Established Member
Certified E-I Addict
"It's far easier to fight for principles than to live up to them."
L
Established Member
Certified E-I Addict
Ah, a balanced and polite way to start a rebuttal.Originally Posted by nicegirlsarenice
Yup. If I could just elabora-
I say, could you calm down a smidgen? You're scaring the Internet.
Errrr... what?
We have not advanced to the technological level where one person is able to explode this, or any other, planet.
Not so. I'm still alive, right?
Now there's no need to be profane about Neanderthals, nicegirls. Just because they look different. Actually, they think we (Cro-Magnon humans) did quite a bit of "fucking" with Neanderthals, and interbred with them as Neanderthals died off, thus preserving their genes down through the millenia. I wonder what a world where Neanderthal Man did not die off would look like, a world with two separate species of Humans living alongside each other?
You're right. They're only pretending to be extinct. Why didn't we see it sooner?
One tries one's hardest. Well, not really.
Whoa, lapsing into your native tongue there. Alright, pisstake over. Elaboration begins.
People say that mankind will destroy himself because he's got nukes coming out of his arse. People say that mankind will destroy himself because he's killing the Earth and one day Gaia will fight back. People say mankind will destroy himself because he's encroaching upon the very concept of God through science on a daily basis. Here's why it's all twaddle.
In a nuclear holocaust, there would be some human survivors. Here, there, hidden underground waiting for the nuclear winter to end. In a world ravaged by a global pandemic, there would still be human survivors - in pathology, there is no such thing as a 100% mortality rate for natural diseases, even horrible things like Ebola. And as for God, well....
... so that's why I say that man will not destroy himself. He may make a catastrophic mistake at some point in the future and come within a hair's breath of extinction, but I see nothing we have today capable of completely and totally eradicating our species from the face of the Earth. (I personally feel that that is because we are an intrinsic part of the Earth, as natural to it as the dinosaurs were too, for example, but that's all neither here nor there.) My point is, we are incapable of destroying ourselves completely - we make a fair stab at it from time to time through wars and terrorism and what-have-you but it hasn't happened yet. It's possible we may advance technologically to the point where we might be able to kill Nature, to eradicate all life from the Earth, but if we're that advanced we'll all have moved off-world by then.
If Man is made extinct in the near future (not 2012 - sorry, whitey), it will be by something not of the Earth. The cosmos is trying to kill us everyday - a supernova here, a gamma-ray burst there, an asteroid the size of my ego - something like that is a real and scarier possibility than the Americans and the Russians deciding to see who can split the most atoms at once. An asteroid obliterated the Yucatan peninsula and the resulting climate change offed the dinosaurs. I'd be more worried about all those flying pieces of rock out there than all the nukes we have under the ground.
Oh God, I'm sick of typing. I'll leave it there for now.
Established Member
Certified E-I Addict
I didn't even read it.........Ssshhhhhhhhhhh..................
"It's far easier to fight for principles than to live up to them."
L
Banned User
Certified E-I Addict
It's a scary line of thinking that you were taking and that others in influencial positions have taken/are taking.
Yes, and hopefully we never will. Because if someone can do it, then sooner or later they will.
We're alive, that gives us a chance. If your car is going out of control down the motorway, you don't say "awww shucks, well I'm not dead yet, maybe if I just act like everything is fine it will be. I never died before after all...."
Very little if any Neanderthal genes are thought to be with human genes. It'd be a tiny percentage if any.
I NEVER SAID they weren't extinct, not sarcastically or any way. I said they WERE "a survivor", they WERE a survivor for millions of years UNTIL they went extinct.
Maybe one of the dodo birds used his body language to assure his comrades that.... oh forget it, you'd never appreciate that analogy.But look the point is that until they went extinct they were "a survivor", for all those millions of years they were "a survivor".
That's where you could very well be wrong, matey. We're used to thinking of bombs in terms of "some group of people get blown up", but with nuclear.... all bets are off. Anything could happen. The power of a nuclear bomb goes up in exponentials, not 4 times as much, not 8 times as much... it could be 100,000 times as much.
In a way I hope he does.
And you are an expert in weapons of mass destruction? There are enough nuclear warheads in the US and Russia alone to destroy the entire planet many times over.
The asteroids won't kill us. We've survived billions of years without the asteroids killing us, we're survive what, some 70 years without nuclear war killing us? And on a couple of occasions we were only just lucky....
Last edited by nicegirlsarenice; 08-04-10 at 00:29.
On the subject of nuclear war. One USA ohio class SSBN with ICBMs
has a nuclear yield of 90 megatons the Hiroshima bomb in WW2 had a yield of 10 kilotons
If just one nuclear submarine launched its ICBMS the dust from the blasts would plunge the world into a nuclear winter
This winter would last years extinish most life on earth. HUmans could potentially surive this but only in a bunker
equipped with enough resouces to many years.
There was at least two occasions during the cold war that ICBMs where nearly launched in anger that we know of
1962 Cuban missle crises and the little known 1983 Able Archer 83 opertaion
In addtion there was the accidents both at reactors and weapons.
Did you know USA and USSR nuclear SSBN commanders required a code from their High command in order to arm the ICBMs i.e. no code no lanch even possible
However ON the UK cold war system the ICBMS where always launch ready
Accidental dischage was prevented by the " integrity of the britsh navy officer system" I quote
My Theory on Industrial soceity and its future
In the next generation Man is about to face two great challanges
Energy
The wealth and massive popualtion growth of the industrial age has driven by fossil fuels coal and oil.
These fossil fuels are coming to an end. We have left it very late in the day for your transiation
to a non-fossil fuel econmnoy. The transiation could be very painful for human race.
Environment
Also in parallel we are about to go thru an enviornmental and ecologcial disater
mass extinction, plastic polltion, loss of biodivertsy, death of coral seas, CCD, loss of habiat etc etc etc.
popualtions contiune to expand at a massive rate and worse consumption of earths resoures
is increasing even faster becasue of the emerging market countries.
All these are happening even without global warming. Throw in global warming
and the potential damage beggars belief.
Mankind is at a crossroads Lets assume we surive the Energy and environmental crunch.
The society that survives could be a very green soceity commited to planet
and technology phobic or If the crunch is not too bad it could still be in love with technolgy
If the latter holds true.
We will see rapid advances in supercomputers, AI, genetic engineering, DNA, Nanotech, Robotics, cybernetics.
in a short space of time. The conqesnces are beyond your widlest imagination.
For exmaple Its should be possible to upload all data from a human brain and download it into a nanorobot
which is self aware and cabale of cloning itself.
In this new world Man will be a lost soul(see manifesto) We will either be exterminated by the machines or cyber hybrids or he evolve into them eventually becomming all machine. This could potnetial happen within a few genertaions. We are already seeing this, some people have machine impants in all parts of body
heart, eyes,ears, limbs etc,
I belive that by 2150 we will be extinct and machines will rule the earth or leaving in a world with a much smaller popultion leaving a much simlpy live in harmony with nature.
Vote Green party.
Established Member
Certified E-I Addict
Don't forget nanotechnology, whitey. Self-replicating microscopic robots reproducing at an exponential rate until the entire Earth is a formless grey sludge.... burp.
Why the future doesn't need us
Please read link Why the future doesn't need us by bill joy chief scientist at SUN micorsystems.
Wired 8.04: Why the future doesn't need us.
quoate
The 21st-century technologies - genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics (GNR) - are so powerful that they can spawn whole new classes of accidents and abuses. Most dangerously, for the first time, these accidents and abuses are widely within the reach of individuals or small groups. They will not require large facilities or rare raw materials. Knowledge alone will enable the use of them
Enjoy your IPAD
Banned User
My mouse scrolls yery fast over you !
I know you dont care but FFS Whitey , you`re postings are toooooooooo boooooooring for me Matey, sorry.
Point taken pugwash
I will use pcitures from know on to explain the frothcoming technolical nightmare.
Vote green
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
