The Survival/Extinction of Humanity

• Hiccup wrote on 2011-07-14 10:04
  Cause we all know what real zombies are like.
  
  

  (Reuters) – If Aubrey de Grey’s predictions are right, the first person who will live to see their 150th birthday has already been born. And the first person to live for 1,000 years could be less than 20 years younger.
  A biomedical gerontologist and chief scientist of a foundation dedicated to longevity research, de Grey reckons that within his own lifetime doctors could have all the tools they need to “cure” aging — banishing diseases that come with it and extending life indefinitely.
  “I’d say we have a 50/50 chance of bringing aging under what I’d call a decisive level of medical control within the next 25 years or so,” de Grey said in an interview before delivering a lecture at Britain’s Royal Institution academy of science.
  “And what I mean by decisive is the same sort of medical control that we have over most infectious diseases today.”
  De Grey sees a time when people will go to their doctors for regular “maintenance,” which by then will include gene therapies, stem cell therapies, immune stimulation and a range of other advanced medical techniques to keep them in good shape.
  De Grey lives near Cambridge University where he won his doctorate in 2000 and is chief scientific officer of the non-profit California-based SENS (Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence) Foundation, which he co-founded in 2009.
  He describes aging as the lifelong accumulation of various types of molecular and cellular damage throughout the body.
  “The idea is to engage in what you might call preventative geriatrics, where you go in to periodically repair that molecular and cellular damage before it gets to the level of abundance that is pathogenic,” he explained.
  CHALLENGE
  Exactly how far and how fast life expectancy will increase in the future is a subject of some debate, but the trend is clear. An average of three months is being added to life expectancy every year at the moment and experts estimate there could be a million centenarians across the world by 2030.
  To date, the world’s longest-living person on record lived to 122 and in Japan alone there were more than 44,000 centenarians in 2010.
  Some researchers say, however, that the trend toward longer lifespan may falter due to an epidemic of obesity now spilling over from rich nations into the developing world.

• Kingofrunes wrote on 2011-07-14 11:04
  The problem with longevity is that if Humans keep reproducing and we aren't dying. We're going to run out of space on earth and quickly use up all our resources.
  
  You guys do realize there is only a finite amount of non-renewable resources right? There's also a limit to how quickly renewable resources can renew themselves.
  
  Get too many humans on Earth and we spell our own doom. Death and Disease is a necessary mechanism to combat this cause you aren't going to be able to stop Human sex drive.
• EndlessDreams wrote on 2011-07-14 17:20

  Quote from Kingofrunes;512040:

  The problem with longevity is that if Humans keep reproducing and we aren't dying. We're going to run out of space on earth and quickly use up all our resources.
  
  You guys do realize there is only a finite amount of non-renewable resources right? There's also a limit to how quickly renewable resources can renew themselves.
  
  Get too many humans on Earth and we spell our own doom. Death and Disease is a necessary mechanism to combat this cause you aren't going to be able to stop Human sex drive.

  
  
  Not true at all. People always believe that our Earth is overpopulated, and that their resources is going to disappear, but that never happened. New technologies were created to use new resources. After all, nuclear power never existed two centuries ago. New technologies also changed the way we use the old resources much more efficiently as well.
  
  There is always people who die to accidents and crimes. It is an everyday scenario. However, highly developed countries tend to have a much lower birth rate than the developing countries.
• Mama wrote on 2011-07-14 17:57

  Quote from EndlessDreams;512207:

  Not true at all. People always believe that our Earth is overpopulated, and that their resources is going to disappear, but that never happened. New technologies were created to use new resources.

  
  
  er, I hope you aren't suggesting that humans aren't destroying natural resources, or overfishing, or destroying rainforests, among many others..
  I'm not suggesting that the earth is overpopulated, but humans currently destroy far more than they create.
  not to mention that scientists are currently flipping their **** over the ocean seemingly being in a crises, but media is not paying attention. If everyone lived like an American, we'd be in serious trouble.
  
  I do agree that there will always be water, since it cannot be destroyed. But that's an economic problem, not a scarcity problem.
• Sumpfkraut wrote on 2011-07-14 18:13

  Quote from Mama;512247:

  If everyone lived like an American, calling our situation serious trouble would be considered a cynical minimisation.

  
  
  Dats roite.
  

  I do agree that there will always be water, since it cannot be destroyed. But that's an economic problem, not a scarcity problem.

  
  But that's not really the problem as far as the oceans go. The probem is the ecosystem.
• Mama wrote on 2011-07-15 04:03

  Quote from Sumpfkraut;512265:

  Dats roite.
  
  But that's not really the problem as far as the oceans go. The probem is the ecosystem.

  
  
  serious trouble a minimisation? My imagination must be shallow.
  I suppose there's hope as long as we don't completely destroy nature's ability to sustain life. Then that's just suicide.
  
  *looks in the direction we're going*
  
  eep..
  
  well, at least there is stuff like those vaults of frozen seeds in case of global disaster.
• Kingofrunes wrote on 2011-07-16 10:59
  I still don't think the Human race is as invincible as you guys are making it sound.
  
  Sure we have been around for awhile and keep advancing.
  
  Where there's a beginning, there's an end. Weither that end is at the end of Life of the Universe or something totally unexpected.
  
  Human life is still frail nonetheless. It's so easy for a Human to die. Even if we manage to not age. There's still death due to violence, and thousands of other ways.
  
  There are so many ways in which you can kill a human.
• Marie wrote on 2011-07-16 17:58

  Quote from Kingofrunes;514383:

  I still don't think the Human race is as invincible as you guys are making it sound.
  
  Sure we have been around for awhile and keep advancing.
  
  Where there's a beginning, there's an end. Weither that end is at the end of Life of the Universe or something totally unexpected.
  
  Human life is still frail nonetheless. It's so easy for a Human to die. Even if we manage to not age. There's still death due to violence, and thousands of other ways.
  
  There are so many ways in which you can kill a human.

  
  
  The thing is though, humans are capable of reproducing at a pretty rapid rate.
  
  And that, even if a disease/astroid/natural disaster wipes out 99% of the human population, there would still be millions alive, and lets just hope that those millions are actually knowledgeable people who are capable of recovering information and from there continue to advance civilization.
• Sumpfkraut wrote on 2011-07-17 01:20

  Quote from Marie;514639:

  The thing is though, humans are capable of reproducing at a pretty rapid rate.

  
  
  Nah, they're way too stuck up and prudish.
• Mama wrote on 2011-07-17 17:05

  Quote from Sumpfkraut;515071:

  Nah, they're way too stuck up and prudish.

  
  
  you underestimate the power of the environment on behaviour!
  
  unless the meteor leaves only the asexuals and homosexuals.
• EndlessDreams wrote on 2011-07-19 05:23

  Quote from Mama;512247:

  er, I hope you aren't suggesting that humans aren't destroying natural resources, or overfishing, or destroying rainforests, among many others..
  I'm not suggesting that the earth is overpopulated, but humans currently destroy far more than they create.
  not to mention that scientists are currently flipping their **** over the ocean seemingly being in a crises, but media is not paying attention. If everyone lived like an American, we'd be in serious trouble.
  
  I do agree that there will always be water, since it cannot be destroyed. But that's an economic problem, not a scarcity problem.

  
  
  Yes, we are "destroying" (using) natural resources that are useful to us. Humans can't really destroy the environment as in making it unsuitable for all present and future lifeforms in that area. The only thing we can really hope to do is to change it. Sure, the new environment maybe bad for us, but the Earth will still move on. Evolution will replace niches with new lifeforms eventually.
  
  Even without rain forests, the world will still move on. There will still be life. Even without fishes in the sea (which is kind of hard to do since the ocean is kind of big), life will still go on.
  
  Technically, overfishing is a bigger problem around Japan than in the US since they like their fishes so much. So if everyone lived like Americans, there won't be overfishing as much... but will create other American related issues...
  
  When environment changes, but people tend to usually adapt around it as well.
  
  It is pure arrogance to think that humans can actually completely destroy an environment, similar to the pure arrogance shown by some people thinking that some creator created the Earth for the sole benefit for humans.
  
  The Earth has gone through more than a billion year in states far more hostile to life than its current form. Humans are nothing compared to such hostility. The only thing that threatens all life on Earth is the Sun when it consumes Earth near the end of its life.
  
  George Carlin explains my point really well.
  [video=youtube;eScDfYzMEEw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw[/video]
• Mama wrote on 2011-07-19 15:38
  I'm well aware.
  
  It's sad that people are using george carlin as an excuse to continue consumption unheeded;
  the fact that a few species will inevitably survive whatever humans do is little consolation if we exterminate most of them including ourselves.
  
  

  It is pure arrogance to think that humans can actually completely destroy an environment

  
  nature has gone through worse things, and it can heal itself, even if it takes hundreds or millions of years. I do not doubt that we can completely poison an environment and render it unhospitable and useless, making it impossible for people to live off the land. We're doing more than ruining ecosystems- we are ruining it's ability to sustain human life. Just like how the Republicans in charge of america won't stop until they kill the economy completely, humans won't stop until they end up killing nature's ability to sustain them; effectively killing themselves. Humans are such pathological beings.
  
  edit: found something funny!
  don't get your environmental wisdom from a dead comedian.
• EndlessDreams wrote on 2011-07-19 18:13

  Quote from Mama;518148:

  I'm well aware.
  
  It's sad that people are using george carlin as an excuse to continue consumption unheeded;
  the fact that a few species will inevitably survive whatever humans do is little consolation if we exterminate most of them including ourselves.
  
  
  nature has gone through worse things, and it can heal itself, even if it takes hundreds or millions of years. I do not doubt that we can completely poison an environment and render it unhospitable and useless, making it impossible for people to live off the land. We're doing more than ruining ecosystems- we are ruining it's ability to sustain human life. Just like how the Republicans in charge of america won't stop until they kill the economy completely, humans won't stop until they end up killing nature's ability to sustain them; effectively killing themselves. Humans are such pathological beings.
  
  edit: found something funny!
  don't get your environmental wisdom from a dead comedian.

  
  
  It isn't a few species, it is many species will survive. The ecosystem can live without humans. It just that humans can't live without their particular ecosystems.
  
  If you meant ecosystems that involves humans, then yea, we can ruin it when we make it impossible for humans to live. However, there are many ecosystems that still have life in it while it is impossible for humans to live at the same time. (Deserts, nuclear zones of radiation, deep under the ocean, extremely cold areas, etc.)
  
  As for the Republican part, they most likely will reverse their positions when they can get a Republican president in the White House again. Typical politics, which has nothing to do with the rest of the thread.
  
  It is a fact that species do disappear over time without human intervention. At the same time, new species appear to replace them. All part of the evolution process.
  
  I do support that we need to be more "environmental" friendly or whatever for the reason of economics. Such stand is a great business standpoint nowadays. It does a great job at taking advantage of certain types of people. After all, money keeps humanity running.
• Phanterz wrote on 2011-07-23 01:28
  I don't think anyone has mentioned humans killing themselves...directly. With weapons.
  
  If a fanatic who desperately wanted to destroy the world somehow got control of these nuclear weapons, we'd all be dead extremely quickly. Right now, that's not plausible. But in the future, technology could improve such that these weapons are practically walmart material.
  
  Then we're screwed.
  
  Furthermore, we need to get out of the Solar System within a billion years or so, or we'll all be cooked by the Sun.
  Human improvement is not infinite; there is a limit to everything in nature, and thus once we reach those limits, we're also screwed.
  
  _____
  
  Doing this is making me contemplate whether we're all a big science experiment done by some other species.
• Excalibuurr wrote on 2011-07-23 20:33
  Well, we have the auto-bots to save us from the sun. :thumb:
  Anyways, I will say that we will have a future similar to that of Fallout.