Will human beings survive for the next 100 years?

Question

Global warming, destruction of natural habitates, and the massive depletion of energy reserves are just some of the things that might signal the end of human life. Are we doing enough to make sure that we are doing to ensure our own survival? If so, what?

Since most species don't continue to evolve beyond a certain point, are we too on the way to extinction unless we find the wisdom to stop mindlessly devouring the natural world in order to insulate ourself from discomfort? Also, pretending that the past is the future is a terrible mistake because if we can't change quickly enough, we won't be alive much longer to repeat our mistakes. So if you are think that we've been all right so far and therefore everything is going to be all right in the future, you don't really see the situation clearly. Unlike the dinosaurs, we have the ability to think about what is working and what isn't. Why are we refusing to use that facility? If we don't use it, we will pass into history. Sorry if this seem too long, but some of the answers make me very, very sad. Again, the past is NOT the future. If you think it is, you are totally deluded.

Answer 1

You are correct in saying that the past is not the future. The problems of the past are not the ones that will be the challenge over the next century.

Truth be told, we really do not have a very clear picture of the challenges of the future, nor do we have a good look at future human ingenuity. We honestly don't have enough data to predict the effects of global warming, as despite many of the possible calamities associated with it, perhaps there will be benefits as well.

What comes to my mind is the adaptable nature of humankind. Despite short-sighted views of politics, climate, environment, and energy concerns, there is a spark of tenacity that human beings have that in the past has served us well. While we cannot fully predict what trials our species face in the next century, I do believe that with such a diversity of viewpoints that at least some of us will not only survive but perhaps even prosper as well.

Much of what determines which aspects of civilisation will survive will be based on the collective efforts that we put into facing future challenges. Fortunately, we live in a time where the connections between different parts of the world are amazingly short. This said, it is possible that this would speed up the seeds of self-destruction. However, I have to believe that we would prefer to use this as the method of meeting a global challenge as a connected species, with our strengths and weaknesses being compensated by others.

To believe that humanity is on the path to self-destruction is a self-fulfilling prophecy of disastrous proportions. I choose to disregard this negativism in favour of believing that there is the will to survive, otherwise I might as well surrender to a bleak destiny. Instead, to reference Dylan Thomas, I choose to not go gently into that good night.

Answer 2

Yes, this is a critical problem, but I don't think it helps to make everything doom and gloom. We need to decide (as nearly as we can) how bad the problem is and how best to fix it. Some things we could try are:

1. REALLY putting serious funding into alternative energy funding. This could include hi-bred cars, wind, thermal, hydrogen fuel cells and of course solar.

2. Try to teach our children that there are other things in life besides buy more, using more and spending more. Teach them that they live on a beautiful planet and they need to love that planet deeply in order to care enough to have a simple life style that won't force it and the animals on it to the point of extinction.

3. Use less energy in our daily lives. Walk or ride your bike to work. Buy local produce where ever possible. Exchange things you no longer need for something a neighbor has. In return he gets something of yours.

4. Support actions that encourage less exploitation of natural resources both at home and in developing countries.

These are just some suggestions off the top of my head. If we had governments and individuals who really cared about this problem and would devote energy to it, we could come up with a really good list. Thing is we need actions not just lamentations!

Answer 3

The greed in the world would not allow change 30 years ago when the warnings were coming thick and fast they were all ignored, It is to late now to do much that will help , and there is little sign that they are even going to try China , India, America , Russia, are even denying it is even happening although the south of euope is turning into a desert , Africa in as little as 40 years will be unhabitable, the gulf steam is slowing down . The point will we be here in a hundred years . humans are survivers , but will it be worth surviving. from my point of veiw no we will not make it

Answer 4

Some very interesting observations from "Old Know All" and "Garden Poetry". While the irresponsible are behaving with reckless abandon to destroy life on the planet, a few people like them and the Asker are drawing the attention of the world to the dangers before us.

Coming back to this answer after sleeping on it for nine hours, I would say, on balance, that human beings and most higher forms of life, are doomed - owing to human activity. To get people to stop harming the planet's eco-systems is what Asker and other concerned people are attempting to do. If they succeed, Asker's fears will not be realised; I'm sure she'll be very happy about it! Yes, it is quite appalling, the complacency of so many people. And the lack of an inquiring mind: e.g. one Answerer seems to think that this being the year 2007 A.D. means that human life goes back only 2000 years!

Asker is a student of Plato, Hume and Kant. My mind boggles at the thought of now wading through the wisdom of such thinkers. Much too cerebral for me!! It is because the collective wisdom of the human race consists of the results of the strivings of such intellects that collective human knowledge has got to where it is. The average human being enjoys the fruits of such knowledge (i.e. technology), without having understanding.

One of the dilemmas for us is that, if we are to live something like normal lives, we cannot possibly find the time to understand the work of at least the most seminal thinkers of the past. The unsatisfactory answer for many are the unsubstantiated, unverified assertions of "Religion". It is significant that Asker is an American, living in Europe, who shows her respect for Indian and Greek Philosophy by adopting an Indo-Grecian name.

Yes, I feel human life will gasp along for, perhaps, another five hundred years, in growing misery in an environment that is increasingly unpleasing despite synthetic camouflage. That is because the efforts of concerned people like Asker have succeeded in putting the brakes on some of mankind's most reckless individuals. To prolong life for another millennium or more we would need something akin to a mutation in thinking.

Physical evolution is also important but I have stressed the intellectual aspects because mankind is at the stage where the force driving the Earth (forward or backward? - an inane question) is the collective intelligence of homo sapiens.

Karma Chimera, thanks for a fine Socratic question. Your clear thinking and the sincerity of your efforts are appreciated.

Answer 5

At current rates I think the human race is tipped to reach a whopping 9 billion in the next century, according to some schools of thought at least. That's of course without the intervention of war, environmental disaster or disease ("natural checks").

It may just be my overwhelming sense of pride in my species but I honestly do not believe humanity would be an easy thing to eradicate. Certainly we have more prowess than to fall at the likes of global warming or nuclear warfare.

Although most of us are "soft" and can't live without our fast food, fast transport and fast info, in the event of a crisis we do seem to realise that other things are more important. We toughen up when needed, and I think that that hidden will to live, to survive no matter what, is what will drive the human race through crisis upon crisis. Think about people who resort to cannibalism just to survive at crisis point. I don't believe there is an extreme that is off limits in the effort for human survival.

Answer 6

100 years is OK. 1,000 years is a bit more doubtful. Global warming won't wipe us all out, but a large proportion of the world's population will get wiped out by rising sea levels, crop failures and wars over the higher ground. Those of us who are left will consume less and the CO2 rich atmosphere will encourage the forests to grow back in the gaps we leave. Eventually, the world's ecosystems will stabilise and the human population may recover - assuming another species hasn't out-evolved us.

Answer 7

Yes humans will survive but species like The Orangutan and The Tiger will not.

Answer 8

If we can't get through the end of a simple ice age, then we don't deserve to make it. The world is going to continue to fluctuate in temperatures and climate as it has since it's begining. We will either adapt or perish just like every other species.

Answer 9

With all those probl;ems MAYBE NOT. The thing I find starange is that there are all these problems but e.g. Global warming is down to us to be blamed so will we survive I dont think so.

Answer 10

Yes!!!
It's basic human nature to survive

Unless some stupid person presses the red button and disintegrates the world