-
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?
- Thread starter IDKFA
- Start date
Guileless
Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
It's already happening. Modern people don't reproduce themselves.
In South Korea—the country with the world’s lowest TFR, at 0.7—the number of babies born in 2100 is on track to be 93 to 98 percent lower than the number of babies born this year. No disease or invading army has ever managed to destroy a country so thoroughly, and the word that springs to my mind, when contemplating such an event, is “biblical.”
Ovek
7Member7
Pretty much.
Guileless
Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
If you are in communication with these gnostic entities, can you put in a good word for a AAAAA Ridge Racer reboot to tide us over?
SJRB
Gold Member
Computer says "no"
Azelover
Titanic was called the Ship of Dreams, and it was. It really was.
I havent read the whole text, so forgive me if I'm dealing with something that was already addressed.
Yes humanity is going extinct, but not in the way that we normally think. Environmental changes will force us to transform into another species. We will blend with technology.
Remember the Borg from Startrek? That's our future in my opinion. However it will take a long long time. Possibly beyond the next generation.
It's gonna happen because the powers that be have wanted it to happen for thousands of years..
We were driven to be kings of the jungle by the inception of tools and the use of them. Now we are going to be enslaved by our tools..
Yes humanity is going extinct, but not in the way that we normally think. Environmental changes will force us to transform into another species. We will blend with technology.
Remember the Borg from Startrek? That's our future in my opinion. However it will take a long long time. Possibly beyond the next generation.
It's gonna happen because the powers that be have wanted it to happen for thousands of years..
We were driven to be kings of the jungle by the inception of tools and the use of them. Now we are going to be enslaved by our tools..
Ulysses 31
Member
99% of all known species have gone extinct.
IDKFA
I am Become Bilbo Baggins
I don’t know how I feels about that idea. I understand humans blending more with tech, but becoming like the Borg, a species that is more machine than human? No thanks.
Eh?
FunkMiller
Member
The threat of nuclear war was mitigated by our actions, as was Y2K. There was never evidence of a serious threat of fossil fuels running out, or over population collapsing civilisation.
You’re making comparisons that don’t fit to make yourself feel better about the effects of climate change.
And climate change is not a total doomsday scenario. It’s not that it’s going to kill off humanity completely. It’s that it’s going to make the lives of everyone immeasurably worse. It’s not an apocalypse. It’s the slow and inexorable decline of human comfort, security and safety.
The media? The media have nothing to do with the mountains of scientific data that prove climate change is a real thing. Get off social media and TV, and go look up the facts. They’re not hard to find.
Humdinger
Gold Member
Tell that to all the people peddling that fear-mongering decades ago.
And you're making attributions about my internal motivations to discount what I'm saying. And I've never felt bad about climate change in the first place, so I have no need to "make myself feel better" about it.
I've heard that one before. Many times.
I've "looked up the facts," thanks bud. And your patronizing tone isn't helping your cause - just making you sound like an alarmist.
The media is absolutely complicit. If you think they aren't, you're simply naive. And I didn't even mention all the financial incentives that go well beyond media and into the research itself.
Last edited:
FunkMiller
Member
No. You haven't. Because if you had, you would know that your claims that I'm being an 'alarmist' aren't accurate. And the fact you spout the usual 'it's all the media's fault!' and 'the scientists are all paid off!' schtick that climate change deniers always trot out proves to me that you're the naive one. Or at least someone who's prepared to accept the word of the media you like to consume and the politicians you like to listen to, without doing any real due diligence.
So, I guess you're going to now link to the few articles out there that back up your opinion, while simultaneously ignoring the other several hundred that don't?
Last edited:
Humdinger
Gold Member
I'm not a climate change denier, but keep making patronizing assumptions about me. Resorting to stereotypes and slurs is a sure sign of wisdom.
FunkMiller
Member
Sorry, but I've run out of patience with people who just quote the same old stuff back that they've seen on TV and social media.
Let's keep it civil and respectful in here, guys.
Runaway greenhouse effect is a possible proper doomsday scenario, yes. Venus used to be Earth-like. We do need human interventions in some capacity to undo the human damage before things spiral out of control. We only have one home and a lot of damage has been done.
That being said, there are various people in the climate movement, prominent people, who are in a permanent state of emotional distress about the impending end of the world. And there are others who welcome the end of the world as a return to nature fantasy. And others who believe they should be in charge so that they can impose enormous taxes and restrictions on all of society for the greater good, as long as it reduces energy consumption. People who believe that they should shame everyone else for not doing enough. Those subsets of people are all a bit ridiculous and undermine the credibility of the issue, unfortunately. But the underlying issue is a genuine one.
As technology continues to improve, and that technology moves downstream to developing countries, we can hopefully turn the tide on CO2 emissions. If that's not sufficient, we'll need to improve carbon capture efforts in addition, and it's looking like we'll need to do so given the current projections. But it's not an unsolvable problem.
Runaway greenhouse effect is a possible proper doomsday scenario, yes. Venus used to be Earth-like. We do need human interventions in some capacity to undo the human damage before things spiral out of control. We only have one home and a lot of damage has been done.
That being said, there are various people in the climate movement, prominent people, who are in a permanent state of emotional distress about the impending end of the world. And there are others who welcome the end of the world as a return to nature fantasy. And others who believe they should be in charge so that they can impose enormous taxes and restrictions on all of society for the greater good, as long as it reduces energy consumption. People who believe that they should shame everyone else for not doing enough. Those subsets of people are all a bit ridiculous and undermine the credibility of the issue, unfortunately. But the underlying issue is a genuine one.
As technology continues to improve, and that technology moves downstream to developing countries, we can hopefully turn the tide on CO2 emissions. If that's not sufficient, we'll need to improve carbon capture efforts in addition, and it's looking like we'll need to do so given the current projections. But it's not an unsolvable problem.
FunkMiller
Member
The likes of Thunberg haven’t helped at all, that much is for certain. Instead of calmly and rationally taking their time to explain the scientific evidence, they thrash around and scream like children. This is more than enough of an excuse for people who want to deny the whole thing to look away and not properly engage.
As you say, not unsolvable. But requires having adults in the room.
Oh dear…
Last edited:
Humdinger
Gold Member
Right, boss.
I actually don't care to argue about the issue. It's not worth it. Just more hot air expelled into the atmosphere.
That's a problem, isn't it, once you realize the world is run by maniacs, demagogues, ideologues, narcissists, and idiots.
FunkMiller
Member
That's a problem, isn't it, once you realize the world is run by maniacs, demagogues, ideologues, narcissists, and idiots.
IDKFA
I am Become Bilbo Baggins
Correct. Not only Thunberg, but also the Just Stop Oil group who until recently, would protest by walking slowly on main roads in London and other UK cities, glue themselves to roads, and close off motorways. They wanted to get the public on their side, but instead they just pissed off the general population by causing mass disruption. Stopping the average joe from getting to work, or taking their sick child to the hospital did nothing to help their cause.
Mihos
Gold Member
I was flying through a school zone in my car this morning. No lift required
Pegasus Actual
Member
Guys I have an idea, let's get some cans of tomato soup, fly to Paris, head to the Louvre... AND FUCK SHIT UP
That'll fix it.
That'll fix it.
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
To be fair if you question why children were coached to pointlessly hide under desks to protect them from a nuclear attack, you might come to the conclusion that the government were attempting to reassure the public that something could be done to protect themselves in the event of an escalation in cold war hostilities.
The Y2K bug that came to nothing only did so because lots of engineers worked really hard once it was discovered to ensure the bug could be dealt with.
If you compare those things to climate change what you've got is people protecting themselves against a bomb that didn't drop and people wondering if their spreadsheets would be broken on new year's day, versus measurable things that are happening. It's a bit different.
Last edited:
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
This as well, (sorry, meant to quote it in my last post) isn't applicable here. The media constantly downplays and under reports on the severity of the situation and a number of outlets actively rubbish things, either by mocking protesters, or by platforming fringe scientists who go against the scientific community's consensus.
Last edited:
TheMan
Member
Will climate change wipe out humanity? I doubt it. Will many many people die from all sorts of issues like weather related events, fresh water shortages, and starvation? Probably. Poor people in developing countries will surely be hit the hardest but all will suffer. Times are going to be tough for a looong time unless someone saves us with tech like magical CO2 scrubbers.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
Even if carbon capture is feasible at the scale we need it to be, that carbon still needs to be stored for millions of years to offset the burning of fossil fuels.
After all, that's exactly what fossil fuels are: carbon that's been stored underground for millions of years.
So the situation is still dire even with storage. Forests store lots of carbon, but they also burn down every few decades or centuries, releasing all of that carbon right back into the atmosphere.
If we are to succeed by capturing carbon, we'll need to figure out a way to store it so that it cannot be accidentally released by future generations, and that's a tall order.
Perhaps eventually we'll start building cities made of diamond. Who knows?
My personal utopian fantasy is not to try storing it indefinitely but rather ship it to Mars in order to thicken its atmosphere and facilitate a beneficial greenhouse effect that turns the planet more liveable. I won't be here to see any of that but it's nice to dream.
After all, that's exactly what fossil fuels are: carbon that's been stored underground for millions of years.
So the situation is still dire even with storage. Forests store lots of carbon, but they also burn down every few decades or centuries, releasing all of that carbon right back into the atmosphere.
If we are to succeed by capturing carbon, we'll need to figure out a way to store it so that it cannot be accidentally released by future generations, and that's a tall order.
Perhaps eventually we'll start building cities made of diamond. Who knows?
My personal utopian fantasy is not to try storing it indefinitely but rather ship it to Mars in order to thicken its atmosphere and facilitate a beneficial greenhouse effect that turns the planet more liveable. I won't be here to see any of that but it's nice to dream.
Last edited:
ForAcademicPurposes
Member
MaestroMike
Gold Member
religious people still do they'll always be around east asian countries aren't really religious they're going to have labor shortage problems
America’s Growing Religious-Secular Fertility Divide
Birth rates in the United States are near record lows, but not for everyone. Indeed, under the surface of the fertility decline since 2007 is a little noticed fact: fertility has declined much more among nonreligious Americans than among the devout. Data from the National Survey of Family Growth...
ifstudies.org
Last edited:
bender
What time is it?
FunkMiller
Member
Except that house is not on the ocean, it's at the edge of a salt water pond, and is a fair bit above sea level. Metres, apparently.
Also Obama is rich as fuck. They won't be the people suffering!
Edit: here are pictures of it. Up a slope.
Also, also... since when did American politicians become the gold standard for understanding, and being a barometer for, science?
Last edited:
RickSanchez
Member
Just what i've read around the internet. here's an example search result: https://www.bing.com/search?q=are+earth's+fresh+water+sources+depleting+?&form=ANNH01&refig=fbb6dec891834355a7e8d7b5d5cdcea3&pc=U531
I did say it was an extreme possibility, but it is conceivable. here's why (and if my science here is wrong, feel free to correct me):
The water cycle on the planet runs as follows: Sea water evaporates into clouds. Clouds go over land and drop rain or snow. Rain or snow turn into glaciers and rivers, which supply fresh water. Used water runs back into the sea. Now, because of rising atmospheric temperatures, more sea water evaporates, but less of it precipitates into snow and rain. Which means we are still losing the same amount of water to the seas but getting less of it back to replenish our glaciers, rivers and lakes. Overall, this results in a gradual but real decline in fresh water reserves. To some extent this has been documented by the rise in sea levels, depleting glaciers and shrinking polar ice caps.
On a side note, i believe this fresh water scarcity is what causes the apocalypse in the Mad Max universe. That's why everything is shown as a big desert. Water ran out. Oceans dried up.
Last edited:
Madserb2023
Member
As I can't use war, I think that we will likely just go the way of most extinct species and just stop reproducing until our numbers are so low that any significant diseases will clear the rest of us off. Even though I don't personally believe in Christianity, the meak inheriting the Earth is strangely coming to pass because the wealthier parts of the world will die out first.
Guileless
Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
Pres. Obama is certainly rich, but not rich enough that he can piss away tens of millions of dollars on bad real estate deals. He's not just an American politician, he was the President of the United States who had access to all government intelligence and studies about climate change and quickly invested a sizable amount of his net worth on coastal property. If the worst case scenarios were likely, I don't think he would have done that.Except that house is not on the ocean, it's at the edge of a salt water pond, and is a fair bit above sea level. Metres, apparently.
Also Obama is rich as fuck. They won't be the people suffering!
Edit: here are pictures of it. Up a slope.
Also, also... since when did American politicians become the gold standard for understanding, and being a barometer for, science?
John Marston
GAF's very own treasure goblin
Damn you for putting that Twisted Sister song in my head with your title 
And no we're all going to be fine short term.
I do feel for our members who have kids & grandkids though.
And no we're all going to be fine short term.
I do feel for our members who have kids & grandkids though.
BlackTron
Member
Lads lads
Problem solved
What happens when Ultron invades the waterproof Kindle factory instead of the Vibranium warehouse?
Last edited:
Guileless
Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
Nothing's stopping this train.
With Trump preparing to take office, young people are seeking more birth control, vasectomies
Lunarorbit
Member
Once the Atlantic ocean's upwelling and water movement from the equator to the poles is broken we are fucked.
I'm not sure rising temps will drive oceanic moisture into the air that then won't come down as rain SOMEWHERE, the humidity tolerance of the atmosphere is finite.
It's really a matter of demand. Especially in the first world, we tend to use fresh, drinkable, water for EVERYTHING, including pooping into it. Rainfall can't keep up with use, we are draining aquifers and the glacial melt lakes, and in general removing standing bodies of water rather than creating more of them. Here, like in many things, the US has a HUGE advantage due to the Great Lakes, which harbor a massive % of the worlds fresh water, something like 20%!
Now with cloud seeding I imagine any increased evaporation moisture could be "directed" to areas prepared to capture the water. With sufficient effort I bet you could redirect quite a bit of oceanic water to land reservoirs. Obviously desalination works as well but that's very energy intensive and moving water uphill away from coasts is very hard. In general though, we ought to be focusing on conserving fresh water deposits that currently exist, especially any depending on glacial melt that isn't recovering between seasons, and transitioning to far less water intensive agricultural and residential uses.
I read somewhere that beavers (their dams more precisely) were responsible for trapping MASSIVE amounts of water inland, in fact lots of areas of North America (and presumably Europe waaaaay back when they had any) were much more boggy than they are now for this reason.
Kraz
Member
Increase in global temp does increase the amount of water the atmosphere can hold.
Steamy Relationships: How Atmospheric Water Vapor Amplifies Earth's Greenhouse Effect - NASA Science
Water vapor is Earth’s most abundant greenhouse gas. It’s responsible for about half of Earth’s greenhouse effect — the process that occurs when gases in Earth’s atmosphere trap the Sun’s heat. Greenhouse gases keep our planet livable. Without them, Earth’s surface temperature would be about 59...
science.nasa.gov
Water being not just drawn from the ocean makes trees and land dry out more. The severity and frequency of forest fires will continue to increase with rising global atmosphere temps.
Lionel Richie
Member
Do we, as a species, deserve to make it anyway? And I don't mean it as casual nihilism, it's just that life itself is a continuing process in which we're only a part of. That process will continue for a very, very long time after we're not here. What makes us different from other species that went extinct?
We're just monkeys floating endlessly in a big rock in the middle of nowhere. So enjoy it by being as much of a mammal as possible, pleasure yourself however you want and don't get too attached to the future. The future is not for us.
We're just monkeys floating endlessly in a big rock in the middle of nowhere. So enjoy it by being as much of a mammal as possible, pleasure yourself however you want and don't get too attached to the future. The future is not for us.
ThatStupidLion
Member
They all would reduce human numbers to a small fraction of what it once was… but i dont think any will make the human race extinct. I guess full on nuclear war may but war isnt an option, plus always a chance those remote island tribes survive that.
machines would keep us around for some reason I think. Not saying it would be pleasant, but theyd find a use for us.
I think humans could adapt to anything other than mass radiation.
machines would keep us around for some reason I think. Not saying it would be pleasant, but theyd find a use for us.
I think humans could adapt to anything other than mass radiation.
Last edited:
Kraz
Member
for the first time in the history of the planet, a species has the technology to prevent its own extinction. - U.S. President, Armageddon
Myopic animalistic self-interested instinct is likely to contribute. Many, many people are living extravagantly, and want more extravagance, not austerity that effects them, they don't want to moderate. Will make any excuse not to. Instinctive urges may contribute to filtering humanity, if it's not overcome by considered thought.
Latest Joe Rogan with the two "archeology dedunker" guys is related to this. The idea that polar shifts can trigger widespread cataclysms and knock civilization back a few steps is an interesting one. What COULD we do, realistically? Build a series of....arks in various places and hope at least one can weather a period of chaos and bring knowledge and technology to the other side? Accept that New Zealand will be the cradle of civilization circa 2700 AD
The singularity doesn't worry me much. Any AI capable and interested in destroying humanity would be too dependent on our cooperation anyway. Its the AI that slooooowly molds us into nice complaint consumers while ensuring its continued support by making sure it is ESSENTIAL to our receiving food and entertainment that really worries me. It's the Matrix....
The singularity doesn't worry me much. Any AI capable and interested in destroying humanity would be too dependent on our cooperation anyway. Its the AI that slooooowly molds us into nice complaint consumers while ensuring its continued support by making sure it is ESSENTIAL to our receiving food and entertainment that really worries me. It's the Matrix....
Similar threads
- Poll