(PhysOrg.com) -- Eminent Australian scientist Professor Frank Fenner, who helped to wipe out smallpox, predicts humans will probably be extinct within 100 years, because of overpopulation, environmental destruction and climate change.
Fenner, who is emeritus professor of microbiology at the Australian National University (ANU) in Canberra, said homo sapiens will not be able to survive the population explosion and “unbridled consumption,” and will become extinct, perhaps within a century, along with many other species. United Nations official figures from last year estimate the human population is 6.8 billion, and is predicted to pass seven billion next year.
Fenner told The Australian he tries not to express his pessimism because people are trying to do something, but keep putting it off. He said he believes the situation is irreversible, and it is too late because the effects we have had on Earth since industrialization (a period now known to scientists unofficially as the Anthropocene) rivals any effects of ice ages or comet impacts.
Fenner said that climate change is only at its beginning, but is likely to be the cause of our extinction. “We’ll undergo the same fate as the people on Easter Island,” he said. More people means fewer resources, and Fenner predicts “there will be a lot more wars over food.”
Easter Island is famous for its massive stone statues. Polynesian people settled there, in what was then a pristine tropical island, around the middle of the first millennium AD. The population grew slowly at first and then exploded. As the population grew the forests were wiped out and all the tree animals became extinct, both with devastating consequences. After about 1600 the civilization began to collapse, and had virtually disappeared by the mid-19th century. Evolutionary biologist Jared Diamond said the parallels between what happened on Easter Island and what is occurring today on the planet as a whole are “chillingly obvious.”
While many scientists are also pessimistic, others are more optimistic. Among the latter is a colleague of Professor Fenner, retired professor Stephen Boyden, who said he still hopes awareness of the problems will rise and the required revolutionary changes will be made to achieve ecological sustainability. “While there's a glimmer of hope, it's worth working to solve the problem. We have the scientific knowledge to do it but we don't have the political will,” Boyden said.
Fenner, 95, is the author or co-author of 22 books and 290 scientific papers and book chapters. His announcement in 1980 to the World Health Assembly that smallpox had been eradicated is still seen as one of the World Health Organisation’s greatest achievements. He has also been heavily involved in controlling Australia’s feral rabbit population with the myxomatosis virus.
Professor Fenner has had a lifetime interest in the environment, and from 1973 to 1979 was Director of the Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies at ANU. He is currently a visiting fellow at the John Curtin School of Medical Research at the university, and is a patron of Sustainable Population Australia. He has won numerous awards including the ANZAC Peace Prize, the WHO Medal, and the Albert Einstein World Award of Science. He was awarded an MBE for his work on control of malaria in New Guinea during the Second World War, in which Fenner served in the Royal Australian Army Medical Corps.
Professor Fenner will open the Healthy Climate, Planet and People symposium at the Australian Academy of Science next week.
Explore further:
New Easter Island theory presented
More information: www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/worldbalance/easter.html
JerryPark
3.7 / 5 (23) Jun 23, 2010If we were indeed destined to expire within a human lifetime, "Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die" would be an acceptable attitude. But profligate politics is not an acceptable course.
We are not about to expire and Frank Fenner is just plain wrong.
jsa09
4.6 / 5 (11) Jun 23, 2010With more people the super rich will be so wealthy that they will be able to match the wealth of a lifetime of work for a normal person in less than a day. Wait this may already be happening and it is extremely unhealthy for society.
ClevorTrever
3.5 / 5 (14) Jun 23, 2010ealex
4 / 5 (17) Jun 23, 2010Mass death? Sure. Drastic reduction in population, again, entirely possible, all it would take is one kick-ass airborne virus.
But you always have to take into consideration that the ARE communities of people living in isolated and remote areas that will not be hit as hard by whatever hits densely populated areas. More so, most countries have various fall-back mechanisms in case of catastrophe to ensure some level of survival of the species (bunkers, shelters, seed vaults, etc) and certainly more than we as a public know of.
So it would be fairly safe to say that excluding the most catastrophic of events, we will NOT go extinct anytime soon.
A lot of us might die, granted, but then again, within 100 years, all of us discussing this here will be dead anyway. Concern should be raised and educated, but not through extremist stances and statements, just IMHO.
mysticfree
4.7 / 5 (27) Jun 23, 2010Egnite
3.8 / 5 (18) Jun 23, 2010ralph_wiggum
4.4 / 5 (16) Jun 23, 2010zz6549
4 / 5 (19) Jun 23, 2010I applaud Fenner's work in eliminating the smallpox virus, but it seems he's forgotten about man's ability to change his environment.
Skeptic_Heretic
2.5 / 5 (15) Jun 23, 2010Glyndwr
3.4 / 5 (12) Jun 23, 2010mysticshakra
1.8 / 5 (25) Jun 23, 2010Bob_Kob
Jun 23, 2010Xynos21
3.8 / 5 (20) Jun 23, 2010This is exactly the kind of thinking that lead to the population of Easter island watching as the last tree was felled. Holding out hope for technology to save us is as wrong and misguided as holding out hope for the gods to save us.
karnoug
Jun 23, 2010otto1923
4.1 / 5 (14) Jun 23, 2010Au-Pu
3.5 / 5 (8) Jun 23, 2010Kynos21 makes more sense than the others.
gunslingor1
4.2 / 5 (13) Jun 23, 2010-You should look deeper into it if you respect him before calling him a fear mongerer, rather than dismissing him without an arguement.
"I applaud Fenner's work in eliminating the smallpox virus, but it seems he's forgotten about man's ability to change his environment."
-No, that's the whole point, we are negatively and excessively changing the planet; in the early days life changed the climate in positive ways that allowed more complex life, we are undoing billions of years worth of evolution.
"Mr. Fenner seems to not recognize that human populations have always been rather large. Population growth is not exponential. It's greater than linear but not exponential.What an idiot. Wonder who paid him to make such stupid and poorly thought out comments. Political agendas abound."
-The graph doesn't lie, those are accurate values, an it is an exponential curve.
gunslingor1
4.4 / 5 (11) Jun 23, 2010thyran
1.7 / 5 (12) Jun 23, 2010Rute
3.4 / 5 (7) Jun 23, 2010The less people who take Earth's fate seriously will have children, the larger the proportion of those who don't will grow. There have been and always will be people who measure up others and themselves by their ability to make children.
In the end times, our planet will be populated by 100 billion people who breed like rabbits and enjoy it. That's darwinism.
MadPutz
3.3 / 5 (9) Jun 23, 2010ArtflDgr
1 / 5 (3) Jun 23, 2010Skeptic_Heretic
3 / 5 (5) Jun 23, 2010Depends on whether social mechanisms come into play.
We've watched that education and wealth greatly remove the impetus to breed as can be evidenced by the population replacment statistics of first world nations and developing nations.
China is a poor example of this due to the social controls involved, however, Canada, the US, and all of western europe are phenominal examples.
otto1923
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 23, 2010http://www.johnst...310.html
http://www.johnst...4pd.html
-1 BILLION abortions, roughly 1/5 the worlds present population, preempted. This is the ONLY reason we have peace and prosperity in the western world today.
otto1923
5 / 5 (3) Jun 23, 2010http://www.nation...wth-rate
http://en.wikiped...ity_rate
-Gazans have roughly doubled their pops in 15 years, meaning that fully half of the population is under 15 years old. You can see that by and large the regions which are experiencing the most violence, suffering, and ecological devastation are the ones whose pops are growing the fastest.
The world as a whole doesnt need to be overpopulated for civilization to collapse because of overpopulation and the devastation it inevitably wreaks.
GSwift7
2.2 / 5 (12) Jun 23, 2010otto1923
4.5 / 5 (4) Jun 23, 2010Donutz
4.5 / 5 (10) Jun 23, 2010fuzz54
3.8 / 5 (11) Jun 23, 2010otto1923
1.7 / 5 (6) Jun 23, 2010The methods of abortion in communist countries often left women maimed, sterile, or dead. This was also easily concealed.
3432682
1.2 / 5 (14) Jun 23, 2010Rute
4.7 / 5 (3) Jun 23, 2010Still, some people make children based on other than social needs, and the question is that will those peoples' groups stay strong or will they weaken.
There's little we can do about the need to make many children, unless we resort to extreme policies like those seen in China. I doubt that, since westerners value freedom more than rational thinking.
For example, it has been predicted that muslims, with their average worldwide child count of six, will form the majority in many western countries in the future. 90% of muslim children keep their faith.
When muslims are in majority, we will live on their terms.
lengould100
2.3 / 5 (6) Jun 23, 2010GSwift7
1 / 5 (6) Jun 23, 2010Come on, get real. This is patently absurd.
HaveYouConsidered
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 23, 2010Bloodoflamb
3.2 / 5 (6) Jun 23, 2010SteveL
4.5 / 5 (4) Jun 23, 2010Over consumption of available energy, water or food will cause rationing and wars - again thinning the population to a naturally sustainable level. But extinction? I highly doubt it. Civilizations have grown to prominance before and collapsed for one reason or another into a subsequent dark age. What makes us so special this time so that it "can't" happen to us? Every thinking person knows there is a limit to the resources upon which our society depends. Any remaining humanity will have to re-learn how to live with what nature provides. Unless of course we eventually learn how to leave the cradle and become a multi-planet species - before the next die off.
JCincy
3 / 5 (2) Jun 23, 2010I believe it would require a catastrophic event or series of catastrophic events to eliminate the human race.
I don't believe population increases or industrialism alone will lead to the extinction of the human species in just 100 years.
Bitflux
5 / 5 (4) Jun 23, 2010My thought is, will our sense of responsability grow at the same rate?
As long as the monetary system rewards the greedy and ego driven and not the scientific and creative minds - we will be heading that way - I for one agree with Mr. Fenner. Darwin will probably win this argument - only when it hurts enough, humanity changes its ways, it just doesnt hurt enough yet.
otto1923
5 / 5 (3) Jun 23, 2010Did you visit the websites I posted? Do you deny that these abortions were taking place, and you had no idea about it when you researched your paper?
Overpop didn't become a problem in much of the world ONLY because of abortion. Something which your paper entirely neglected to include. And it is indeed a problem, and the greatest one as the article states, in regions where abortion doesn't occur, where growth is mandated by religious edict.
GSwift7
1.7 / 5 (6) Jun 23, 2010There's a delicate balance between too much success and not enough success in any society. In the former Soviet Union you see the problem of not enough success. In ancient Rome you see the problem of too much success. Our modern global society self-regulates that to some extent, at least compared to previous human cultures. Global communication and trade has an equalizing effect. For example you see companies outsourcing work from places where costs are high to places where costs are low. That allows market pressure to spread the wealth better than it ever was before. As we humans meet new challenges, we always seem to find some path of least resistance to overcome those challenges. That is a real trend that's always existed. I see no reason to expect that trend to suddenly stop. 3000 years of human history is hard to argue with.
GSwift7
2.1 / 5 (7) Jun 23, 2010DGBEACH
1 / 5 (3) Jun 23, 2010Skeptic_Heretic
2 / 5 (4) Jun 23, 2010PoppaJ
1.3 / 5 (6) Jun 23, 2010Gammakozy
Jun 23, 2010ArcainOne
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 23, 2010otto1923
3 / 5 (4) Jun 23, 20101BILLION ABORTIONS.
22% of all pregnancies in the US consistantly aborted. Wake up.
Ronan
4 / 5 (1) Jun 23, 2010Mind, I'm not sure about the 2100 date, and I'd consider it wholly possible for some small pockets of humanity to survive, despite everything--and, given enough time, repopulate Earth. But IF we were to go extinct in the near future, then I'd be surprised if it took only 100 years. 250, minimum...and maybe more. There are a lot of us, and unless things get really bad, really fast, the odds'll still be in our favor for a time.
Bloodoflamb
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 23, 2010joefarah
1 / 5 (5) Jun 23, 2010If only 10% of the earth's land surface is habitable, that leaves 100,000 sq m (roughly 1 million square feet) per person, assuming there are 10 Billion people. When it gets down to 100 sq. ft. per person, let me know. We may then have to work at making the other 90% of the earth habitable, assuming we don't want to build high rises, etc.
This is old propaganda successfully used to justify killing of the most innocent. NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS.
GSwift7
1.6 / 5 (7) Jun 23, 2010ArcainOne
5 / 5 (3) Jun 23, 2010I'm sure thats what many politicians and business men are saying as well... why should I deal with it when I can pass the buck to tomorrows generation.
I also say it is ignorant to believe that 6,800,000,000 people (and counting) are incapable of royally screwing up the world.
And I can't believe I actually HAVE to ask this.. buy why let it get to that point? Does it really have to stare us in the face before we say "Gee bob, maybe we SHOULD do something about this..."
Megadeth312
4.7 / 5 (6) Jun 23, 2010Easter Island.
It didn't even take climate change, they managed to do it simply by over-consumption of resources.
Our ignorance leads our cleverness only to our detriment.
While it would be silly to say we will become completely extinct in that time frame, great change is coming, I think that's the point we should focus on.
GSwift7
1 / 5 (2) Jun 23, 2010This is from the web site you linked:
"TOTAL, 1922 - 2010: 863,000,000 reported abortions, estimated 950,000,000 total abortions"
on this page:
http://www.johnst...310.html
That averages to 11 million per year. With global birth rate at about 134 million per year. That's only 8%, and I have to question the assumptions used on your web site to come up with the estimated value with unreported and missing data added into the total.
ArcainOne
5 / 5 (2) Jun 23, 2010We hit 6 billion people when I was in high school roughly in 2002-2003... maybe 2004. Within 7 years we are almost at 7 billion... if we where to continue on a linear progression that is very generous, it would increase by 1 billion every 10 years and that would mean in 30 years we'd be at 10 billion people... and that is being extremely generous on the estimates...
ArcainOne
5 / 5 (2) Jun 23, 2010Caliban
3.5 / 5 (8) Jun 23, 2010To that, let me add: bathe, excrete, sleep, exercise, work, dance, fuck, play, swim, congregate, spectate, build, destroy, travel....all those people aren't going to be shoe-horned into ten-mile-high boxes. In short, all this bullshit about technology solving all our problems is hopelessly pie-in-the-sky. We can't even get it together enough to accomplish a relatively simple goal, like feeding all of the nearly seven billion currently "living" on this planet. This has got to end, and yes, we are going to get hit hard, and soon. It is inevitable.
There is no distinction between communist/capitalist/muslim/xian/brown/white/yellow/homo/hetero/
educated/healthy/beggar/banker/candlestickmaker/
asshole/saint/liberal/ conservative when you are DEAD.
Bloodoflamb
3.3 / 5 (4) Jun 23, 2010Caliban
3 / 5 (6) Jun 23, 2010Loodt
Jun 23, 2010Caliban
3.5 / 5 (8) Jun 23, 2010Everyone seems to forget that the ENTIRE population of H. Sapiens has been reduced-on at least one occasion- to as few as a thousand or less individuals. What are the odds of a group that small surviving long enough to overrun the globe. Astronomical. Not Inevitable, but MIRACULOUS! Why do we insist on tempting Fate, instead of being rational and doing what is necessary to maximize our survival as a species?
otto1923
5 / 5 (3) Jun 23, 2010And I would have thought that your college research would have given you an idea of how complex demographic calculations can be. Many variables and interrelations. But the correlation between overgrowth and unrest is a pretty clear one. Uganda, Somalia, Liberia, Gaza, Rwanda; all near the top of the list.
Skeptic_Heretic
3 / 5 (2) Jun 23, 2010H Sapiens is so prolific because we're so adaptable. You could end our technology right now and we'll probably still live on due to our unsurpassed ability to reason through problems. Bloodoflamb is right on the money here, ridiculous that he's been downranked. The human mind is extraordinary within nature because we don't see nature as an obstacle inherently, or at least not all of us do. Our curiosity, even when left alone with no referential framework is unmatched.
otto1923
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 23, 2010The industrialized nations prospered and were peaceful. The third world remained in constant turmoil, punctuated by incidents such as the ethiopian genocide or the hutu/tutsi bloodbath. The cultures which caused it were not destroyed; Ethiopia, Rwanda and Burundi remain near the top of the list.And still plenty left over to produce this kind of misery over and over:
http://en.wikiped..._to_2000
-They tell us this is caused by bigotry and despotism; but the numbers tell us overpop always results in them.
otto1923
5 / 5 (3) Jun 23, 2010http://en.wikiped..._culture
Caliban
2.6 / 5 (5) Jun 23, 2010I remain optimistic in that regard as well, too, BUT- the last time it happened, we don't have any reliable evidence of massive, long-lived environmental degradation, abrupt climate change, radiation, disease, vanished food and water, et c.(much less any CATASTROPHIC events) ALL at roughly the same time.
We are feverishly at work creating the perfect storm. That's the difference this time around. Why put ourselves in the position of having to "Do Over"- much less risk extinction?
Bloodoflamb
1 / 5 (1) Jun 23, 2010knikiy
1 / 5 (1) Jun 23, 2010ZeroGravitas
Jun 23, 2010RobertKLR
1 / 5 (3) Jun 23, 2010Caliban
2.5 / 5 (6) Jun 23, 2010I would like to believe that too.
Keep in mind, though, all the other species, oh-so-marvelously adapted to their(frequently quite varied)environments, that are no more.
We are not invulnerable- especially not, if we are deprived of technology.
Amy_Steri
3.8 / 5 (5) Jun 24, 2010Scryer
1 / 5 (4) Jun 24, 2010Anyway, unless a meteor hits the earth, I think we'll be alright, either way I may not be alive to care about such a prediction.
Also, I can imagine other civilizations that have gone through similar trials and errors and possibly made it out alive, so to speak. It's possible we'll develop technology that can break any waste down to it's basic units, then reconstruct it however we want it. Considering what we're capable of right now, I can see many problems getting solved with just a little investment of money from any sector.
It's more of a race - can we fix our problems at a decent enough rate to the point where the problems we're causing get negated fast enough, right?
Though we have more problems then we can control at the moment, I'm sure.
sven
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 24, 2010JoeySimpson
1 / 5 (2) Jun 24, 2010GabrielHBay
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 24, 2010gt000
5 / 5 (3) Jun 24, 2010TheMightyPen
5 / 5 (2) Jun 24, 2010getgoa
1 / 5 (5) Jun 24, 2010drbo.org---humankind will fall according to the commandments. The bible says clearly in Deutoronomy or consequences of stars how huanity will fall and why it will. This book is the only source of reference. Mankind will not end anytime soon and my webpage at myspace(http://www.myspac...a8thsin) shows exactly how this can be done, by reading/interpretation. The end of mankind is no where soon and is a full circle to the exact date King Artaxerxes? gainsaid conditions to be built for the Jewish Temple. This approximation directly from the bible is 3473A.M. and mankind will return to ash in 3473.
VOR
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 24, 2010otto1923
5 / 5 (1) Jun 24, 2010http://en.wikiped...ttleneck
-Which may have been caused by a Toba eruption.
otto1923
not rated yet Jun 24, 2010If wars can be Planned and Engineered to benefit humanity, so can environmental peril.
otto1923
not rated yet Jun 24, 2010I suggest that the human race in its best form will survive through the indefinite future because it has Guardians with the Foresight and Resolve to ensure that it does. They have carried us this far; I have faith they will continue to do so.
otto1923
5 / 5 (1) Jun 24, 2010http://en.wikiped...nization
Caliban
1 / 5 (2) Jun 24, 2010That's what I'm talking about.
The difference being, this time around, that there will be the likely addition of several other environmental and/or catastrophic events just for added measure.
A very narrow escape following those other supposed near extinctions, with, apparently, only one or two stresses. Looks like we'll be going into this one with multiple stresses at the outset, and can probably expect some sort of catastrophic event in roughly the same time frame, as well.
If we plan to survive, then we probably better send
the Chosen Ones into the bunker right now.
I'm not a doomist, or armageddon-jockey, it's just that these events happen with more or less complete regularity. As I said earlier- very well-adapted species -Hell- whole phyla- have disappeared overnight too many times, and too regularly to ignore.
convolutedmind
4 / 5 (1) Jun 24, 2010otto1923
5 / 5 (1) Jun 24, 2010What to do? How would you defend against such an Inevitability? The need to establish independent colonies off-planet is pretty obvious, but this is still decades away. Where else could totally independent and self-sustaining colonies be established to ensure the survival of the species, but underground.
And so we have Rumors of vast subterranean bases under such places as Dulce afb NM, and the Denver airport; hundreds perhaps scattered around the globe and interconnected by evacuated tubes and supersonic transport.
Not so outlandish given the Plowshare weapons and void creation, robotic nuke earth borers, plus the 1000s of cubic miles weve already mined out beneath the surface.
Skeptic_Heretic
5 / 5 (1) Jun 24, 2010trekgeek1
1 / 5 (2) Jun 24, 2010On a serious note, we'll be fine. Technology will save us, but only if we also change the way we operate. There is plenty of land, energy, and Oxygen for everyone. We must ensure that we use our technology wisely, and that means clean energy sources, recycling, and efficient cities that can handle mass populations.
Eventually though, we will have a problem. If we succeed and don't die, we'll eventually hit a population limit in the distant future. We need to start working on getting off this planet effectively and in large numbers while learning to colonize all m-class planets.
otto1923
3.5 / 5 (2) Jun 24, 2010THATS the basis. You must admit that the premise, that People will habitually plan for the future, is sound.
otto1923
not rated yet Jun 24, 2010Youll accept the idea that unrestricted markets invite collusion to fix prices, or that organized crime would inevitably corrupt judges and lawmakers who were potential enemies, and yet not expect the same behavior from european dynasties or Greek city-states in waging war and managing economies and populations?
You could believe that somehow one man could turn a whole nation into an army, but you couldnt accept the idea that he was assisted by a Group working behind the scenes to enable him to do so?
And you couldnt possibly believe that these things could be done because to let war and corruption happen by themselves might well lead to something infinitely worse?
damnfuct
1 / 5 (2) Jun 25, 2010In regard to this drivel you've been spouting about some "all powerful" group behind the scenes acting as puppet masters; what is your point? Seriously, if you are or aren't correct, what difference does it make? What difference does one person posting conjecture on the internet make? No difference; there is no point. If you're right, then you are just cattle and you cannot make a difference.
kevinrtrs
1.2 / 5 (10) Jun 25, 2010Until you do that, life is just going to get worse on earth, even if the tech gets better. Those with the tech will strut around like peacocks showing it off and those without will maim and kill to get it. Here's an example of the atrocities we are cabable of:
To those worshipping at the altar of evolution, just how is the human race to evolve out of their sinful condition?Perhaps by aborting all new pregnancies?
kevinrtrs
1 / 5 (10) Jun 25, 2010Strange you should say this, have you considered that most of the best known scientists e.g. Newton, Galileo, Pasteur etc. were all god-fearing men?
God said: be fruitful and multiply - hence there are around 7Billion people around now. God also gave us commands to obey and it's in violating those commands that we have the mess we find ourselves in today: Total disregard for God Himself, lying, stealing and cheating, sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman, covetting what we don't possess, disobeying and disrespecting our elders and authorities, killing physically as well as in our hearts. The list goes on.
So it's not disregard for science as much as disregard for God that will lead us to "extinction". Your choice.
otto1923
4 / 5 (5) Jun 25, 2010People have always been 'obsessed' with sex. We owe our existance to the fact.
It's just good to know that the world isn't out of control, the species has a future, and all the violence and suffering can actually have a Purpose, isn't it? Otto thinks so.
otto1923
5 / 5 (5) Jun 25, 2010Your god has done his work. The earth is full. He is now only a menace. Time for his reign to end.
Skeptic_Heretic
4 / 5 (4) Jun 25, 2010Skeptic_Heretic
3.4 / 5 (5) Jun 25, 2010getgoa
1 / 5 (7) Jun 25, 2010Ecclesiastes 7:17
Be not over just: and be not more wise than is necessary, lest thou become stupid.
(drbo.org)
The answer to the end of any nation or people is found in the bible, there is no other source on this planet or any other that explains the difference so well between thought and reality for mankind.
Skeptic_Heretic
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 25, 2010otto1923
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 25, 2010"1 There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under heaven:
2 a time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot..." -Ecc3
-That includes just about everything created by man, including your faulty religion. Time to pull it up by the roots. The earth needs weeding.
Quasi_Intellectual
5 / 5 (2) Jun 26, 2010Anyhow...
While Professor Fenner's prediction might be a bit pessimistic, there is a certain degree of truth there as well.
Hell, the man MAKES viruses for population control purposes. He could very well be the orchestrator of our doom.
MarkyMark
Jun 26, 2010alivation
5 / 5 (3) Jun 26, 2010This would seem to be just a matter of time.
alivation
3.5 / 5 (2) Jun 26, 2010otto1923
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 26, 2010I think what we've seen in rampant capitalist consumerism in the last 60 years has been a mad rush to reach a self-sustaining tech plateau which would allow for a serious reduction in pop density. It is obviously unsustainable; it has caused suicidal ecological damage; and has all but collapsed. But it seems like we are now on the verge of something, doesn't it?
Bookbinder
5 / 5 (1) Jun 26, 2010fullbony
1 / 5 (3) Jun 26, 2010this guy should stick to microbiology....its people like him who have increased the world population through his efforts. now he is just feeling bad about the whole thing and wants to stir up the media. until he can come up with solid explanations for his theory it all sounds like BS to me.
ShotmanMaslo
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 26, 2010williemays
1 / 5 (4) Jun 26, 2010The responders to this idea are very
funny indeed.
This theory is either politically motivated...
Not a thought out theory or
Completely wrong...
At least I know what I don't know about
what will happen in 100 years...which isn't much.
skipm
1 / 5 (1) Jun 26, 2010gt000
not rated yet Jun 26, 2010otto1923
1 / 5 (1) Jun 26, 2010We are already being parsed out according to ability. The great expansion of the university system enabled those with higher acumens to be removed from their incipient cultures, encouraged to commingle, and caused to settle elsewhere in pursuit of their careers. This was the real message of the book 'the Bell Curve'; we're all being husbanded in new and more effective ways.
otto1923
1 / 5 (1) Jun 26, 2010MorituriMax
not rated yet Jun 27, 2010MorituriMax
not rated yet Jun 27, 2010Riiighhhhhhhhttttt.. because the human industrial age of the last couple hundred years has done the same damage to the planet as this:
Vredefort meteorite: The meteorite, larger than Table Mountain, caused a thousand-megaton blast of energy. The impact would have vaporised about 70 cubic kilometres or rock - and may have increased the earth's oxygen levels to a degree that made the development of multicellular life possible.
otto1923
3 / 5 (2) Jun 27, 2010This cycle has been slowed in the west by abortion, but allowed to continue in predominantly Moslem-dominated regions.
hush1
1 / 5 (3) Jun 27, 2010Hi Everyone
http://news.natio...doctors/
(70 years without food or water)
I'm surprised none of you consider this an option.
Just surprised. Nothing more. Nothing less. :)
O.k. Thanks. Have a beautiful millennium.
Or week. Or year. Or decade. Or century.
(Your choice)
otto1923
3 / 5 (2) Jun 27, 2010otto1923
3 / 5 (2) Jun 27, 2010"faqir is not who can not do anything and is nothing in his self-being. But faqir has all the commanding powers (gifted from Allah) and his orders can not be revoked."
stealthc
Jun 27, 2010davezichos555
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 27, 2010davezichos555
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 27, 2010Warrensn
3 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2010otto1923
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 27, 2010Ignorance is bliss when you let go and let god, eh? I say let go and let god... go.
How was church this morning? Hot I bet.
kevinrtrs
1.4 / 5 (9) Jun 28, 2010This is the main reason most people do not believe in God:
They do not understand how God carries them each and everyday of their lives.
It seems you do not understand that either, Skeptic. Go read Isaiah and see that God right down to the individual level.
John 3:16 states it quite clearly - for God so LOVED the world that He gave his only begotten son so that whoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life.
Because you do not believe this you are now going about dissing everything and anything said about God. trying to dissuade anyone from even considering the love of God.
Simply because you cannot experience it yourself.
harryvincen
2 / 5 (4) Jun 28, 2010http://www.health...iew.html
Vlasev
1 / 5 (2) Jun 28, 2010This seams worse than "the worst case scenario".
In 100 years the people might live in quite different conditions dew to rapid changes in everyday lives, but extinction... I would say this is statistically impossible.
otto1923
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 28, 2010"John 3:16 states it quite clearly - for God so LOVED the world that He gave his only begotten son so that whoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life."
-Allow me to translate... "For god so loved the WORLD, that he would promise the people upon it just about anything, including that nonsense about immortality, in order to protect IT from THEM." god in this case being the Group who concocted your idiot religion, and 'the people' being the vast bulk of humanity whose unbridled excesses threaten their very existence. Klar? This is one of the most outrageous lies in the entire bible, and the one which makes you xians grovel and salivate the most.
otto1923
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 28, 2010I think the People who composed this brilliant work were very clear on what it's real Purpose was to be, and they were pretty explicit about it in the book, if we can read it with this in mind... They didn't care a whit about people were going to survive beyond death. Their concerns were wholly about what would happen in this world, about preserving a future for their own lineage, which is the only real chance any of us has at 'immortality'.
zinlavu
5 / 5 (1) Jun 28, 2010Clearly people feel guilty and are in denial because they don't want to face the fact that, just as Stephen Hawking says, we are destroying ourselves through stupidity and greed. Civilizations may not be sustainable by nature of their growth design flaw. Though humans will be extinct, the earth will abide. But even the earth will expire in another 500 million years after the sun expands and burns it up.
nada
5 / 5 (1) Jun 28, 2010Between the whacko religious types who believe GOD tells them to breed like rabbits and the whacko lack of self-control types who JUST WANT TO breed like rabbits, this comment thread shows that 95% fall into those 2 groups.
Yep, Humans will be extinct in 100 years. Thanks commenters for PROVING his prediction.
getgoa
1 / 5 (2) Jun 28, 2010And again there is no commandment that says prayers will do anythin' for the human saying them nor a church "a" must to observe the commandments.
enantiomer2000
1 / 5 (2) Jun 28, 2010kevinrtrs
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 29, 2010God is LOVE. Love is about relationship between living people. The love of God for the world - is for the people has created. Everything God has done for us is so that he can be WITH us - so that we can be His people and He can be our God.
So you mis-interpretation of the meaning of "world" is actually quite laughable.
How do you interpret Jesus telling people to not love the world? or the things of the world?
Just because you hate god doesn't make you an expert at interpreting it properly. In fact your hating God guarantees that you'll skew the meaning in the word to suit your own selfish ambitions.
By the way, I use the word hate because it's exactly that - you are an enemy of God. Whoever is not for Him is against Him. There is no neutral position.
Choose you this day whom you will serve - the one and only God or man and his sinful ways.
As for science - it's for all.
kevinrtrs
1 / 5 (8) Jun 29, 2010God is LOVE. Love is about relationship between living people. The love of God for the world - is for the people He has created. Everything God has done for us is so that he can be WITH us - so that we can be His people and He can be our God.
So your mis-interpretation of the meaning of "world" is actually quite laughable.
How do you interpret Jesus telling people to not love the world? or the things of the world?
Just because you hate God doesn't make you an expert at interpreting it properly. In fact your hating God guarantees that you'll skew the meaning in His Word to suit your own selfish ambitions.
By the way, I use the word hate because it's exactly that - you are an enemy of God. Whoever is not for Him is against Him. There is no neutral position.
Choose you this day whom you will serve - the one and only God or man and his sinful ways.
otto1923
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 29, 2010Your ardor tells you what your book is supposed to mean rather than what it actually SAYS.And you think your blind adoration makes you any more capable of rational interpretation? Youre an addict and Reason endangers your fix.
otto1923
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 29, 2010http://www.youtub...TjjvfNyE
Caliban
4 / 5 (4) Jun 29, 2010And, since you've done a better job of it than I would have, I'll happily let it stand for my own sentiment.
"kevinrts" singled you out, but by extension, was leveling the same hateray at everyone here that doesn't agree with him.
Kevinrts will understand the infinite mercy and truth of his god when he's dead, but while he yet lives, he will continue to make everyone else miserable with religionistic snakeoil.
Probably still stingin' from the collapse of the multi-level marketing scam that seemed to have inordinate appeal to all the godders out there.
Hey- it works really well recruiting them, so it's worth a try on the rest of us, right?
otto1923
5 / 5 (2) Jun 29, 2010My blasphemy improves with practice-
Kevin wont be in much condition to understand anything when he's dead...
"sunbleached shadow, useless corpse, jesus loves you, useless corpse
lux rigor mortis, lux rigor mortis, lux rigor mortis, cinis ater et ossa
behold, one who moments ago at the height of power, received worship from kneeling crowd, now himself cast down by deaths dominion, bears mute witness to the whole worlds face: cinis ater et dessa
sack of maggots, maggotsack, hopeless pile of hopeless bones
so thin was his holy plan." -Marduk, Imago Mortis
http://www.youtub...PJky33aE
:-)
otto1923
5 / 5 (1) Jun 29, 2010Caliban
3 / 5 (4) Jun 29, 2010No fair Otto- the last time you posted one of these links, I spent about the next 7 hours, searching for the ultimate death/black metal. Sadly, I was unsuccessful. I think Gaahl still owns it. Was good fun, though!!!
Modernmystic
1 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2010That's a goooood boy...now here's a lollipop and try to keep those depends dry at least another hour before it's time for your ensure snack...
has20birds
5 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2010by Percy Bysshe Shelley
I met a traveler from an antique land
Who said: "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert...
Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal these words appear:
My name is Ozymandius, King of Kings,
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains.
Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
Ancient_Anomaly
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2010Existence of such group is absurd, existence of one ruler not. How could such group survive and keep its goals through generations? How could they fight their enemies, yet remain completely hidden and unknown? What you suggest would require efforts of MASSIVE scale that would be impossible to keep secret.
SteveL
2 / 5 (4) Jul 02, 2010Skeptic_Heretic
5 / 5 (3) Jul 03, 2010That is why we must ensure religion never becomes compulsory again.
God is man made, and imaginary.
Skeptic_Heretic
5 / 5 (1) Jul 06, 2010If something happens in reality, everyone can experience it happening. If something happens in your mind, others cannot.
otto1923
5 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2010'WHAT' is the seeming Order that underlies the apparent chaos of history. 'WHY' is the undeniable potential of our rate of growth to destroy everything of Value, as it always had from the advent of agriculture until the emergence of western culture.
The truly secret societies are the ones you dont know about.
Scale is only a matter of Perspective. You can accept the very greatest power structures that youre aware of, but you cant believe there might be one more Step beyond those? You think youre aware of everything that goes on in this world?
SteveL
1 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2010otto1923
5 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2010Conflict is INEVITABLE given our rate of growth; They only arrange it so that the unrecoverable things the human race has developed are no longer lost because of it. That is Their Philosophy.
Ecclesiastes 3
A Time for Everything
1 There is a [PROPER] time for everything,
and a season for every activity under heaven
http://www.bibleg...esiastes 3&version=NIV
-read the whole thing with this in mind [hint- it was NEVER about god]
Skeptic_Heretic
4 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2010You mean like it was in Europe throughout the majority of the reign of the Christian church?
Such ignorance of history is ridiculous. Don't ever forget that the punishment for apostacy in Christianity was also death for over a thousand years, with laws just as strict as Al Sharia. Don't trade one formless master for another. When you submit yourself to the metaphysical you simply have a master you can never escape.
SteveL
1 / 5 (1) Jul 07, 2010I'm not trading anything, nor am I confusing the abusive history of Christianity with the present abuses of Muslim radicalism. Hundreds of years seperate the two. Personally I'm no friend to any official religion. Faith however is a different thing altogether. Faith and religion should not be confused as being synonymous. Enough on that.
Still, my point is that the enabler for our present freedoms is rooted in a modern Christian philosophy that no longer accepts radicalism. Ancient Christian history is about as valid in this context as an ill deed performed by a child. Enough years pass and it becomes meaningless.
What is of import is what is happening today. Europe is being invaded and it's only a matter of time before the same changes will be enacted here.
ShotmanMaslo
3.8 / 5 (4) Jul 07, 2010Our freedoms are rooted in ancient greek democracy and philosophy and roman law system, not in christianity. We have our freedoms DESPITE christianity, not thanks to it. Renaissance was also an anti-religious movement.
I tend to agree with you about Europe. If atheists and sane believers wont stand up against fanatics, we may very well have a new dark age, this time under muslim rule...
ronicolxuo
1.5 / 5 (2) Jul 26, 2010http://hubpages.c...xCleanse
rvlife
not rated yet Aug 02, 2010Even if we last that long and in small numbers, The 90% will be muslims.
rvlife
not rated yet Aug 02, 2010Right said Steve. They are invading every country, not only Europe and America. Only that, we are blind to these invasions because of our so called secular values.
mthomasx
Aug 02, 2010Helvipojohan_Helvipo
Aug 06, 2010krowinxz
1 / 5 (2) Aug 09, 2010http://healthprod...-cleanse
jessica2020
1 / 5 (1) Aug 10, 2010http://hubpages.c...se-Trial