[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 137 KB, 500x497, 4604386487_3a4842e840.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1225588 No.1225588 [Reply] [Original]

>Human race 'will be extinct within 100 years', claims leading scientist

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1287643/Human-race-extinct-100-years-population-explo
sion.html?ITO=1490

We had a good run.

>> No.1225590

100 years too short

200, 300 max.

but yeah the idea is pretty much ok go

>> No.1225608

Short of a natural event that fucks us over we won't go extinct anytime soon.

>> No.1225621

I give it 400 years.

>> No.1225629

>dailymail
yep

>> No.1225649

>>1225588
Overpopulation is not a problem. The Earth has plenty of resources to support 10billion+ humans. Those resources just aren't evenly distributed right now.

>> No.1225653

population explosions dont lead to extinctions, god damn it why are people such fuckwits.

>> No.1225671

I honestly don't see how a world wide extinction of humanity could happen. I could see MOST of the population dying and the technology level of the survivors regressing.

But the fact is, we've spread across the whole world now, even if we were to trigger a world wide ice age, people would still find places that were warm enough (or could be artificially heated enough) to survive.

>> No.1225705
File: 31 KB, 224x315, article-1257939-08B80431000005DC-941_224x315.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1225705

Protip: Use the Daily Mail's science section to wipe your ass, nothing more.

Remember when they reported you can make fruit rot by saying mean things to it: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1257939/All-mind-You-really-talk-beautiful-says-expert.htm
l

>> No.1225716

>>1225671
This. The only way we're dying out is if there is some high level extinction event that takes out 50%+ of species.

And if that's the case, fuck it, at least we're taking out most of those other mother fuckers with us.

>> No.1225719

>implying nobody born in 2010 will live to be 100+ years old

this guy has to be trolling

>> No.1225745

>>1225705

It truly infuriates me that people outside the UK view the Daily Mail as a credible news source.

>> No.1225764

>>1225745

it truly infuriates me that the UK's style of humor is "post fake science articles that are blatantly wrong"

>> No.1225772

Overpopulation is the one problem that fixes itself before extinction happens.

>> No.1225798

He's fucking 95.

He's probably old and confused, just let him have his moment.

>> No.1225809

Human race extinct in 100 years?
nah.
Our technologically advanced civilization?
Totally.

>> No.1225810
File: 157 KB, 515x417, 1271574394527.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1225810

> DailyMail

>> No.1225879

I didn't even read.

Just some senile old fart attention whoring, I'd guess.

Nothing to see here.

10,000 years, now that sounds more plausible, albeit still unlikely.

>> No.1225896

>>1225879

>Implying science doesn't work

>> No.1225922

>>1225896
And what science is he basing this off of?

The life expectancy in first world counties has doubled over the last century, it is just plain retarded to expect it to decrease 100% over the next century.

>> No.1225932

Also he's probably just grumpy that the actuarial table says he's got about a year left on average and life extension technologies have not progressed to the point of actuarial escape velocity.

You know, sour grapes. "IF IM FUCKIN DEAD IN A YEAR, THE WORLD IS DOOMED ANYWAY SO FUCK IT"

Something along those lines, totally baseless and driven by emotion.

>> No.1225941

Within 100 years, we won't be human anymore.

>> No.1225962

>>1225932

>armchair psychology

>> No.1225972

>>1225941
Apples and oranges.

So long as we are contain over 80% of our current DNA, I'd still call us human. Even highly radical transhuman genetic engineering won't touch anything near 20% of our DNA any time soon.

>> No.1225981

>>1225962
Makes a hell of a lot more sense than reading a life expectancy graph over time and expecting a drop to zero after centuries of slow (and recently fast) unrelenting upward progress.

>> No.1226106

spoiler: most people in this thread don't know about the exponential function

>> No.1226129
File: 17 KB, 444x299, kermit the frog.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1226129

>>1226106
>he still thinks exponents are a function and not an operation (like subtraction and multiplying)

>> No.1226134

>>1226129
8/10 because i'm replying
f(x)=ce^bx is a function yes

>> No.1226140

>>1225972

80%?

You do know that rodents have higher sequence homology than that right?

>> No.1226182

>>1226134

yes but that doesn't mean all uses of the exponent is a function

>> No.1226204

in any case, if you use exponential growth it's not impossible to get 100 years for the extinction of the human race, there would be too many people and not enough resources. However once the cities start running out of food, there will be disease which would kill off many people so growth will cease in that time.

>> No.1226257

So is DailyMail pretty much the Britfag version of FoxNews?

Every article I've ever seen from them has been pretty fucking retarded.

>> No.1226285

Best year? 1968, 1660, 1395, 321BC were all pretty good.

>> No.1226436

She has a great facial structure.

>> No.1226441

Damn. Well, I guess we did okay.

See you all in the next reincarnation. Fingers crossed that I reincarnate as a Xarasillian.