In 100 years time (assuming that we do not end life in a nuclear war).........
* I predict that the influence of the USA will wane and … morethat China will overtake the USA as the largest economy.
* Automonous prosthetics will become the norm for amputee sufferers.
* Fashion will be unrecognisable compared to now for the most part.
* Cars may be powered by either synthesised crude oil from algea farms, by self-sustained electricity or some third thing that has yet to see the light of day.
* Labourers will be replaced by machines and their maintainence workers.
* Germany will remain the economic powerhouse of the EU.
* Vladimir Putin may or may not succeed in annexing former Soviet Republics (I believe that he is trying to rebuild Russia as a whole. With or without the Communist system, I cannot say.)
* North Korea's dated customs and techniques will allow outside influence to seep in through these cracks as the rest of the world advanc… [view original content]
There are small unrests all the time with all the riots and junk happening. I believe there won't be a large scale civil war again but civil unrest is bound to happen.
The pursuit of the knowledge of nuclear energy is not what caused that. It was of consiquence, true, but one is not the other. Putting knowledge to application is the potential negative.
I also thought that's what he was referring to, I just think labeling the pursuit of knowledge as one of two causes of human destruction is inherently incorrect.
For instance we have people studying extremely dangerous viruses across the world, the pursuit of this knowledge is not likely to end humanity, unless someone applied this knowledge.
How does the pursuit of knowledge lend to anthro-destruction?
We invented nuclear weapons, correct? Our pursuit of knowledge caused … morethat. And with those weapons can wipe out humanity, and that leads to destruction.
And so forth, if humanity keeps pushing for more knowledge, deadlier things would come about, yes? Things that can lead to our destruction.
I think that's what he's referring to.
I wasn't speaking of nuclear energy in general, I meant the entire knowlege that people desire when they define themselves as the self-appointed rulers of the world what gives them the right to know everything about the past and the future. As a pesimist myself, I believe that human race is selfish, greedy and ruthless, to busy to see they cause most of damage that they try to blame something else later on. Not only the deforestation, poluttion, species extinction or habitat destruction, but also the science being expanded every day with worse effects every time. I'm not saying people should be afraid of gaining knowledge in order to save lives, etc, it's simply dangerous to deal with it and some borders should be specified before something becomes irreparable - for example, apocalypse caused by recklessly released virus or the series of natural disasters which combined would destory the Earth to the bare ground.
I think that humans are the Earth's biggest enemy.
The pursuit of the knowledge of nuclear energy is not what caused that. It was of consiquence, true, but one is not the other. Putting knowl… moreedge to application is the potential negative.
I also thought that's what he was referring to, I just think labeling the pursuit of knowledge as one of two causes of human destruction is inherently incorrect.
For instance we have people studying extremely dangerous viruses across the world, the pursuit of this knowledge is not likely to end humanity, unless someone applied this knowledge.
Humans pose no more of a threat to the Earth than the cosmos (astoundingly less, actually). If humans cause another extinction level event then, so what? The only ones who will care will be humans momentarily before they cease to exist. Mother nature would hardly bat an eye lash, same with the other 5 extinction events in the past 550 million years. You give humans much too much credit to think that, at our current stage, we could do anymore than press a refresh button.
I wasn't speaking of nuclear energy in general, I meant the entire knowlege that people desire when they define themselves as the self-appoi… morented rulers of the world what gives them the right to know everything about the past and the future. As a pesimist myself, I believe that human race is selfish, greedy and ruthless, to busy to see they cause most of damage that they try to blame something else later on. Not only the deforestation, poluttion, species extinction or habitat destruction, but also the science being expanded every day with worse effects every time. I'm not saying people should be afraid of gaining knowledge in order to save lives, etc, it's simply dangerous to deal with it and some borders should be specified before something becomes irreparable - for example, apocalypse caused by recklessly released virus or the series of natural disasters which combined would destory the Earth to the bare ground.
I think that humans are the Earth's biggest enemy.
The importance of the USA will decrease or will not increase as much as other countries.
EU and the euro will lose power.
Cars will cause danger to the environment, since most of them are based on the "black gold", that declines in offer and increases in demand. There might be even stricter laws against driving private property (there must be at least 2 people per vehicle, etc.) or there might even be powered by other types of energy.
Workers will be replaced by machines. It's a GOOD thing as long as people control the resources, since then people could spend their time doing what they want (art, literature, sports, music, etc.).
Global warming will raise if most countries don't do major changes in their systems. Global warming and pollution will also decrease the value of alimentation.
Third World's Factories and Third World Countries (for example some countries of Asia and of South America) might start an uprising against the globalization of the First World.
The augment of equality for minorities and for women will also enlarge anti-equality campaigns or campaigns that defend male&majorities rights.
If the government doesn't watch out, there would be more radical movements (communist, fascist, anarchists, etc.).
Here are my predictions for today. I may edit and add some later on.
How exactly does cosmos destory the Earth more than humans?
Doesn't matter how long people exist in the Earth scale of subsistence, humans have been causing more damage in their short period of time than anything else ever have.
Humans pose no more of a threat to the Earth than the cosmos (astoundingly less, actually). If humans cause another extinction level event t… morehen, so what? The only ones who will care will be humans momentarily before they cease to exist. Mother nature would hardly bat an eye lash, same with the other 5 extinction events in the past 550 million years. You give humans much too much credit to think that, at our current stage, we could do anymore than press a refresh button.
How does the cosmos destroy the Earth's life more than humans? 99 percent of all life that has ever existed on Earth is now extinct. Even if humans, today, destroyed 99.999999 percent of all life currently alive on Earth we would still pale in comparison. The Earth would simply move on as it has after every extinction level event. We simply can't compare to time and nature.
How exactly does cosmos destory the Earth more than humans?
Doesn't matter how long people exist in the Earth scale of subsistence, humans have been causing more damage in their short period of time than anything else ever have.
I've never thought about it but i think we'll all be on mars and someone has blown up the earth but I don't really give a shit since its not my problem,might be my fault tho...
Comments
Doctor Who will never die.
You never know...You never know.
It cannot, for what is the TARDIS, if not another Starship Enterprise for another time?
This is true...
The pursuit of the knowledge of nuclear energy is not what caused that. It was of consiquence, true, but one is not the other. Putting knowledge to application is the potential negative.
I also thought that's what he was referring to, I just think labeling the pursuit of knowledge as one of two causes of human destruction is inherently incorrect.
For instance we have people studying extremely dangerous viruses across the world, the pursuit of this knowledge is not likely to end humanity, unless someone applied this knowledge.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR-qQcNT_fY
lolololololol
I wasn't speaking of nuclear energy in general, I meant the entire knowlege that people desire when they define themselves as the self-appointed rulers of the world what gives them the right to know everything about the past and the future. As a pesimist myself, I believe that human race is selfish, greedy and ruthless, to busy to see they cause most of damage that they try to blame something else later on. Not only the deforestation, poluttion, species extinction or habitat destruction, but also the science being expanded every day with worse effects every time. I'm not saying people should be afraid of gaining knowledge in order to save lives, etc, it's simply dangerous to deal with it and some borders should be specified before something becomes irreparable - for example, apocalypse caused by recklessly released virus or the series of natural disasters which combined would destory the Earth to the bare ground.
I think that humans are the Earth's biggest enemy.
Humans pose no more of a threat to the Earth than the cosmos (astoundingly less, actually). If humans cause another extinction level event then, so what? The only ones who will care will be humans momentarily before they cease to exist. Mother nature would hardly bat an eye lash, same with the other 5 extinction events in the past 550 million years. You give humans much too much credit to think that, at our current stage, we could do anymore than press a refresh button.
Well, let's see...
People walking around with robotic limbs and organs
Human like robots
Anti Robot Campain
Goddamn human clones (it'll probably be illegal though)
"Design your baby"
Alternative to oil due to the penury
Rich people getting richer
Poor people getting poorer
More acceptance
Nano medicine
Tons of film remakes
Cats ruling the world
Agriculture getting screwed up due to how we deteriorated the Earth
Therefore, not enough crops means nothing to feed the animals with
Which means meat getting really rare and expensive
An alternative to meat (artificial meat or insects? Yummy yummy)
Human span of life increasing around 10 years
Endangered species becoming exctint
Mars' colonization
Weird weather
Edit: Just thought of that one
Let me see what I can predict...
The importance of the USA will decrease or will not increase as much as other countries.
EU and the euro will lose power.
Cars will cause danger to the environment, since most of them are based on the "black gold", that declines in offer and increases in demand. There might be even stricter laws against driving private property (there must be at least 2 people per vehicle, etc.) or there might even be powered by other types of energy.
Workers will be replaced by machines. It's a GOOD thing as long as people control the resources, since then people could spend their time doing what they want (art, literature, sports, music, etc.).
Global warming will raise if most countries don't do major changes in their systems. Global warming and pollution will also decrease the value of alimentation.
Third World's Factories and Third World Countries (for example some countries of Asia and of South America) might start an uprising against the globalization of the First World.
The augment of equality for minorities and for women will also enlarge anti-equality campaigns or campaigns that defend male&majorities rights.
If the government doesn't watch out, there would be more radical movements (communist, fascist, anarchists, etc.).
Here are my predictions for today. I may edit and add some later on.
How exactly does cosmos destory the Earth more than humans?
Doesn't matter how long people exist in the Earth scale of subsistence, humans have been causing more damage in their short period of time than anything else ever have.
How does the cosmos destroy the Earth's life more than humans? 99 percent of all life that has ever existed on Earth is now extinct. Even if humans, today, destroyed 99.999999 percent of all life currently alive on Earth we would still pale in comparison. The Earth would simply move on as it has after every extinction level event. We simply can't compare to time and nature.
I've never thought about it but i think we'll all be on mars and someone has blown up the earth but I don't really give a shit since its not my problem,might be my fault tho...