• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

We're not going to make it, are we?

Do you think any of the below will wipe out humans in our lifetimes


  • Total voters
    92

IDKFA

I am Become Bilbo Baggins
"We're not gonna make it, are we? People, I mean"

This is a quote from Terminator 2: Judgement day. Young John Connor makes the remark to the T-800, who replies with "It's in your nature to destroy yourselves". I've been thinking about that scene recently and I can't shake the idea from my head that we're not going to make it and humanity might wipe itself out in my own lifetime. Let's look at the current problems facing the planet.

Climate Change

Please, no politics here. This topic has oddly become a political divide, but it really shouldn't be. Although it's true the climate does change naturally these natural changes occur over tens of thousands to millions of years due to factors like volcanic activity, changes in the Earth's orbit (Milankovitch cycles), and natural variations in greenhouse gases. However, the problem with modern climate change is that human activity is speeding up the process beyond what is natural and ecosystems cannot adapt to the change this quickly. The evidence that humans are having a negative impact is incontrovertible

This isn't the first time Co2 has caused a mass extinction event. At the end of the Triassic age a mass extinction event known as the central Atlantic magmatic province eruptions took place. These massive volcanic eruptions released trillions of tons of Co2 into the atmosphere wiping out 75% of all life. However, it should be noted that this happened over tens of thousands of years. Humanity has released around 2.5 trillion tons of Co2 since the start of the Industrial Revolution. That's roughly 100 times faster than the end-Triassic extinction event. See the problem?

The Sixth Great Extinction

Climate change and other human activities have other impacts on the planet beside it being a bit warmer. Pollution, acidification of the ocean and deforestation are all contributing to a sixth extinction event. This could have a devastating impact on humanity. For example, we're currently on the verge of a "insect apocalypse." due to the alarming declining numbers of insect species. I know most of us hate insects (I really don't like moths because they always seem to fly in my face), but their vital for pollination, providing a food source for other animals and natural pest control. Lots of studies have been done around the world (for example, a study found the UK has lost 50% of butterfly species since 1976), but whatever study you look at the decline is staggering. Flowering plants and global food crops depend on insects. Without them, we could see world wide food shortages, as well as the decline of other animals that feed off insects, which then causes a biodiversity collapse.

The Singularity.

At face value, this one seems like the stuff of Sci-fi, but it's a real threat that I feel nobody is really taking seriously. The other examples most people are aware of , so a brief overview here. The Singularity refers to a moment in time when AI becomes capable of improving itself autonomously, creating a feedback loop of ever-accelerating intelligence and technological advancement. Sounds cool, right? However, this could actually be a nightmare for humanity if we lose control. Imagine the AI is tasked with preventing global warming. It would have no inherent reason to prioritise humanity's survival unless explicitly programmed to do so, which means it's solution is to wipe out humanity. It may even come up with ways to do this humanely and in ways we wouldn't even notice until it was too late. A super intelligent AI would also have a complete understanding of human phycology and behaviours. It would know perfectly how to manipulate us in order to service it's own goals. Throw quantum computing into the mix and we have a being that is almost god-like from our current perspective.

Like I said, it sounds sci-fi, but it's not only a real possibilty, but one that could happen soon. Computer scientist and futurist Ray Kurzweil has predicated 2045, but as we're in a midst of a AI tech race it could be a little sooner than that and unless steps are put in place to protect humanity, reaching the Singularity could be humanity's last invention.

Do you think any of the above will mean we're going to wipe ourselves out within our lifetimes? Any other threats you can think of? ****EXCEPT FOR WAR - I was going to use this as an example, but it would mean bringing politics into the topic****

TL:DR notes
- We could be fucked in our lifetimes.
 

IFireflyl

Gold Member
Last edited:

FunkMiller

Member
Nothing would wipe out humanity in our lifetimes save nuclear armageddon or disease.

However, climate change will make living a lot less pleasant than it is now. Food sources will become more scarce. Migration will increase away from areas that will be too difficult to sustain a population. Air quality will fall. Health will suffer.

People need to stop thinking so much about 'wipeout' and start thinking more about 'this fucking sucks'. There will be billions of humans, but life will be generally really fucking unpleasant if we don't do something to mitigate the damage.
 
Last edited:

Hrk69

Member
The Singularity.

At face value, this one seems like the stuff of Sci-fi, but it's a real threat that I feel nobody is really taking seriously. The other examples most people are aware of , so a brief overview here. The Singularity refers to a moment in time when AI becomes capable of improving itself autonomously, creating a feedback loop of ever-accelerating intelligence and technological advancement. Sounds cool, right? However, this could actually be a nightmare for humanity if we lose control. Imagine the AI is tasked with preventing global warming. It would have no inherent reason to prioritise humanity's survival unless explicitly programmed to do so, which means it's solution is to wipe out humanity. It may even come up with ways to do this humanely and in ways we wouldn't even notice until it was too late. A super intelligent AI would also have a complete understanding of human phycology and behaviours. It would know perfectly how to manipulate us in order to service it's own goals. Throw quantum computing into the mix and we have a being that is almost god-like from our current perspective.
Godofwar GIF by PlayStation
 

FunkMiller

Member

Mistake

Member
Nothing would wipe out humanity in our lifetimes save nuclear armageddon or disease.

However, climate change will make living a lot less pleasant than it is now. Food sources will become more scarce. Migration will increase away from areas that will be too difficult to sustain a population. Air quality will fall. Health will suffer.

People need to stop thinking so much about 'wipeout' and start thinking more about 'this fucking sucks'. There will be billions of humans, but life will be generally really fucking unpleasant if we don't do something to mitigate the damage.
I estimate that we'll run out of fish right before I kick the bucket. Either from warming or overfishing. Everything will spiral down from there. Not too sure about air quality just yet, since plants love warmer weather and will grow more, except the ones we eat.

Also highly likely humanity takes a huge hit with us playing around with viruses. Always a chance someone somewhere will be resistant, like what happened with the plague, but things will collapse as they are with that much death
 

TransTrender

Gold Member
I'm still going with nuclear armageddon or disease.
The disease part would also come from humans fucking around and finding out.
 

poppabk

Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
Last edited:

IDKFA

I am Become Bilbo Baggins
None of the above. We aren't even close to being wiped out in the next 100 years or so.

Edit: An interesting read regarding climate change:


An interesting read indeed, but outdated. It's from a 1970s study that's based on climate science during that period. It's not relevant today as climate science has progressed a lot since the 1970s and the current science shows the impact of humanity activity on climate change is frankly not open to debate.

If we think about logically it makes sense. 70% of the suns energy is absorbed by Earth's surface and atmosphere, which in turn warms up the planet. However, the earths surface then emits this energy back into space, which then cools the planet. Co2 is a greenhouse gas that occurs naturally on earth. The Co2 (along with water vapour and other gases) is a greenhouse gas because it can absorb and re-radiate some of this energy back onto the earth. This complex system is why earth is just warm enough to be an ideal place for life. Without Co2, the earth would be too cold for life.

With that in mind, it's only logical to understand that pumping trillions of extra tons of Co2 into the earth would increase the warming. We have evidence of this happening before with past mass extinction events where trillions of tons were pumped out via volcanic activity over tens of thousands of years. We're doing the same, just on a much faster scale.
 

Dacvak

No one shall be brought before our LORD David Bowie without the true and secret knowledge of the Photoshop. For in that time, so shall He appear.
Time for a remaster? Or should we go full remake with this one, space babies, hyper intelligent sponges?
Man I think we should go back to the basics: 2D universe.
 

IDKFA

I am Become Bilbo Baggins
Kurzweil was right and the singularity is inevitable.

It is going to happen. The questions now are when and if we'll be prepared for it.
I dont even think about tomorrow until it arrives, never mind years from now.

And that's one of my concerns. Most people are not concerned with these and other threats. Really we should be, but a lot of us think these are problems for future generations.
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
We've done a lot of damage to the planet, yes, and continue to do so. AI is also progressing rapidly to the point where we're spinning up nuclear reactors to power AI systems. Don't know what the future will hold, but 50 years from now might become unrecognizable on a number of levels.
 

mitch1971

Member
And that's one of my concerns. Most people are not concerned with these and other threats. Really we should be, but a lot of us think these are problems for future generations.
I have enough to think about within my family circle, than to be thinking about those beyond it.
 
Last edited:
We've done a lot of damage to the planet, yes, and continue to do so. AI is also progressing rapidly to the point where we're spinning up nuclear reactors to power AI systems. Don't know what the future will hold, but 50 years from now might become unrecognizable on a number of levels.
There are many active projects to try and reverse climate change using chemical means, as long as we don't pull a Snowpiercer and accidentally freeze the planet we still have a great deal of runway to reverse the damage we are doing and will do

I'm not worried about climate change, the Terminator Scenario where we invent an AI that tries to exterminate us is a more likely scenario than slowly suffocating from global warming

Also we have a quiet microplastics crisis combined with chemicals in the environment which is causing a crash in male sperm counts worldwide, so the Children of Men Scenario is also more likely in the near term than some climate change issue
 

Trogdor1123

Member
For the singularity I don’t think it makes sense to eliminate humans. It would be easier for them to just let us become subject to all of our base desires. Nuclear attack is too risk for the ai itself and an ai could developed to fight the other. It’s too much risk. Why fight when you can just use us against ourselves and give us the tiniest amount of their computational time.
 

IFireflyl

Gold Member
That paper is from 1998.

Here's NASA's up to date page on climate change, with references: https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

An editorial by one guy with scant references. Not exactly what I would bet the survival of the human race on. Doubt anything major will happen in the next couple of lifetimes but we aren't on a good track.

It was still interesting regardless. I added a second link as well that is good food for thought. We are nowhere near extinction-level events.
 

jason10mm

Gold Member
I think in 100 years we will be down to just a few billion humans living on earth. While it would be nice if that was through controlled, voluntary brith control, I think it will be largely through mass famine in third world countries and reproductive apathy/infertility in first world ones.

But if we can avoid too many toxic/nuclear spills then once we drop down in population a lot of the earth should recover.
 
"no politics". Two Doritos later: "climate change is incontrovertible" , an apocalyptic prophecy 100% based on politics, the same as the demographic inferno and many others

I'm old enough to remember how the Earth would be cooked after the ozone layer disappeared 20 years ago. It's still there. Nobody cares anymore. Every few years we recycle our prophecies so the sheep keep clapping at 7 PM.

BTW, there was already an apocalyptic event several centuries ago, when a supervolcano darkened the atmosphere for almost two years, pretty much like the impact of an asteroid.


Men won't kill humankind. Only a major natural event or a bigger asteroid would.
 

offtopic

He measures in centimeters
As someone who teaches environmental science and am well familiar with all the issues (which are serious!), I see the threat of nuclear war under unqualified/narcissistic leadership (from either party or country) and unregulated AI as the biggest threats to humanity over the next few decades. The movement towards anti-science makes those more plausible.
 

FunkMiller

Member
"no politics". Two Doritos later: "climate change is incontrovertible" , an apocalyptic prophecy 100% based on politics, the same as the demographic inferno and many others

You've been banned, but if you read this I would strongly encourage you to engage with the wealth of independently verified evidence that exists which proves man made climate change is a real and tangible thing. Multiple organisations and scientists, in both public and private sectors, from many countries have all come to the same conclusion based on their extensive research - which is peer reviewed, independently examined, and based in the scientific method.

It has nothing to do with politics, except in the minds of those who ignore the evidence.
 
Last edited:

Mistake

Member
You've been banned, but if you read this I would strongly encourage you to engage with the wealth of independently verified evidence that exists which proves man made climate change is a real and tangible thing. Multiple organisations and scientists, in both public and private sectors, from many countries have all come to the same conclusion based on their extensive research - which is peer reviewed, independently examined, and based in the scientific method.

It has nothing to do with politics, except in the minds of those who ignore the evidence.
I think there are valid criticisms to this topic, with the biggest being how lucrative it is. While there may not be a complete consensus, I think it's fair to say climate change falls under "most likely." You can't pump tons of CO2 into the air and have zero consequences. While the earth probably doesn't give a shit, and maybe even likes it, people don't, and that's the problem. There's also many net benefits for us to gain as a species if we act under the assumption that it's true.

Anyone have some favorite science channels to share?
 

kevboard

Member
I don't think climate change will be something that actually destroys humanity... at worst it's gonna be really shitty for different reasons across the globe, but mankind can survive a lof of stuff, and has survived worse conditions.

nuclear war or a catastrophic asteroid impact are the 2 most probable end time scenarios I think.
 

Shubh_C63

Member
The Great Filter

Humans eats through Earth resources and finds out it is infact really really hard to setup Mars bases or Moon mineral factories. Minor conflicts ensues, pollution rises, earth population gets reduced or gets humbled the third time and we live/die cozily on our blue perfect planet never to venture the great beyond.
 

kevboard

Member
The Great Filter

Humans eats through Earth resources and finds out it is infact really really hard to setup Mars bases or Moon mineral factories. Minor conflicts ensues, pollution rises, earth population gets reduced or gets humbled the third time and we live/die cozily on our blue perfect planet never to venture the great beyond.

it's actually not that hard to creat settlements on Mars. it's all about budget and manpower. if all the biggest nations on earth worked together, with a near infinite budget, with minimal restrictions in terms of testing and test flights... we would have settlers on Mars within a decade.

but that's not how the world (currently) works 🤷
 

Hrk69

Member
We'll be fine. I honestly don't understand the doom and gloom.

The future is going to be amazing, in my opinion.

Just curiously, why are you guys so negative about it?
This might sound strange. I can’t help but feel like humanity has already experienced its peak and things will only decline

It feels like the systems we rely on are becoming increasingly fragile and instead of addressing the root problems, we’re either ignoring them or making them worse

And I feel a deep sense of unease about the future, especially in light of the many challenges humanity is currently facing

It triggers anxiety and a sense of helplessness. I hate it and I wish I could be more positive

Maybe I need someone to talk me out of this mess I created in my head and help me find some clarity
 

kevboard

Member

we have space crafts that can fly there, we have computers that can navigate there... we have space crafts that can sustain human life for long durations of time.

we have all the components needed, just not anyone who is willing to give a massive budget and massive amounts of manpower towards that goal, as it will have limited potential to make any profits from such an endeavour. that's the limiting factor here... the incentive...
 

Hrk69

Member
we have space crafts that can fly there, we have computers that can navigate there... we have space crafts that can sustain human life for long durations of time.

we have all the components needed, just not anyone who is willing to give a massive budget and massive amounts of manpower towards that goal, as it will have limited potential to make any profits from such an endeavour. that's the limiting factor here... the incentive...
Your first point already highlights a glaring issue: spacecraft don't fly in space.
 

chakadave

Member
This might sound strange. I can’t help but feel like humanity has already experienced its peak and things will only decline

It feels like the systems we rely on are becoming increasingly fragile and instead of addressing the root problems, we’re either ignoring them or making them worse

And I feel a deep sense of unease about the future, especially in light of the many challenges humanity is currently facing

It triggers anxiety and a sense of helplessness. I hate it and I wish I could be more positive

Maybe I need someone to talk me out of this mess I created in my head and help me find some clarity
Yes I would find someone to talk to.

Also if the co2 theory is true then the earth will warm, plants will grow better and more places will be hospitable.

Co2 isn’t going to cause a world wide cataclysmic event.

Even if we wipe out all the coast lines in and I stand there will be thousands or maybe millions who can survive because of hunter gatherer skills. and migrating to more habitable places.

Nuclear winter is wag more likely to ruin this planet.
 

Hrk69

Member
There's no atmosphere in space to provide lift

So, spacecrafts use engines or thrusters that expel gas or other materials to create the necessary force for movement. This allows them to travel through space, even though there's no air

For example: birds wouldn’t be able to fly in space because space is a vacuum. There is no air to generate lift for flight
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom