It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Stephen Hawking says humanity only has 1000 years left

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 05:01 AM
link   
Read this this morning.
To be honest, sometimes I feel even 1000 years is being generous, given the way things are going.


Physicist Stephen Hawking has warned humanity that we probably only have about 1,000 years left on Earth, and the only thing that could save us from certain extinction is setting up colonies elsewhere in the Solar System. "[W]e must ... continue to go into space for the future of humanity," Hawking said in a lecture at the University of Cambridge this week. "I don’t think we will survive another 1,000 years without escaping beyond our fragile planet." The fate of humanity appears to have been weighing heavily on Hawking of late - he’s also recently cautioned that artificial intelligence (AI) will be "either the best, or the worst, thing ever to happen to humanity". Given that humans are prone to making the same mistakes over and over again - even though we’re obsessed with our own history and should know better - Hawking suspects that "powerful autonomous weapons” could have serious consequences for humanity.



www.sciencealert.com...

cheer up!!




posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 05:20 AM
link   
No he's wrong we have at least another five thousand years. Prove me wrong.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 05:21 AM
link   
1000 years is a long time. Only alien intervention or attack could cause us to unite (or mass devestation on a global scale).

"The last to starve will be the first to suffocate"



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 05:22 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBulk
Just used my time machine and you were wrong.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 05:25 AM
link   
Ahh Prof Hawings....Now let's hear from specialists in the field. Instead of a "physicist" out of his field.Unless a black hole is going to consume us or we are going to be hit by a supernova's massive gamma ray burst.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 05:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog
Ahh Prof Hawings....Now let's hear from specialists in the field. Instead of a "physicist" out of his field.Unless a black hole is going to consume us or we are going to be hit by a supernova's massive gamma ray burst.


If i remember correctly he wasn't talking about black holes or supernova's or any other such BS, what he was getting at was the continued rise in the Human population on this planet, in 1000 years at the continuing expansion, this planet will not be able to sustain its forecasted population

Unless something drastic happens, birth control, wars etc to keep the population in check or some form of free limitless fuel, food and water is discovered i think he may have a point.

Just hope them Cylons don't start following us when we do depart for pastures new



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 05:42 AM
link   
a reply to: corblimeyguvnor

They will be waiting, they always do. Plus I gave away the coordinates of all the colonies when I dated that fit blonde.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 05:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

He is talking about colonising the solar system so I think a physicist is a bit more knowledgeable than the average person. He's pretty good at maths believe it or not so I think he's more than qualified for these sort of projections.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 05:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: corblimeyguvnor

originally posted by: Gothmog
Ahh Prof Hawings....Now let's hear from specialists in the field. Instead of a "physicist" out of his field.Unless a black hole is going to consume us or we are going to be hit by a supernova's massive gamma ray burst.


If i remember correctly he wasn't talking about black holes or supernova's or any other such BS, what he was getting at was the continued rise in the Human population on this planet, in 1000 years at the continuing expansion, this planet will not be able to sustain its forecasted population

Unless something drastic happens, birth control, wars etc to keep the population in check or some form of free limitless fuel, food and water is discovered i think he may have a point.

Just hope them Cylons don't start following us when we do depart for pastures new

That exemplifies and qualifies my statement exactly. Thanks for the support
Next.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 05:53 AM
link   
a reply to: GemmyMcGemJew
And the reason as stated for the need to colonize ? The reason for the OP ? Forgotten already ?
Next...


edit on 11/17/16 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 06:24 AM
link   
Steven hawking is a bitter old broken man who curses the healthy with every machine assisted breath. He always has.
And he's not an authority on the future of mankind.


As if....



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 06:24 AM
link   
a reply to: athousandlives

thats fine - i shall be death by then



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 06:31 AM
link   
In a thousand years, at the pace our technology is evolving, we probably wouldn't be considered human by then. Also, if we could survive in outer space, then we could survive on a lifeless Earth as well. I agree that Hawking should stick to physics and occasional appearances on The Big Bang Theory.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 06:50 AM
link   
I agree with Hawking. We absolutely need to focus on space travel and colonizing other planets. We are putting all our eggs in one basket keeping everyone here on Earth. I think people don't appreciate just how devastating natural disasters can be. Whether that originates on Earth or comes from space.

I'm much more hopeful about Artificial Intelligence than he is. I think advancement in that arena is precisely where we need to focus. I understand the concern though.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

I'm sorry, did you just claim that a physicist and futurologist should not comment on affairs pertaining to the possibilities presented by autonomous weapons and the future of life on earth?

If so, may I ask how you voted?

The only reason I ask, is that if you have a problem with listening to the advice of an intelligent man outside of his field, then one must assume that you did not vote for an incompetent buffoon whose field of knowledge is limited exclusively to con artistry, to do a job which is so infinitesimally complicated because it pertains to maintaining the structure which keeps millions of thinking, breathing people in kibble and bits, and in work to earn those by.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:24 AM
link   
It wouldn't surprise me at all. I would like to see us focus on taking care of what we have. Nurture it as we would an aging parent or fragile loved one.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:37 AM
link   
a reply to: athousandlives

He's right inasmuch as mankind's ultimate survival is contingent on colonising other planets, though conjuring up an arbitrary number of a thousand years is meaningless.

Anyway, I'm surprised he gives mankind as long as that given that he appears to believe most people will be killed off and the rest turned into mindless thralls by despotic, intelligent computers that will 'magically' develop consciousness before the end of the century.



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:49 AM
link   
That seems way too long. I say a couple hundred at most



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Gothmog

I'm sorry, did you just claim that a physicist and futurologist should not comment on affairs pertaining to the possibilities presented by autonomous weapons and the future of life on earth?

If so, may I ask how you voted?

The only reason I ask, is that if you have a problem with listening to the advice of an intelligent man outside of his field, then one must assume that you did not vote for an incompetent buffoon whose field of knowledge is limited exclusively to con artistry, to do a job which is so infinitesimally complicated because it pertains to maintaining the structure which keeps millions of thinking, breathing people in kibble and bits, and in work to earn those by.


Irrelevant how I voted. Why do you feel you need to ask ? Bringing politics in to everything these day ? Not like you. Nor does it become you
Hawkings is a physicist

Physicist - Def per Google defs


noun noun: physicist; plural noun: physicists
an expert in or student of physics.


Physics - Def per Physics Wiki


Physics (from Ancient Greek: φυσική (ἐπιστήμη) phusikḗ (epistḗmē) "knowledge of nature", from φύσις phúsis "nature") is the natural science that involves the study of matter and its motion and behavior through space and time, along with related concepts such as energy and force.


Yes. And do I see "seer" "soothsayer" "crystal ball reader" in the above definitions
I am not a Hawkings fan , especially when he tries to go out of his field .

But , to try to bring politics and calling politician names in a debate of an intellectual level , kinda shows the poster to be of a certain intellectual ability

ETA: Hawkings is soooo 70s


edit on 11/17/16 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:55 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit
Come on now, you know one person doesn't run the entire complex machine that is the government.

On topic: I think Mr. Hawking is very smart. I don't know about his future forecasting abilities though and I believe that was the only point trying to be made, as I saw it.
He does make a fantastic point though, we do need to start spreading out into the galaxy like the cancer we are.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join