII.


#23
Recyvuym

Recyvuym

    Apophis 2036

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 999 posts
  • LocationDie Sonne

Well Erowind, I apologise in advance for the info dump.

 

If this is the Cold War's little brother, it's the Cold War's psychotic, trigger-happy little brother who is making no promises he won't destroy the entire human race this time. Unlike 1950 - 1991 (during which time, I must stress, the USSR and the US almost destroyed each other five times - and then a sixth time in 1995, after the fall of the Soviet Union!), both Putin and the US have openly discussed a first-strike nuclear policy, bringing nuclear tensions to an all-time high.  Here you will see the present situation described as "worse than the Cold War," and you'll also see that NATO expansionism is partly to blame for it.

 

The risks of an unintended war with Russia are higher than you think. 100 policy experts put the risk of engagement at an unacceptable 11%, with a further 18% forecast of nuclear apocalypse if war does break out. Here are ten maps that explain the desperation of Putin's situation. If none of this alarms you, try this article.

 

Russia is a democracy in name at best. On the topic of trade, don't forget that US-led sanctions on Russia are wreaking havoc on the Russian economy. Borders are still open for now but popular opinion in Russia of the US and NATO is lower than it has been in my lifetime.

 

Everyone on Earth should be pissing themselves right now over the privatisation of nuclear war and the implications of developing and deploying fourth-generation nuclear weapons.

 

I will agree that for the time being, the threat of a US / Chinese nuclear engagement is low. But it's not unthinkable either. Don't forget, nuclear war does not have to be intentional. There are several times it almost happened (to within minutes or even seconds of a decision) only for the parties concerned to discover it with a computer error or a bad reading.

 

India and Pakistan still regularly skirmish with each other. They're the only two nuclear powers on Earth who do so. In 1998, they almost obliterated each other. With their present arsenals, though this would probably not destroy civilisation, it would still kill hundreds of millions of people, usher in a 'Decade Without Summer' which would destroy crop yields worldwide, massively damage all the surrounding countries and of course it would utterly obliterate India and Pakistan themselves. The present threat may also be low, but keep in mind that India, Pakistan and Bangladesh will be among the countries most adversely affected by climate change, and this may lead them to war. By midway through this century, that entire region of the world will probably be under far more pressure than even the US and the USSR were during the first Cold War!

 

I also agree that North Korea may collapse internally. That's precisely what concerns me. Unstable powers and nuclear weapons are a terrible combination. And the Kim regime is legitmately psychotic. This situation is like a severe schizophrenic with his finger on that button - and he's ordering more and better nukes to be built all the time.

 

Iran doesn't have nukes, yet, but Israel has several hundred of them and the entire Middle East wants to see Israel destroyed. Not a pretty picture either.

 

The Doomsday Clock now reads three to midnight, the second highest it has ever been.


I loudly predicted the second wave of the Global Financial Crisis would begin by the 31st of March 2017. But I was wrong! Observe my well-deserved public humiliation here, here and here. Let this be a warning to all of you who try to guess the future. Yes, that means you, reading this now! Put that prediction back in your pocket! Do it now, before it's too late! (Also check out my userpage, it's even funnier.)


#24
Erowind

Erowind

    Psychonaut, Aspiring Mathematician and Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 523 posts
  • LocationInside some convoluted formula I don't actually understand.

Well Erowind, I apologise in advance for the info dump.

 

If this is the Cold War's little brother, it's the Cold War's psychotic, trigger-happy little brother who is making no promises he won't destroy the entire human race this time. Unlike 1950 - 1991 (during which time, I must stress, the USSR and the US almost destroyed each other five times - and then a sixth time in 1995, after the fall of the Soviet Union!), both Putin and the US have openly discussed a first-strike nuclear policy, bringing nuclear tensions to an all-time high.  Here you will see the present situation described as "worse than the Cold War," and you'll also see that NATO expansionism is partly to blame for it.

 

The risks of an unintended war with Russia are higher than you think. 100 policy experts put the risk of engagement at an unacceptable 11%, with a further 18% forecast of nuclear apocalypse if war does break out. Here are ten maps that explain the desperation of Putin's situation. If none of this alarms you, try this article.

 

Russia is a democracy in name at best. On the topic of trade, don't forget that US-led sanctions on Russia are wreaking havoc on the Russian economy. Borders are still open for now but popular opinion in Russia of the US and NATO is lower than it has been in my lifetime.

 

Everyone on Earth should be pissing themselves right now over the privatisation of nuclear war and the implications of developing and deploying fourth-generation nuclear weapons.

 

I will agree that for the time being, the threat of a US / Chinese nuclear engagement is low. But it's not unthinkable either. Don't forget, nuclear war does not have to be intentional. There are several times it almost happened (to within minutes or even seconds of a decision) only for the parties concerned to discover it with a computer error or a bad reading.

 

India and Pakistan still regularly skirmish with each other. They're the only two nuclear powers on Earth who do so. In 1998, they almost obliterated each other. With their present arsenals, though this would probably not destroy civilisation, it would still kill hundreds of millions of people, usher in a 'Decade Without Summer' which would destroy crop yields worldwide, massively damage all the surrounding countries and of course it would utterly obliterate India and Pakistan themselves. The present threat may also be low, but keep in mind that India, Pakistan and Bangladesh will be among the countries most adversely affected by climate change, and this may lead them to war. By midway through this century, that entire region of the world will probably be under far more pressure than even the US and the USSR were during the first Cold War!

 

I also agree that North Korea may collapse internally. That's precisely what concerns me. Unstable powers and nuclear weapons are a terrible combination. And the Kim regime is legitmately psychotic. This situation is like a severe schizophrenic with his finger on that button - and he's ordering more and better nukes to be built all the time.

 

Iran doesn't have nukes, yet, but Israel has several hundred of them and the entire Middle East wants to see Israel destroyed. Not a pretty picture either.

 

The Doomsday Clock now reads three to midnight, the second highest it has ever been.

 

I have checked our links and I do not have a counter argument at this time. I will take the time to investigate the credible sources you linked (Wikipedia and Stephen F Cohen. Tabloids like Vox, and Times of India are not credible as they write their articles for views not objective investigation. Also, any organization discussing FEMA death camps is not credible. http://www.globalres...in-america/3010

http://www.globalres...ractors/5412059


Current status: slaving away for the math gods of Pythagoras VII.


#25
Recyvuym

Recyvuym

    Apophis 2036

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 999 posts
  • LocationDie Sonne

Hm. Well spotted. Thanks for that. I'll disavow Global Research as a resource and console myself that maybe the US government isn't quite at Dr Strangelove levels of insanity just yet.

 

I wouldn't call Wikipedia a credible source, even though I linked you to it. But there's more than enough to go off in that summary if you want to find out more.


I loudly predicted the second wave of the Global Financial Crisis would begin by the 31st of March 2017. But I was wrong! Observe my well-deserved public humiliation here, here and here. Let this be a warning to all of you who try to guess the future. Yes, that means you, reading this now! Put that prediction back in your pocket! Do it now, before it's too late! (Also check out my userpage, it's even funnier.)


#26
Erowind

Erowind

    Psychonaut, Aspiring Mathematician and Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 523 posts
  • LocationInside some convoluted formula I don't actually understand.

Hm. Well spotted. Thanks for that. I'll disavow Global Research as a resource and console myself that maybe the US government isn't quite at Dr Strangelove levels of insanity just yet.

 

I wouldn't call Wikipedia a credible source, even though I linked you to it. But there's more than enough to go off in that summary if you want to find out more.

I agree that Wikipedia is not a credible source for research purposes. However, everything is relative this is a casual conversation so sighting Wikipedia is good enough in my opinion. Now if we were on philosophyforums.com we would both be getting crucified right now for a multiple reasons.


Current status: slaving away for the math gods of Pythagoras VII.


#27
Recyvuym

Recyvuym

    Apophis 2036

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 999 posts
  • LocationDie Sonne

Yeah for sure, haha


I loudly predicted the second wave of the Global Financial Crisis would begin by the 31st of March 2017. But I was wrong! Observe my well-deserved public humiliation here, here and here. Let this be a warning to all of you who try to guess the future. Yes, that means you, reading this now! Put that prediction back in your pocket! Do it now, before it's too late! (Also check out my userpage, it's even funnier.)


#28
Ghostreaper

Ghostreaper

    Hopelessly optimistic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 640 posts
  • LocationWest Midlands, UK

Hm. Well spotted. Thanks for that. I'll disavow Global Research as a resource and console myself that maybe the US government isn't quite at Dr Strangelove levels of insanity just yet.

 

I wouldn't call Wikipedia a credible source, even though I linked you to it. But there's more than enough to go off in that summary if you want to find out more.

 

Wikipedia is as credible as the sources each page cites, it's up to the reader to ensure that those sources are credible, if they are, then so is the article.


  • Recyvuym likes this

“If the genius of invention were to reveal to-morrow the secret of immortality, of eternal beauty and youth, for which all humanity is aching, the same inexorable agents which prevent a mass from changing suddenly its velocity would likewise resist the force of the new knowledge until time gradually modifies human thought.” 

 

                                                                 Nikola Tesla - New York World, May 19th 1907 


#29
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Nadsat Brat

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,133 posts
  • LocationAnur Margidda

Israel...= They don't have nukes...

I'm not so sure about that...

 

I personally believe Israel does possess nukes, and, should a new Arab-Israeli War break out (i.e. a new Six Day War, or new Yom Kippur War), they will unveil them to the world in a rather nasty way.


  • joe00uk likes this
Nobody's gonna take my drone, I'm gonna fly miles far too high!
Nobody gonna beat my drone, it's gonna shoot into the sky!

#30
joe00uk

joe00uk

    Marxist-Leninist Futurist ☭

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,543 posts
  • LocationUK

Oh yeah, Israel has nukes. They're even protected from UN inspections (by, surprise, surprise, good ol' 'Murica), they're so afraid of being found out.


  • Yuli Ban likes this

"The Proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains." - Karl Marx
"A revolution is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a picture, or doing embroidery; it cannot be so refined, so leisurely and gentleso temperate, kind, courteous, restrained and magnanimous. A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another."  - Mao Zedong


#31
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Nadsat Brat

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,133 posts
  • LocationAnur Margidda
 

Except Rome really did fall.

 

And the Assyrian Empire. And Babylonia. And Sumer. etc.

 

Collapse of civilisation is not a new phenomenon to the human race.

But can we afford a Dark Age at this critical moment? Modern society has become so complex, after all, and a lot of the echoes of civilization could wreck our remnants should we go down. Imagine an Earth that's undergoing runaway global warming, all the while civilization has collapsed and we've reverted to a sort of techno-medieval state. It's possible that our luck is running out, and that the 3rd millennium is the one where our shit gets wrecked. 

 

We've been ungodly lucky to have 12,000 years of relative harmony on Earth. I'd like to believe that we were in for 12,000 more, but industrial society put an end to that. Now we're altering the world in ways we can't imagine. Without ASI and ultratechnology, it may be impossible for us to return to a pre-industrial state for a very long time— somewhere on the order of 10,000 years or more. And so many of us are detached from an agrarian lifestyle that it would be very likely that the first generation of post-civilization people will die the soonest. 

 

 

It's these kinds of thoughts that make Threads so horrifying for me, why I keep talking about failed civilizations and totalitarian dystopias. We basically have one shot, and we've bulls-eyed all the others.


  • nomad likes this
Nobody's gonna take my drone, I'm gonna fly miles far too high!
Nobody gonna beat my drone, it's gonna shoot into the sky!

#32
Recyvuym

Recyvuym

    Apophis 2036

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 999 posts
  • LocationDie Sonne

I know, it's frustrating to be strapped in for the ride, isn't it? Frankly it makes me glad I don't expect to live too far into this future.

 

Best-case scenario I think, is that we mitigate the damage to the environment and economy while we have the chance. Global decentralisation, breakdown of governments and replacement with minimalist, voluntary structures. Return to self-sufficiency and only producing what we need. Leave some resources in the ground. Figure out a less terrible way to go about whatever we consider progress.

 

Worst-case scenario, we render the planet not quite bad enough to kill us, and we limp on for tens of thousands of years in some condition that would make extinction preferable.

 

Next worst-case, we whip out the nukes during collapse. Not so bad at the end of the day, it would be a miserable and all, but at least everyone would be dead within five years.


I loudly predicted the second wave of the Global Financial Crisis would begin by the 31st of March 2017. But I was wrong! Observe my well-deserved public humiliation here, here and here. Let this be a warning to all of you who try to guess the future. Yes, that means you, reading this now! Put that prediction back in your pocket! Do it now, before it's too late! (Also check out my userpage, it's even funnier.)


#33
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Nadsat Brat

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,133 posts
  • LocationAnur Margidda

I know, it's frustrating to be strapped in for the ride, isn't it? Frankly it makes me glad I don't expect to live too far into this future.

 

Best-case scenario I think, is that we mitigate the damage to the environment and economy while we have the chance. Global decentralisation, breakdown of governments and replacement with minimalist, voluntary structures. Return to self-sufficiency and only producing what we need. Leave some resources in the ground. Figure out a less terrible way to go about whatever we consider progress.

 

Worst-case scenario, we render the planet not quite bad enough to kill us, and we limp on for tens of thousands of years in some condition that would make extinction preferable.

 

Next worst-case, we whip out the nukes during collapse. Not so bad at the end of the day, it would be a miserable and all, but at least everyone would be dead within five years.

To me, the best case scenario is the advent of artificial superintelligence. At this point, that's the only thing I can think of that would result in an unquestionably positive result. The only people who doubt that are the antihumanists who want us to die.

 

Having us reach a radically decentralized structure of social order is a basic tenant of Vyrdism, but the different between what you're proposing and what I'm proposing is that we cannot afford to lose AI progress at all. 

 

Never think only in the short term. Always remember that there is forever a one in a million chance of an extinction-level asteroid impact, or a supervolcanic eruption. We humans are operating on literally obsolete hardware and software— the last time we underwent any sort of biological upgrade was, in fact as your sig mentions, around 40,000 to 50,000 years ago, when we achieved behavior modernity. But even then, all Sapiens lived hunter/gatherer lifestyles and thus our brains developed for that lifestyle. 

 

We're living in a post-industrial age. Even the most backwards, regressive nations on Earth have reached the Industrial Revolution, something that wasn't true even 30 years ago. 

You can say all you want that there are benefits to slower AI development, but to me, that's tantamount to saying "there are benefits to continued human idiocy." 

 

Chimpanzees are built for the jungle. You can't bring a chimpanzee into a household and expect it to act human, no matter how well you raise it. The more chimps you have, the rowdier they'll be. But while you'll get mountains of shit and broken furniture, you'll never get polite houseguests who'll help paint your walls or mop your floors. It's not because the latter is necessarily beyond them— they're simple tasks, seemingly. It's just that the former is in their nature. 

 

That's us. 7 billion psychotic super-chimps. There's a way to save our civilization that even chimps will never know, but we have to trust that it'll pay off. 

 

It's one reason why I argue so much with Jakob over his proposed "limitless population" proposal— you can't just create more humans to solve problems caused by humans. That's like saying "we need more chimpanzees to solve a problem created by chimpanzees." Except that problem is that the chimps have managed to set fire to their habitat entirely by accident. 

It doesn't matter if you have 7 chimps or 7 billion chimps— the solution to this problem will always be beyond their cognitive abilities. And this is the same deal with humans. We have much an order of magnitude greater cognitive abilities than chimpanzees, but we're still apes at heart. We'll still pursue short-term pleasure over long-term prosperity. We've even managed to make saying "pursue long-term prosperity" sound evil

 

 

 

But, despite all that, despite all our problems and our faults, the fact of the matter is that we're the only fully sapient species on Earth, as far as we know. It's up to us to populate the cosmos and discover all that there is to know, because we have that power. If we waste it, there's no guarantee Earth'll ever have such a transcendent opportunity again. I don't care if "we" means Sapiens, or transhumans, or AI. Any aspect of our society surviving is worth it. And no one knows how much time we have left. Climate change is merely one problem, a problem that takes a longer time to really get going than most. 

 

It's possible that we're going to get struck by a 5-kilometer wide asteroid tomorrow. If so, there's nothing we can do about that. But it's also possible that we're going to get struck by a 5-kilometer wide asteroid on 29 December, 2116. There may be quite a lot we could do to prevent such a fate by then, so imagine how awful it would be to have thrown everything away before then.


  • Maximus, sasuke2490, Infinite and 1 other like this
Nobody's gonna take my drone, I'm gonna fly miles far too high!
Nobody gonna beat my drone, it's gonna shoot into the sky!

#34
Recyvuym

Recyvuym

    Apophis 2036

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 999 posts
  • LocationDie Sonne

 

To me, the best case scenario is the advent of artificial superintelligence. At this point, that's the only thing I can think of that would result in an unquestionably positive result. The only people who doubt that are the antihumanists who want us to die.

And Stephen Hawking.

 

You know my view on this. There's good AI and there's bad AI. I welcome good AI just as much as you do. Too bad we're studiously constructing bad AI.


I loudly predicted the second wave of the Global Financial Crisis would begin by the 31st of March 2017. But I was wrong! Observe my well-deserved public humiliation here, here and here. Let this be a warning to all of you who try to guess the future. Yes, that means you, reading this now! Put that prediction back in your pocket! Do it now, before it's too late! (Also check out my userpage, it's even funnier.)


#35
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Nadsat Brat

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,133 posts
  • LocationAnur Margidda

 

 

To me, the best case scenario is the advent of artificial superintelligence. At this point, that's the only thing I can think of that would result in an unquestionably positive result. The only people who doubt that are the antihumanists who want us to die.

And Stephen Hawking.

 

You know my view on this. There's good AI and there's bad AI. I welcome good AI just as much as you do. Too bad we're studiously constructing bad AI.

 

Here's the thing: Stephen Hawking also doubts bad AI, but he does not doubt AI itself. Of course, pop-futurist blogs would have you believe that because "STEPHEN HAWKING SAYS AI WILL KILL US ALL" gets more clicks than "STEPHEN HAWKING SAYS WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL WITH AI".

 

Same deal with other big names who you might think have said "We need to stop AI research before it kills us all"— Elon Musk has gone so far as to create his own AI company. I distinctly remember watching this AI alarmist meltdown when he saw this, trying to figure out why the fuck Elon Musk was working on AI when he "clearly" stated that AI would be 'unleashing the demon'. Even brought up that very article. Others had to tell him what I'm telling you.

 

 

In the end, however, my thought process can be simplified into this—

 

-There is a 50% chance of human extinction as the result of artificial stupidity

-There is a 100% chance of human extinction as the result of human stupidity

 

I don't know about you, but I'm taking the glass half full rather than the glass tipped over.


Nobody's gonna take my drone, I'm gonna fly miles far too high!
Nobody gonna beat my drone, it's gonna shoot into the sky!

#36
Sciencerocks

Sciencerocks

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,721 posts

I realize how important it is to win this for civilization and so we/I/us must keep fighting for investment into science, tech and education to make it happen. It's a huge fight as there's a lot of people that want to defund it and say to hell with it.


To follow my work on tropical cyclones


#37
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Nadsat Brat

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,133 posts
  • LocationAnur Margidda

So apparently it gets even worse.
 

Our Magnetic Shield Is Weakening— Fast

This isn't the first research to show that Earth's magnetic field is changing. Our magnetic field has always been in flux, and over the past few years it's become clear that the invisible bubble that protects our planet from the harsh conditions of outer space has been getting weaker and weaker. 
According to scientists' best estimates, the field is now weakening around 10 times faster than initially thought, losing approximately 5 percent of its strength every decade. But they don't really know why, or what that means for our planet.
One of the most likely explanations for what we're seeing is that our magnetic poles are getting ready to flip - something that happens once every 100,000 years or so, and that sounds a lot scarier than it really is. There's no evidence that life on Earth suffered when this happened in the past - the most likely impact is that our compasses would eventually point south instead of north.
"Such a flip is not instantaneous, but would take many hundred if not a few thousand years," Rune Floberghagen from the European Space Agency (ESA) told LiveScience back in 2014. "They have happened many times in the past."




And when it goes... well, can you say "reverse-terraforming?"
mars_atmos_1.jpg

 

We have no idea when we'll lose the thing altogether, but I'm sure it'll be too soon for anything newly sapient to evolve. Especially since we're currently in the era of the Sixth Great Mass Extinction. Yeah, losing our magnetic shield and killing off massive numbers of creatures. That's gonna ensure a glorious civilized future for whatever carries on after us if we fail.


Nobody's gonna take my drone, I'm gonna fly miles far too high!
Nobody gonna beat my drone, it's gonna shoot into the sky!

#38
Nerd

Nerd

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts

Likely wont happen. People are stupid and don't give a fuck about anybody or their needs. Humanity disappoints me so much sometimes.

 

I'm very pessimistic and sad today, sorry.



#39
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 716 posts
  • LocationLondon

I think you are all underestimating the impact of what our civilization will leave behind. Even if every fossil fuel disappeared tomorrow, resulting in a massive global collapse, some nuclear wars etc. and a general end of all significant human civilization, when, 1000 years on the scattered remnants of humanity start climbing towards civilization once again, they're going to have lots of weird artifacts of the old days to examine which are, (once they get the scientific method worked out again), going to allow some really interesting jumps which we could never have made the first time without examples. 

 

So for example they may not know about electricity, but they will be able to figure out that for some reason the ancients were weirdly obsessed with rotating magnets using various methods, and then connecting all our rotating magnets up to absolutely everywhere using aluminium wires. Someone, at some point is going to get curious and start experimenting with rotating magnets and wire and shortly after that they can skip the entire first industrial revolution. 


  • BasilBerylium likes this

#40
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Nadsat Brat

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,133 posts
  • LocationAnur Margidda

^ Much of my post-collapse pessimism is centered around the possibility that we will be struck by existential threats that we won't have the technology to prevent. 

 

Okay, let's imagine this.

 

 

2019: Nuclear war occurs. Civilization gets set back 300 years. Too many minds die, and all technological innovation dies for some time. The dominant social group on Earth becomes farmers in the Global South. 

 

2039: Global population bottoms out at beneath one billion

 

2059: Some aspects of civilization have rebounded, but we have no functional space program, global trade has returned to a post-medieval level, and nations are somewhat returning

 

2079: Mankind goes extinct. Mankind is extinct because there was an asteroid that struck Siberia that was about on par with what killed the dinosaurs. We could have pushed it away using technology even from 50 years prior, but we no longer have said technology because we decided to throw a nuclear war.

 

 

Replace that asteroid impact with whatever you need. Maybe there's a supervolcano eruption. VEI-8. Turns out that, if technological progression continued, we'd have learned how to safely depressurize volcanoes and supervolcanoes. Maybe cyanobacteria goes extinct after the nuclear war + all our industrial pollution and Earth's oxygen gets mostly used up in those global megafires caused by the nuclear exchange.  

 

 

It's not necessarily collapse that freaks me out— it's the consequences if it turns out that something happens to us that we could've prevented. This theoretical future "final generation" would (rightly) cast our generation as demons, hellspawn, wicked and evil who deserve only the worst fires of hell if that were to happen.


Nobody's gonna take my drone, I'm gonna fly miles far too high!
Nobody gonna beat my drone, it's gonna shoot into the sky!





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: human extinction, failed civilization

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users