Will the Sun set on the human race?: Can Homo sapiens survive - or is it doomed to extinction, a fate known to have overtaken up to 99 per cent of all life forms?
Credit: iStockphoto
Mass extinction, runaway genetic engineering and ecological shutdown: enough to keep you pondering. At least we no longer have to worry about the Bomb, or so we thought. Then Des Ball addressed the conference.
According to Ball, one of Australia's leading defence analysts, the prospects of a nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia are now fairly remote – although between them they still possess more than 15,000 nuclear weapons. "Nuclear war is in fact more likely between India and Pakistan than it ever was between the U.S. and the Soviet Union during the Cold War," he said.
On six occasions in the past few years, nuclear weapons have been a factor in conflicts between the two populous neighbours. Scenario planning undertaken in 2002 suggested an exchange of just two dozen 25-kilotonne nuclear weapons would result in as many as 35 million deaths.
"In the longer term, a nuclear war between India and China would be much more catastrophic," said Ball. "By 2015, China might have more than 1,000 nuclear weapons and India about 300. A nuclear war between them might then involve an exchange involving up to perhaps 500 warheads."
Fatalities in this situation would amount to some 250–300 million on each side. Unfortunately, these new nuclear powers have the weapons, but not the same 'assured second-strike capabilities' that the USSR and the USA had during the Cold War. This capability meant that with many weapons scattered around the country in underground silos and a series of layered, multiple command-and control systems, your enemy is aware you could retaliate if they struck first.
That makes your enemy think before starting anything. But India and China may have no such capability and, without it, "the pressures for pre-emptive or decapitation strikes can become compelling," said Ball.
The meeting of the elders carried on over two grey days. Most members of the audience were aware of the seriousness of the matters being discussed, and largely in agreement with the speakers. But there was a growing disquiet. There was so much that seemed so wrong, and yet the world carried on as if nothing was amiss. Where was the radical change to come from?
Now and then, there were shouts from impassioned audience members denouncing human overconsumption, or the failure of our political system to tackle these problems. But their cries, and the smattering of applause that sometimes followed, had a lonely, impotent ring to them. Is this how it will all end for us – with a whimper? Like the Easter Islanders, will we slide headlong into oblivion, knowing we could have done something – but didn't?
So indeed, back to the question of the conference: can we, as a species, survive? If not, what will knock us off? Will it be ecological breakdown or the Bomb, a new ice age or a greenhouse effect; will we simply run out of food or energy? Or maybe it will be a bit of all of these?
"I think Homo sapiens will survive," said Fenner. "But from about 2050, it'll be pretty tough going."
Raupauch cautioned: "We have just two more generations, at most, to fix the problem with our climate systems. We are aware of what we need to achieve to survive in the longer term, but the big trick is to identify the next steps."
The measure of human rationality
"they were either ignored … or they spoke up too late." or they were dealing with phenomena outside the current limits of their knowledge, ethics and reason. And that same process can be observed unfolding at this very moment.
Survival of the Human species
is our extinction really such a bad thing ?
we are merely the leaseholders of the Planet, and like any itinerant tenant that insists on constantly trying their hand at home improvements to the detriment of the entire building we will be duly evicted.
Once we are gone,the Earth will heal itself and another genus will be handed a new
tenancy agreement and invited to make something with the available resources, the third such tenant since the original leaseholders, the Dinosaurs, failed to make much more of it than was given them.
Homo Sapien or killer ape, which ever description you prefer, has made it this far despite himself and his baser instincts rule his heart, which are to kill and destroy, we just can't help ourselves, even our pitiful invention, the Sky Fairies, (aka religion), has in all its guises, failed to assuage us of our self destructive instincts.
Eternity beckons for our children, and yet even at the end we will pray to the sky fairies for guidance and forgiveness. "God Help us"
Time to move on....
Well i guess scifi is near Jump in our Ftl ships and pollute some other planet ....
It's an evolution our next step is it just some impossible evolution? What about already looking at the stars for new liveable planets how about some crazy projects about traveling faster then light?
Well guess what no matter what we will find a way lol trust me a chance to destroy another planet damn right .Its our instinct and im pertty sure if we see another type of species were gonna kick them out and conquer whatever is there. Yup thats us Humans .
survival of the human species.
I love this question. We humans have done what no other creature has been able to do on this planet. we have trancended evolution even though we are still a part of it. If the question is will we still look and have the same genetic makeup as today a million years from now, the answer has to be no. but barring a total cataclysmic event on the planet, humans will be around for a long time. what we need to do is ensure our survival by moving beyond our border of this blue marble and that, will definitly will ensure our survival. even if 99 percentof the population dies off that still leaves alot of people.lr vero beach florida
Human Survival...?????????????????
..."I am not sure which weapons world war III will be fought with, but world war IV, will be fought with rocks and sticks"
...Albert Einstein.
...2 more generations at most...
..."Raupauch cautioned: "We have just two more generations, at most, to fix the problem with our climate systems."...
So folks, if we are already up to gen-"Y".
Can anyone tell me what comes after "Z" ...????????
ON A COLD AUTUMNAL .......
O nosso mundo está mudando, e se os seres humanos, num futuro próximo, nao fazer nada em relação aos desmatamento, clima, efeito estufa, estaremos todos condenados num período de curto tempo... a florestas amazonas vai virar um deserto, as terras vão ficar cada vez mais estéril para a agricultura, num futuro próximo, não mais de 25 anos, o planeta terra vai ter sérias dificuldade de relacionamento com a natureza.
O homens do nosso planeta terra, não esta pensando na preservação, sim em como lucrar no desmatamento, em uso irracional da natureza, nos dias de hoje qualquer pessoas sempre comentam, o clima não esta como era a 25 anos atras. Temos que fazer algo agora, é já... para que as concequencias não chegue a todos...
boom and bust
the economic buble is good anlog to human race. Sustainable existance is a colonization of space. But that has a problem of limiting the gene pool and hence evolution. No doubt our selfish gene will kick in and we will devolve (or evolve) to dolphins and leave the planet by our own means."So long and thanks for all the fish" - ( Douglas Adams 1978).
Respect the digital watch and now ipod bla bla...
:-) Nick