The End of Man

The End of Man
Quantummist
07/05/07

Mankind will sooner or later be wiped from this little ball we live on. This is a fact not an opinion. next week we could be hit by a mile wide hunk of iron and we're toast. A shift in the magnetic field of the planet will someday wipe 90% of all life from the tiny blue ball we call home. Someday the sun will burp and all life will be ash in seconds. Someday a super volcano will erupt and almost all life large enough to see with the naked eye will vanish within months or years.

These are facts that have happened 12 times in the past. We have a record in the rocks that show 12 separate epochs in this balls history where almost all life was wiped at each event.

So I wanted to give a view of the only option that can save our species from being nothing more that radio waves passing through space for some life on some far away planet to receive and watch reruns of "I Love Lucy" sent out into the universe a million years before, the ghost of a long lost people.

The only way our species can survive is to find a way to get off this ball. We have to travel to new worlds. We have to start colonies on several places so that when that next ball is made toast we have other places to hide from all the destruction that occurs in this universe.

This requires we take baby steps today. I hear all the shouts about it being a waste to go to the moon. The folks that say the money is better spent feeding the world and solving the problems of our inner cities. I read of those that think we are wasting the lives of those that have given their lives in the shuttle tragedy's to gain little or no value in their sacrifices.

Each year in America we spend more per year by far on Twinkies than we spend on the entire space program. In one year in America alone we spend more on booze that we have spent on the space program since its inception in the 50's. And for each dollar spent by NASA has produced 3 dollars in gross national product for our nation. The computer you use to read this blog can be directly linked to our space program.

So if we survive for the next couple hundred years we must find the science to leave this solar system at some point in the future or we are doomed as a species. So when you hear someone speak of shutting down the space program because we need to put a new black board in some school or save some frog in a pond in Indiana think of your children's, children's, children's, children and what your leaving them to deal with when they are stuck on this tiny ball as they watch a hunk of rock heading for them at 40,000 miles per hour.

I absolutely agree with you. So many people think the space program is a waste of money, but we inevitably have to figure out how to get off this planet. Even if there's not an imminent catastrophe (and really, who knows?) we'll exhaust the Earths resources at some point. I do wish, though, that NASA would spend its funds more wisely, sometimes I think they fly to to space just because they have to look busy. I really don't think it's necessary that we send probes to murcury, or constantly fly up there to do little insignificant tests of this and that. When it comes to space, I say work on getting us farther out; otherwise spend the money on Earth-bound technologies and theoretical sciences (IE quantum mechanics).

I've said this myself for quite some time. If we can get our crap together the human race can survive. We currently have the technology for instance to land a man on mars. Which would be a huge step for our space program it's just fairly expensive and everyones too greedy to want to spend the money. We as an intelligent race have the ability to change our own fate. If we at least get some of our life off this rock and on other rocks to colonize we in the end can save our own asses from meteors and comets and other such freak disasters that are bound to happen. If we strive to become a space faring people we can leave the solar system when our sun gets close to dying and survive the end of our solar system. If we continue to expand and develop new technologies a long time in the future we may be able to leave or at the very least endure the colliding of the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies.

If we stay on Earth and never leave we are a dead. Sooner or later be it tomorrow or in 3 billion years...we will be destroyed sooner or later only taking steps to ensure our race lives on past the earth will we ensure our survival.


However I disagree with not doing missions just for the sake of Knowledge. Everytime we send a probe to a certain planet or asteroid there is many questions and theories that Nasa and other scientists/astronomers are testing and learning to discover new things, things that could help us. To the average person it may seem like a waste of time and money but it's really not. Every bit of knowledge helps us in the long run. We just can't be discouraged by small steps.

Quantummist, i agree with you... your ideas are very good, but im sorry to say that its too late.
Mankind will destroy itself not much far in the future. Wars, diseases, hunger, and so will do it. And, if not, there is always some ecological catastrophes just waiting its right time to happen...
I dont want to sound pessimist... but its the true. Sad but true. We are living the calm before the storm, mark my words. Soon this peace will end, and the whole world will suffer... Enjoy the peace while you can, because the future is dark...
I hope im wrong, but i fear im right...

Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine,
Et lux perpetua luceat eis.

Doomsday theorists are all the same. They're all about letting us know of our doom, but not doing anything about it. Anyone can make suggestions, but just how worried are you about our future?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coelho

but im sorry to say that its too late.
Mankind will destroy itself not much far in the future. Wars, diseases, hunger, and so will do it. And, if not, there is always some ecological catastrophes just waiting its right time to happen...
I dont want to sound pessimist... [/I]

---

I can see your bright and smiley non pessimistic view just oozing out every pore..:). Its been 15,000 to 30,000 years since mankind was smacked down by nature and I see nothing on the horizon that tells me we will be smacked again before we gain the knowledge to pack a suit case and pop off this ball.

Yes we could get poped by a big rock next week but we had the same chanch 10 years ago or 5,000 years ago.. and it didn't happen..

And at the rate knowledge and technology increase I tend to think we will gain the ability before we kill each other off. It took thousands of years before we could go from fire to indoor pluming . A few hundred years ago we were living at the center of the universe on a pancake. A bit over a hundred years ago we figured how to get our feet off the ground and today we are sending our little gadgets out into the vastness, living in orbit, exploring the bottom of the sea and conversating here and now in ways that our forefathers would think to be magic.

The rate of technology advancement increases as we gain knowledge. We may very well pull a new rabbit out of the technology hat at any moment...

Buck Up Sparky .. all is not darkness and despair.. We have shining minds set free thees days to ponder the never before pondered...

Q

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quantummist

I can see your bright and smiley non pessimistic view just oozing out every pore..:). Its been 15,000 to 30,000 years since mankind was smacked down by nature and I see nothing on the horizon that tells me we will be smacked again before we gain the knowledge to pack a suit case and pop off this ball.

Yes we could get poped by a big rock next week but we had the same chanch 10 years ago or 5,000 years ago.. and it didn't happen..

---

Well... the problems which mankind will have to worry about in the future are the ones caused by mankind, or by mankind's influence over the environment.

Take the so-called global warming, for example. The nature have its own complicated cycle of recycling the CO2, so its level has been almost constant for centuries. But now, its levels are rising, the planet is becoming hotter, and all the delicate equilibrium of the climate is being altered. The seasons are changing. The hurricanes are becoming stronger. You all who live in u.s. knows how destructive a hurricane can be, and how impotent is all our technology face the nature's forces, even today.

And this problem i cited is only one of many others. There is the hunger (millions of people dies of starvation, you know), the diseases, the wars and so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quantummist

And at the rate knowledge and technology increase I tend to think we will gain the ability before we kill each other off. It took thousands of years before we could go from fire to indoor pluming . A few hundred years ago we were living at the center of the universe on a pancake. A bit over a hundred years ago we figured how to get our feet off the ground and today we are sending our little gadgets out into the vastness, living in orbit, exploring the bottom of the sea and conversating here and now in ways that our forefathers would think to be magic.

The rate of technology advancement increases as we gain knowledge. We may very well pull a new rabbit out of the technology hat at any moment...

---

You must remember that the technology is restricted to the richest countries, and mostly used to bring more richness for them (and consequently more poverty to the poorer ones). The ones who have the power to change anything dont want to, if it were to mean less profit for them. Money is the ruler of this world, unfortunately.

I could go on and on on this subject, but i dont want to enter in a political/sociological/historical/etc discussion, so i will stop here. I hope you have got my point, though.
If all people were good, and if all people cared about the common well-being, i would agree with you, and would have some hope in the future.
But, unfortunately, people are becoming more and more selfish... thats why i have lost my hope, and wait for the end.

And, Mr.Bubbles, there is nothing i (or anyone) can do. Can you make the peoples mind for changing their ways? Can you make them less selfish and more altruist? Can you make people love less the money and more their neighbors? I know i cant.
BTW, i dont care about the future. It will come, regardless my caring or not. So, i choose dont care, cause i know my caring will not change it. And yes, i believe in doom. Thats why i think this world is doomed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coelho

Well... the problems which mankind will have to worry about in the future are the ones caused by mankind, or by mankind's influence over the environment.

Take the so-called global warming, for example. The nature have its own complicated cycle of recycling the CO2, so its level has been almost constant for centuries. But now, its levels are rising, the planet is becoming hotter, and all the delicate equilibrium of the climate is being altered. The seasons are changing. The hurricanes are becoming stronger. You all who live in u.s. knows how destructive a hurricane can be, and how impotent is all our technology face the nature's forces, even today.

---

You gota quite listening to Gore.. Why do you think a climatic change is a bad thing. Maybe in a bit Canada will have endless miles of land that could feed the world. You may think its a nice sun shinny day buy I think some of the folks that live in Siberia would love the idea of a few degrees warmer. If you remember at one time we were in a melting of the ice caps and world disaster in the 20's then in the 70's we were in the start of the next ice age. Now were back to the melt down. You do relize that if you stick a bit more CO2 into your plants what happens... Faster growth..faster growth CO2 taken and locked in the bio mass. I have no fear of globull warming,, no more than that of the hole in the Ozone.. Oh yea that was going to kill us last time...

Quote:

---

And this problem i cited is only one of many others. There is the hunger (millions of people dies of starvation, you know), the diseases, the wars and so.

---

Yep, My grand Maw died 2 days ago. Does not mean I don't ravel in the lives of those that follow.

Quote:

---

You must remember that the technology is restricted to the richest countries, and mostly used to bring more richness for them (and consequently more poverty to the poorer ones). The ones who have the power to change anything dont want to, if it were to mean less profit for them. Money is the ruler of this world, unfortunately.

---

Technology can help most of the poverty stricken countries and is readily available as soon as they as a people take control of the corruption that has come to power if their areas.

America didn't pop into existence last week. We had a period where we had starving masses, Bodies piled high and brothers killing brothers. Untill the People control their own local affairs can't expect others to do it for them.

Quote:

---

I could go on and on on this subject, but i dont want to enter in a political/sociological/historical/etc discussion, so i will stop here. I hope you have got my point, though.
If all people were good, and if all people cared about the common well-being, i would agree with you, and would have some hope in the future.
But, unfortunately, people are becoming more and more selfish... thats why i have lost my hope, and wait for the end.

---

Yea but if we have a melt down then all the major coastal cities would be toast and most the A'Holes live in cities.. See theres another upside to even globull warming

Quote:

---

And, Mr.Bubbles, there is nothing i (or anyone) can do. Can you make the peoples mind for changing their ways? Can you make them less selfish and more altruist? Can you make people love less the money and more their neighbors? I know i cant.
BTW, i dont care about the future. It will come, regardless my caring or not. So, i choose dont care, cause i know my caring will not change it. And yes, i believe in doom. Thats why i think this world is doomed.

---

I didn't even like the game.. But I see a different world .. when I ride my bike through the mountains as everybody waves from the front porch. When a neighbor you haven't met walks a mile to bring you a bag of fresh tomatoes because they grew a lot and were giving some to all the folks... When I stop by the road and over the next little while 4 cars stop to ask if I need any help just because I stopped for a smoke, then I have to say we travel a different path.. Most of the people I run into are those of Honor, even those that walk a different path tend to have good hearts...

No offense, but you guys DO know that this catastrophic event isn't going to take place until December 2012 right?

So don't worry guys, we've only another 5 years on this planet until this planet, or us, is no more. =)

Maybe some of those people spending all thier money on beer who don't believe in God realize something you don't. That all of man's acheivements are ultimately worthless. It makes sense for them to drink themselves into oblivion, they believe they're without hope and will never live again. What does it matter if mankind lives another million years? Does it really matter? Why waste their time?

Thankfully, thier is hope and God does exist and there's no need to waste our money on booze.

I think we are on a knife edge of ecological and societal collapse, but we might just make it through.

Most of the problems we face here on earth are of our own making. They are related to overconsumption of resources, and that is mostly related to overpopulation and greed. There are too many of us, and we are using up the resources faster than they can be replaced. If nothing changes, and critical resources run out, what will follow will be degradation of the environment, resulting in failure of agriculture, leading to famine, then starvation, then war, and finally canibalism ---- complete collapse of society, no more online forums.

In that scenario, I don't think humankind would go extinct. Society would collapse, and everyting we know and care about would be destroyed, but some vestige of the human species would survive to live on in a greatly diminished world. The kinds of things that would lead to extinction are impact by a large asteroid, all-out global nuclear war, or some kind of runaway global warming that would make the planet uninhabitable. Short of that, I think the human species is tough and smart enough to survive, even if it means living like rats for a few thousand years.

I think that aggressively moving into space is part of the solution. We need to find new resources in space, especially energy, so that we don't continue to degrade the planet. We need to find some room to offload some of the overpopulation. We need to get some people into safe places other than our planet so that if things go bad down here, we've got someene to keep it going out there.

In addition to moving into space, we need to get a grip on what we are doing to this planet. We are like the inhabitants of Easter Island who expereinced their own ecological and societal collapse. We are isolated and we are focused on building our idols while we run through the last of our resources. We need to realize what we are doing, stop stripping our island of the trees that make life possible, care for our environment, keep our population in balance, and find a way to spread beyond our island. It would be a shame to end up like the Easter Islanders did.

I think we are basically in a race to save ourselves. We are definitely speeding down a path to destruction, but we also have the knowlege ans skill to save ourselves. The only question is whether we will act fast enough.

I see it a bit differently. I don't see that we are ecologically doing much damage. We have what you call critical resources up the Wazoo.. We have enough oil for the next 500 years at projected rates of use and by then I see no reason that technology will not find a replacement. Global Warming is a new hyped desaster created to scare but if you actually look at the Facts you see that its not what the news has made people think. Thank about this.. Since America got a press we have had a reverse of Global Warming or Global Cooling every 20 years or so. 20 years ago the press was all abuzz with the next ice age.. 40 years ago articles told how the Ice Caps are meltin, 60 years ago the Times stated that the earth is about the have a climate shift to an Ice age.

Today we here there is consensus that Global Warming is man made.. but Facts now.. That consensus is of 300 scientist and they made all the news.. But.. there is also a list of over 500 scientist that say its a normal cycle due to sun out put variations. But those you never see on the evening news.. and if you stand and say Global Warming is not as stated you get scorned and degraded in the press.

Its a created view of the environment by some that seek political positioning and the gullible fall for it and actually never check to see if the Fact fit the hype.

Remember the Hole in the Ozone? Haven't heard much of it since it was found.. Remember what happened? We had to cut CFC's and put new gasses in our air conditioners, Require more emission controls and all this caused a wind fall for many companies and people. Our cars cost more and you have to pay way more for A/C and refills. But The fact is 1 lighting storm anywhere on the planet produces more Ozone than could be destroyed by CFC's in 20 years. The hole was always there.. it was just seen for the first time because we stuck a satellite in polar orbit and looked for it. Its cause is the magneto sphere drawing charged particles from the sun into our upper atmosphere and burning off the ozone .. But look all you want and you will be hard pressed to find even a mention of the hole that was going to kiss us all a few years back.. But you still can't get freon and all the stuff done to protect us from the destruction of the ozone is still in place.

So when you look at the news and how the world will crumble under the weight of the people on it you should look back in the Historical record and you may find that its been coming to and end since 2000 years before Christ.

When some take to the soap box to save the world, stop and look at the details before you believe a word they say.. You may find that their reason for gloom and doom are more for Power, Control and Cash than a concern for their fellow man.

I would agree that climate change is not fully understood and the ozone layer is not fully understood. But I personally believe that both are legitimate problems caused by human activity.

I think the ozone depletion was something that no one expected when we started releaseing so many CFCs into the atmosphere years ago, and it is a disaster that was just narrowly averted. Ozone depletion was not an obvious consequence of using CFCs, and the role of the ozone layer in protecting us was not fully appreciated. Once we realized that we were depleting the ozone layer and that the ozone layer was important, we took action to stop damaging it. I think that one nearly got past us, and we were lucky to figure it out in time to do something about it. I think you don't hear very much about it now, because the problem is considered to be "solved." I would not conclude that we don't hear about it now bacuse it never was a legitimate problem.

Climate change is definitely not fully understood. Some of it is certainly due to non-human factors such as natural fluctuation in CO2 levels, variations in the earth's orbit and angle, changes in the output of the sun, and probably other things that we do not understand.

But I do not think you can discount the fact that human activity has changed the composition of the atmosphere. All of that carbon was under ground and we have dug it out, burned it, and put it into the air. The processes that took it out of the air in the first place and put it undersground in the form of fossil fuels took many millions of years, and we have reversed that process in a hundred years or so. It's a very rapid rate of change to a system we do not fully understand, so it seems like a dangersous thing to do. There is a lot of evidence that in the geologic past, periods of higher temperature climate corresponded to periods of higher CO2. So there is a lot of evidence to suggest that chaniging the CO2 content of the atmosphere could change the climate. Even if the evidence is not conclusive, you have to wonder how much we should be willing to gamble.

One of the factors that comes into play when you talk about changes to complex systems is the idea of equilibrium and the resiliency of the status quo. Complex systems like the climate have thousands of inputs and feedback loops that keep the system in relative equilibrium, with minor variations. So maybe adding some CO2 would encourage plant growth that would pull that CO2 back out of the air and restore equilibrium. Or maybe a small increase in temperature might somehow change the pattern of cloud cover, and reflect more heat away into space, and restore the equilibrium. But in many complex systems, if you apply a large enough or constant enough new input into the system, the system will suddenly fall into a new and different equilibrium. Often the system goes through a period of chaotic change before it finds it's new equilibirum. Sometimes it remains in a chaotic state and never finds a new equilibrium.

My fear would be that the climate and systems dependent on climate, such as natural ecologies and agriculture, would change suddenly into a new equilibrium. Even worse than a new equilibrium would be a period of chaotic climate fluctuation. I'm not really worried that the planet would experience a runaway climatic disaster and become as hot as venus. I'm more worried that we could experinece several years of crazy weather that would cause massive worldwide crop failure and begin a cascade of famine and war. Our population is so high, so well armed, and so interdependent, that I think a disruption in food supply could trigger a collapse of our society.

If you move beyond the question of climate change, there are a lot of other human activities that cannot be sustained at current levels. There are many historical examples of different societies that collapsed because intensive agricultural techniques destroyed the long term sustainabity of their crop land. Generally it is belived that these collapses occurred suddenly with very little warning.

Regarding your last point about people motivated by greed and power --- well, I agree that people in power often use fear to get what they want. But most of my experience with poeple invloved in environmental debate has not led me to believe that people concerned about the environemnt are seeking power. Maybe some are, but not most. It seems to me like it is more common that people who resist changes designed to protect the environment are motivated by their own vested interest in the status quo. So it is important to look at the details of both sides of the debate.

Again I have a differing view. What you Believe may be the issue that separates our views.
You see I follow the view that I believe in nothing ever. I Know, I Think I know or I Do Not Know but I never Believe. For once you follow a view where belief over rides facts you now have a religion.

So I'll debate facts, Fact. The Ozone layer has never been very much different than it is right now, at least in the last 10,000 years and the CFC's and other hydrocarbons had almost no impact what so ever. It sounds as if you have fallen for the Hyped " Doom and Gloom" version. The quantities of ozone lost as its whisped away by solar winds is many times the amount that hydrocarbon molecules contact and steal a O molecule. And each thunder storm anywhere produces enough ozone to replace all thats lost to charged particle stripping from the sun. The Science shows that the only reason we had the Doom scenario is that we place a polar orbital sat up that was looking at the Ozone layer in that region for the first time. The Historical Record shows then some scientist did studies and figured that it was due to hydrocarbons were interacting with Ozone and destroying the ozone. The Press picked this up and many started jumping on the band wagon, for lots of reasons, and the religion of Ozone Hole was created. To this day many like you still think that the priest of this religion saved us and now we need to follow them blindly into the next incarnation of global warming.

The same thing is now happening. Some one sees a process, gives a theory and the game is on. If the view fits the story line the media likes ( gloom and doom sells papers) it hypes said theory. A bunch of folks see dollar signs from grands to study the theory and find if there studies say were OK then its never spoken of in the press or worse is attacked by the press where those that produce studies that say were all going to die are touted as word coming down from on high and just being supplied to the masses by the speakers of truth as they hand down the stone tablets of said Theory.

But when we fiqure out that what was thought truth was in fact totally incorrect the same seekers of truth seem missing in action. Think about the last time you heard stories on the ozone... Did we fix the problem? The last word was that if we stopped all CFC's and destructive processes it would be at least 2050 before it would stabilize. So no its not because anything we did had any effect. Its because its the way it was before and the way it will be later. The Hole was always there and the variance in the ozone layer had not changed enough to worry about in 10,000 years.. But they did get their hands in your pocket in the mean time .

I don't think I'm the dupe you are making me out to be. Or if you would rather I phrase it as a fact: I am not a dupe.

The fact is that measurements of stratospheric ozone show that it has decreased about 4% per decade since 1980. So the problem does continue even if it is not such a hot topic in the news these days. I think that probably has a lot to do with the fact that the call to action is over. We may not necessarily have fixed the problem, bacause it will take decades to stabilize and reverse, but we have stopped most of the major activities that were causing the problem.

I don't agree that ozone depletion was all just a bunch of hype. And I do not think that it would have been possible to get so many countries to agree to ban such useful substances as CFCs based only on hype. In general I think government tends to take the side of industry, and it would be nearly impossible to make so many governments side against industry on this issue if the danger was not real.

I feel the same way about global warming. I think it is a real problem, not just a bunch of hype. We can measure the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere now and historically (ice cores and such like). The fact is that measurements indicate the amount of CO2 has gone up since the begining of the industrial age. The amounts now are higher than any we can find in the historical record going back 650,000 years. And they are increaseing more rapidly than at any time ever measured. Global temperature has risen since the begining of the industrial age. CO2 is known to have heat trapping properties, as do many other atmospheric gasses. Once you get beyond these kinds of measurable facts, you get into the realm of hypotheses and theories. So sceptics can always say that the cause and effect relationship between the rise in CO2 levels and the rise in temperatures is not conclusively proven. On the other side you have many scientists who have studied the atmosphere and have modeled their understaning of how it works who have theorized that the global increase in CO2 is causing climate change. I tend to agree with these scientists, even if their theories cannot be conclusively proven at this point. In any case, it is ridiculous to think you could change the composition of the atmosphere without some kind of effect --- whether that effect would be catastrophic or not is up for debate, but you have to accept there would be an effect.

Anyway, you and I are not likely to agree on whether ozone depletion and global climate change are real, or dangerous, or caused by people, and I am fine with that.

Even without these two problems, I think we have plenty of other dangers of our own making to face in coming years. The fact is that any given ecosystem has a finite carrying capacity for the number of creatures it can support. I think we are close to reaching the carrying capacity for the number of humans the earth can support.

Quote:

---

The survival of the human race depends on its ability to find new homes elsewhere in the universe because there's an increasing risk that a disaster will destroy Earth, world-renowned physicist Stephen Hawking said today.

---

Hawking: Space exploration a necessity (Googled to find a news site with the story)

If we are wiped out then so be it, bollocks to worrying about anything.
The human race will evolve or die, but I doubt very much that any of us will live to see that day. I don't believe all the enviromental mentalists, I don't believe the religious nuts predicting the Apocolypse, I'm happy to watch the insanity that passes for people and live my life as I please.