Will man drive himself extinct?

Forums: Philosophy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Darwin said that evolution is a result of the fittest striving for survival. Only the strong can pass on their genes to the next generation. And all of the movement of genetic material keeps the world's ecosystem moving.

There is one exception to that rule. Man. Humans have become so incredibly superior that there are no more predators to hunt them. They run around letting the strong pass on their genes freelybut so do the weak. Weak genes are potential plaques and potential world-wide disease.

Humans have hit an evolutionary cul-de-sac, all genes are mixed so that we approach a dangerous level of conformity. Not only that, but the majority are the ones that go out and do dangerous things so that most of the weak survive. Our brain is the only defense yet we cannot see the impending disaster because it is so far in the future. Such is the fate of humanity.

Or is it?
Will man drive himself extinct through genetic faults, nuclear winter, biological outbreak, or will he continue on until the universe implodes?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,586 • Replies: 31

No top replies

My guess is that humankind will eventually destroy itself.

My guess is that most evolving entities in this universe use the same method of selections that got humans to be the dominant lifeform -- and most eventually destroy themselves.

My guess is that very, very, very few species ever survive the stage of their existence that we humans are now living -- namely, the time when their technological evolution is so advanced that they can develop implements that can destroy their kind -- while at the same time not being philosophically evolved enough NOT TO DO SO.

And my further guess is that there are galactic police forces that will gladly destroy us if we don't destroy ourselves -- if we show any signs of getting off this speck of dust and possibly polluting anywhere else in the universe.

We are a virus -- and you know how you gotta handle a virus, right?

0 Replies

This may sound horrible but hospitals are doing the opposite of good in the long run.

Suppose a person with "weak genes" gets himself hurt. In nature, he would surely die because he is unnecessary and was not destined to pass on genes. But then he is rushed to a hospital where he is not only cured to pass on his weak genes, but viruses and bacteria saturating the hospital use him not only as a tool to mutate themselves so they can kill more "weak" people but he is a host to go infect thousands more people. Instead of the weak being killed by this disease, they let all of their exponentially expanding offspring pass the susceptibility on.

Pair that with our over administration of anti-bacterial drugs and inability to take the drugs regularly and you provide a good place for the bacteria to perform a complete evolutionary cycle and become immune to the drugs at the same time that the weak have multiplied by a huge quantity.

Massacre.

0 Replies

Culture will continue to evolve and genes will continue to mutate. If we all die out, it won't be because the hospital didn't kill someone with Marfan's.

0 Replies

Can you give any support or just a dry statement? How do you know that genes will continue to mutate at a rate fast enough to combat conformity? Would it really matter if the hospital saved someone from Marfan's syndrome, it's autosomal dominant and the person will live long enough to reproduce, so the child is very likely to inherit this disease and it increases the likelyhood that the effected individual will harbor bacteria.

Just one more day alive could potentially kill thousands.

Yet even without death by a genetic dead-end, do you think that we will really live indefinitely?

0 Replies

Sheep, the strong are not necessarily the fittest to survive. Those who survive are by definition the fittest, whether they do it by killing off the competition or appealing to others to care for them.

We have no way of knowing which genes are one or two steps away from mutating into an advantageous form, so our best bet for survival is to give everyone a chance to live and combine their DNA with as many others as possible. We cannot guess what fortuitous combination might take the human race to the next level of evolution.

A person with what you term "weak" genes may also possess exceptionally "strong" genes for another trait. Stephen Hawking is a good example.

My guess is that the human species will survive. But then I've always been an optimist. Very Happy

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

My guess is that humankind will eventually destroy itself.

My guess is that most evolving entities in this universe use the same method of selections that got humans to be the dominant lifeform -- and most eventually destroy themselves.

My guess is that very, very, very few species ever survive the stage of their existence that we humans are now living -- namely, the time when their technological evolution is so advanced that they can develop implements that can destroy their kind -- while at the same time not being philosophically evolved enough NOT TO DO SO.

And my further guess is that there are galactic police forces that will gladly destroy us if we don't destroy ourselves -- if we show any signs of getting off this speck of dust and possibly polluting anywhere else in the universe.

We are a virus -- and you know how you gotta handle a virus, right?

Ever think we're the first species to reach this level of evolution.

And don't forget we also have evolved the capability to destroy EVERYTHING.

And it's even scarier that the people I would least trust with this power now possess it:(

0 Replies

I don't think it makes any sense to try and look millions of years into the future. Life based on that amazing replicating molecule DNA will be around, but it will look pretty strange.

Will humankind survive the next 200 years? I think it highly likely that some catastrophe, man-made or natural, will destroy a very large percentage of the world's population. But some people will survive. Even if they have to live on Mars. I can't say I'm optimistic about the future for man on Earth.

No governments (even the US) or scientific bodies around the world now dispute the findings of the UN panel on climate change. Its happening. And its happening at the quicker and fiercer end of the projections. We are sleep walking towards disaster, except we are not asleep. Mankind seems to be suffering from some form of collective cognitive dissonance. We can see it coming, we are aware of the magnitude of what it means, but we just can't harness the will to do anything meaningful about it.

As it will be elements from the governing elites and the international super rich that are most likely to survive the catastrophe, perhaps they just don't care.

Que sera sera, whatever will be will be
The future's not ours to see...
(or rather we would rather not look too closely)

0 Replies

Neo, you quoted me and then wrote:

NeoGuin wrote:

Ever think we're the first species to reach this level of evolution.

Yep! Often.

With everything out there, though, more than likely many, many other species have evolved to this very, very dangerous point.

I'd love to know what percentage of evolving species actually get through this point. At times I have considered the possibility that none do -- and that we, in concert with other species at our same stage of development, represent the most advanced species now extant.

Quote:

And don't forget we also have evolved the capability to destroy EVERYTHING.

Not for a moment do I forget that.

(Terry, I normally am very optimistic also, but on this issue, I am at the pits. My guess is that I will be gone long before we "drive ourselves extint) -- although I think it is more like a short chip than a drive.)

Quote:

And it's even scarier that the people I would least trust with this power now possess it:(

AMEN!

Although I wouldn't trust the pope or Albert Schweitzer with the kind of weapons and power now in existence.

0 Replies

Steve, I agree that millions of years from now, mankind could be as different from Homo sapiens as Australopithecus is from us. For the better, I hope. And I agree that at least some people would likely survive almost any catastrophe. This species has apparently had as few as 10,000 individuals and still rebounded.

So what might kill us off? Pestilence? We have the ability to identify and treat pathogens that was unknown in the days of the black plague, which only killed ¼ of the population of Europe. I expect that we will be able to repair defective genes within my lifetime.

Certainly we could all be wiped out by an asteroid, but I am not too worried about climate change since hominids survived several ice ages without the benefit of modern technology. Japan survived two atomic bombs, and while today's arsenal is much larger, I doubt if enough warheads would actually be launched to cause a nuclear winter. Perhaps I underestimate human stupidity. Crying or Very sad

0 Replies

Frank, my guess is that since there are many star systems older than ours, we are probably not the first to evolve intelligence. I could not even begin to guess the percentage, though.

NeoGuin, we may be good but I wouldn't say that we have the capacity to destroy everything. We can exterminate many species and damage our environment, but are nowhere near the level required to wipe out all life or destroy the earth itself.

0 Replies

If it can happen it will happen, and it matters not who is in charge at any given time.

0 Replies

Terry wrote:

Frank, my guess is that since there are many star systems older than ours, we are probably not the first to evolve intelligence. I could not even begin to guess the percentage, though.

My comment did not say we were the first nor the only, Terry. My point was that all evolving entitites may do their evolving the way we did -- dog eat dog -- and may come to a point when the technical ability to destroy itself comes before the philosophic wherewithal not to do so.

Maybe -- a LARGE MAYBE -- all evolving entities destroy themselves at this point.

Who knows?

It is idle speculation on my part -- occasioned at the moment by the snow which means I ain't gonna play no golf for a couple of months.

0 Replies

This topic has got me to thinking a bit.

Could have the Dinosaurs reached our level had the Earth not taken a "Body Shot" from an asteroid/comet?

0 Replies

Quote:

...hominids survived several ice ages without the benefit of modern technology.

Quite the opposite, actually. Nobody survived the ice age except the ones that managed to live in the desert, and even they survived the lesser of two evils.

However, I am mostly worried about nuclear weapons. Cuba got us running to our bomb shelters. Now, North Korea (that country with the crazy dictator) has the potential to bring about one explosion that has more power than every bomb dropped in WWI and WWII combined. So far Kim Il Sung has shown that he's crazy, but not entirely stupid.

Even so, we've come so close so many times in such a short amount of time that It's almost impossible to survive for very long. On the other hand, it was almost impossible for life to start in the first place.

0 Replies

Well, what makes you think we're all genetically the same anyway? Believe me, there's plenty of genetic material out there still - there are what, a few billion people in the world now, and guess what, they all have different genes. Not to mention, different cultures, which is what's really going to determine "evolution" anyway.

0 Replies

Quote:

, but I am not too worried about climate change since hominids survived several ice ages without the benefit of modern technology

Terry
Its not potential ice ages that are the problem, its global warming throught the profligate use of hydrocarbon fuels.

The way things are going the moment, it is quite possible that warming could lead to the melting of the permafrost and the release of vast amounts of methane. Methane is a much more serious "green house" gas than CO2 or water vapour. It is possible this could give rise to a positive loop warming scenario leading to a run away greenhouse affect. We might end up cooking ourselves, it really would make the earth uninhabitable.

from

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2000/GeorgeRyabov.shtml

Quote:

Water and water vapor are extremely rare on Venus due to its high surface temperature that can approach 758 K (900 °F). This extreme temperature is caused by the greenhouse affect. As sunlight heats Venus' surface, the surface radiates infrared energy that is kept from escaping the planet by dense carbon dioxide atmosphere.

0 Replies

Rufio, you're missing the point.

Are we going to drive ourselves extinct?
Not, are we going to drive ourselves extinct in the near future solely because of a lack of genetic diversity.

0 Replies

Well, certainly not intentionally. I would argue for overpopulation being the most likely cause of extinction though.

0 Replies

Yet all ecosystems are self-regulating: if the land couldn't feed the people, then population would fall to a more suitable level. After all, people are surviving with much less than what Americans throw away every day.

0 Replies

Will man drive himself extinct?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know