will there be an ice age in the future? will mankind become extinct like dinosaurs?

Question

is global warming a precedent for future catastrotropes like tsunami etc. Can the earth support ane ever growing sea of mankind with permanently depletion of its limited resources ?

Answer 1

Since there have been at least seven known ice ages in the past 10 million years I am sure there will be another....

Answer 2

Sometime in the future the earth's core will give out exposing the life on earth to radiation. Also the sun bill become A red giant heating the earth to uninhabitable temperatures before dying itself. Some scientist believe that the earth will be repelled when it reaches a certain proximity to the sun and that will cause an ice-age. As for the relatively near future, we could be struck by an asteroid that could send so much debris in the atmosphere which would block sunlight and cause an ice-age. The moon moves away from earth at about an inch a year, overtime causing extreme weather on earth which could also cause an ice-age. No doubt about it, it will happen again.

Answer 3

We all know that the earth revolves around the sun every year,and on its axis every 24 hours. But many don't realize there is another rotation the planet makes. Earths' axis is on a tilt and this axis also rotates around ,like if you were to run a straw around the rim of a glass from the inside. This rotation takes the Earth about 10,000 years.
It appears there is an ice age about every 10,000 years. We are just entering another ice age. The last one ended about 10,000 years ago.
As far as man becoming extinct, yes I think it is inevitable. Either by our own hand. Or by some act of nature. The way things look nowadays, it is more likely by our own hand.
We should be as lucky as the dinosaurs were.They existed for millions of years. We (humans) have only occupied the Earth for a mere thousands of years and already things don't look to promising.

Answer 4

In the literal sense, global warming is not a precedent for other types of catastrophes such as tsunamis. However, humans' RESPONSES to some catastrophes do give us some idea of how humans are likely to respond to other catastrophes, and in that sense our slow and ineffective response to global warming and many other threats suggests that we are likely to continue responding too slowly to other threats.

For example, as the human population grows, we expand into more and more areas. Since we start out in the areas that are "best" (safest, or have the most productive farmland, etc.), our expansion is almost always into areas that are less desirable -- areas where it's harder to grow crops, or areas that are more dangerous due to volcanoes, floods, etc. Once we are in such dangerous areas, it is difficult to move back out (unless the population shrinks or unless crop productivity rises much faster than population). So, for example, if you look at volcanoes that have exploded in the past, you generally find that even after major eruptions, people move back to places near the volcanoes. The same is true for areas subject to other types of disasters (tsunamis, earthquakes, floods, etc.)

Over time, people pay less attention to dangers that they have not experienced recently. (Most people living in the San Francisco Bay Area, for example, are not well prepared for the next earthquake, even though we KNOW that sooner or later there will be another earthquake.)

Local disasters are not likely to drive humans completely extinct. However, global problems such as global warming could drive us to extinction, especially since fights over shrinking resources will probably lead to wars and crimes that will kill off many/most of the remaining people.

Imagine what would happen on an island that has 200 people but only has enough food for 100. It's not likely that 100 people will die and 100 will live normally. Instead, all 200 people will eat food and even the seeds for next year until ithe food is all gone and so there's not enough to keep even a few people alive. Thus on an island that can feed 100 people but has more than 100 people, it's almost certain that the population will fall not to 100, but to a number far below 100 people, and possibly all the way to zero.

(An alternative is that while there is still enough food left to keep a few people alive until the next growing season, a few powerful people with deadly weapons will kill everyone else before it's too late -- but murdering the vast majority of people doesn't sound like a happy ending to me, either.)

Ultimately, we will either voluntarily slow our population growth rate and resource consumption below the rate at which our productivity increases (which may mean a zero rate or even a NEGATIVE population growth rate if our productivity goes negative because we've used up too many resources), or else nature will involuntarily slow our population growth for us.

History shows that people generally don't make difficult choices until they are forced to, which means that our stalling over threats such as global warming does give us some clue as to our possibly very dark future...

Answer 5

Well strictly speaking we are probably still in an ice age, it just happens to be a warm period between glaciation. Ice ages in the geological record last hundreds of thousands of years and contain alternating (much shorter) warm and cold spells. The really scary part of global warming is that the natural trend at the moment could be for cooling so human activity is having more impact than we think assuming a steady climate.

Answer 6

The world will come to an end one day. But it's probably not going to happen for another century or centuries.

Answer 7

1- Yes...2...Most Likely, except unlike the dinosaurs, man will probably do it to himself.

Answer 8

we shall degenerate