Posted on 05/05/2013 7:59:36 PM PDT by presidio9
The crazy man walking down the city street holding a sign that reads “The end is near” might just have a point.
A team of mathematicians, philosophers and scientists at Oxford University’s Future of Humanity Institute say there is ever-increasing evidence that the human race’s reliance on technology could, in fact, lead to its demise.
The group has a forthcoming paper entitled “Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority,” arguing that we face a real risk to our own existence. And not a slow demise in some distant, theoretical future. The end could come as soon as the next century.
"There is a great race on between humanity’s technological powers and our wisdom to use those powers well," institute director Nick Bostrom told MSN. "I’m worried that the former will pull too far ahead."
There’s something about the end of the world that we just can’t shake. Even with the paranoia of 2012 Mayan prophecies behind us, people still remain fascinated by the potential for an extinction-level event. And popular culture is happy to indulge in our anxiety. This year alone, two major comedy films are set to debut (“The World’s End” and “This is the End”), which take a humorous look at the end-of-the-world scenarios.
For its part, NASA released a series of answers in 2012 to frequently asked questions about the end of the world.
Interestingly, Bostrom writes that well-known threats, such as asteroids, supervolanic eruptions and earthquakes are not likely to threaten humanity in the near future. Even a nuclear explosion isn’t likely to wipe out the entire population; enough people could survive to rebuild society.
“Empirical impact distributions and scientific models suggest that the likelihood of extinction because of these kinds of risk is extremely small on a time scale of a century or so,”
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
We’ve already seen the movie...it’s called The Matrix.
“experts” in human extinction?
Is there a college course for that?
I think the end of humanity might come after people figure out how to feed a sex simulation directly into the brain that is indistinguishable from reality. And, because its a simulation, it will actually be BETTER than reality. At that point, you’re messing with basic reproductive and motivational forces.
Think guys (and many girls) sitting around all day getting their jollies while hooked up to a machine.
Hope you like salad: it was a mis-spelling. Jihadi’s get 72 VEGANS. . . .
Yes, but one would think that the population would start to increase again once space opened up from people dying off.
Human beings are not rats. We are much more complex. Cancer can easily be started and cured in rats, but not people.
I DO think that technology insulates us from reality in a way that is not always healthy. I don’t think we properly understand or appreciate how this. How that will play out is an open question.
A century ago, this exact article could have been written, substituting "automobiles, electricity, oil, and the telegraph" for "machines, synthetic biology, nanotechnology and artificial intelligence". The chicken littles of the world can always find something to fear in the unknown, even if they hail from Oxford University’s Future of Humanity Institute. The unknown is unknown to them, but is science to the enlightened. Science has a track record of saving and improving humanity, not destroying it.
No doubt some Prof. Grok said pretty much the same thing back in the bronze age, when they started making the first metal swords.
I'd believe 3 or 4 but 72? Come on, where did you find them?
Yes, but you have to wait until the next global caliphate shows up first.
Yes and no. In the paper they argue that the only thing that matters is preventing complete extinction and there are no scientifically credible sources arguing for extinction (e.g. earth turns into Venus). OTOH they point to a paper on "extreme" climate change and "extreme" uncertainty, both of which are invented. Even if "extreme" climate change is correct it will take hundreds of years (e.g. melting permafrost). The notion that uncertainty is "extreme" is utter nonsense. That is simply a product of ridiculous specualations being published and hyped that would be ignored in any other scientific field. One example (of many) is melting permafrost. Yes, it is melting, but it will take centuries to melt even if we stay in a warm Arctic pattern. The probabbility of it speeding up is close to zero. Venus-like conditions is complete fiction.
Not in Chicago
I agree that there is danger in our Western heavy reliance on technology. However, there are multitudes of people who live low tech lives around the world — way too many for the word extinction to be used.
The next global Caliphate is here now (thanks to Mr. O’transformational). He’s installing his MuslumBros or similar terrorista pals all over the world. So, please fedex my 72 virgins now. Thanks!
72 “meat-hungry” vegan raquel welches will be just fine. (Snicker snicker)
There are few scenarios outside of pandemic that could wipe out mankind completely and that would have to be a disease for which there was no immunity.
I would think that if there was a “extinction level event” the humans that survived would rise up again pretty quick, especially if they were able to retain the technological knowledge we have acquired. Depending on who the humans were, this wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing.
The story came from a book entitled “World Health and History”, by W. Hobson, M.D., John Wright & Sons, Ltd., Bristol, 1963. It is available through abebooks.com
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=w.+hobson&sts=t&tn=world+health+and+history
I discovered the story in a collection, “The Best of MDN”, a long defunct medical magazine, a thin (48 pages) but very entertaining illustrated small book of brief stories of medical peculiarities through history.
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?kn=the+best+of+mdn&sts=t&x=0&y=0
I truly wish there were more like it, as well as the short stories of medical writer Berton Roueché; and even some of the better writings of Oliver Sachs, such as The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat.
(After reviewing the story I would like to note I made a few errors. First of all, the 18th Century hedgehog trait was passed through five generations, not five brothers, and it was inherited only by the males. This meant that probably with great discomfort to the women, they were able to successfully mate. This matters, because it proves that, unlike many mutations that are first or second generation sterile, this was not the case.)
(I did read some other details elsewhere, accounts of the exhibition of the first boy with the trait to the Royal Society in 1731, the doctors noting the boy’s fitness, strength and mental sharpness. Which though they did not know of it at the time, suggested that his was a superior mutation.)
I see natural selection as usually a situation of degrees. For example, women prefer to select a mate that reflects “what they (think they) want” in a husband and father. The same way, males choose women as mates. Over time, this results in more males and females of the preferred type.
Likewise, when a more efficient way of doing things, such as civilization, comes along, more primitive and barbaric ways in proximity to civilization are doomed to die out, as efficiency is recognized even by primitive people as “better”.
This is actually the biggest selling point of democracy and republican democracy. Because even illiterate and uneducated farmers can see the common sense advantages of such decision making over even informed dictatorial management. And it is easy to figure out that while democracy works at the lowest level, it is far more efficient to subcontract representation at higher levels in most cases; thus republicanism is born.
Freedom and liberty are just necessary side effects to this efficiency. Democracy and republican democracy just work better with freedom and liberty.
Importantly, when the idea of efficiency is introduced to democracy and republican democracy, the idea spreads like a virus. From peasant to king, anyone can “catch” it, without overt symptoms. But from that point they not only spread it, but facilitate its growth.
It is the natural selection of ideas.
Wow thanks for the info!
Interesting!
As it happens, I do endorse the use of the Oxford comma
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.