Documentary - Life After People - is this a subtle look of what is to come

reply to post by ArMaP


Here is the link, it should take you to page 5, that has the best version's as i rushed the original post and it took me awhile to put a picture togther that pointed out what i was talking about. The link to the original raw is on my OP. But look at page 5.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I will U2U just incase you miss this reply

Oh and i said 1000yrs depending on the building materials

[edit on 25-4-2010 by Havick007]

[edit on 25-4-2010 by Havick007]

The earth after the dissappearance of humans.

I saw the doc too, but am not 100% statisfied that this will be the future of earth.
Of course plants will come back, trees will try to reach the sky again. But it will be a world we can`t imagine.
Every single thing in this world is connected with each other. The simple mozzie contribute to the beautiful flight of the eagle. A lonely waterhole somewhere in the middle of nowhere find his way to the deep ocean. The magnificent butterfly brings the enormous rainforest to life.
Only the humans seem not to fit in this perfect circle. Since the excistence of mankind we have been able to create a lifeless world. Concreet buildings, mechanical engines, etc. And for the candle on the cake, we managed to slowly break down this connected world. Animals ,who once contributed to this circle, only excist in books anymore. With our never statified consuming attitude, we managed to reorganise the world to our selfish needs. Animals that are to dangerous , or don`t contribute to our needs are extinct, or will be. Trees and plants that have no financial value are cut away and changed by other.
So by destroying this connected world , we are creating another world with the human kind as ruler and provider.
If human kind , for some other reason dissappear, nature will be left alone.
No more insectides, no more interference. The world will have to try to survive after the damage that has been done. Certain animals will prospect, because they don`t have natural enemies anymore. Some species just gonna dissapear because there is nothing left anymore to eat.
To go back to the doc, i don`t believe there will be deers running around in the city, the majestic roar of the lion will never be heard again, They just want excist anymore.

Maybe the world will find his own balance again , populated with species and plants we don`t know of. Or maybe the world will turn again to a lifeless place for thousands of year, when suddenly life starts to grown again, and try again to create a perfect living world.

Just a thought.

One other school of thought is that the producers may have wanted to show that people do/can make a difference in our enviornment, at a time in our history when so many think that nothing they do will ever matter, and to get people to think about the positives and negatives of that impact.

Well,another interesting,thought provoking thread.

I think(therefore I am) that a more appropriate term for humans presently occupying the earth is parasite and not virus. check the links and you will see I am correct.

I take the documentary series at only its entertainment value only.

The "History" channel is no longer a channel dedicated to showing shows on history.

Those documentaries are as about as factual as the Jetsons cartoons were for those old enough to have seen them.

Modern man may not survive the next global catastrophe that will surely occur in the future,but I know the aboriginal peoples will survive and repopulates the earth.

Structures built to last will in some form survive even if the native vegetation covers it.

Machu Pichu comes to mind.Angkor Wat,the many ancient cities known to be hidden in the South American jungles ar some others.

I can quickly name one place where engineers say the structures may remain long after man has left.A thousand years may be a stretch but over a hundred possibly.

Adak,Alaska was the home for a naval air station that has been closed for sometime now.The climate is very harsh with gale force wind and rain/snow a daily occurrence and earthquakes are very common.

Because it is very remote and the expense of transporting building materials high,the military took the attitude of "building it to last" to heart,and did.

The barracks and administrative buildings built on top of Bering hill are like fortresses.Very little maintenance was ever needed on the outside of the buildings during the base's operational existence.

They are wind,rain and earthquake proof.They had to be.

There is no evasive vegetation on the island to create cracks etc.only tundra.

It will be interesting to see how it survives.

Using Chernobyl as an example is humorous.

The Soviets were not actually known for their quality construction methods now were they?


[edit on 25-4-2010 by Oneolddude]

reply to post by Oneolddude


Yeah of course, i never it said it was a serious show but a possibility, thats all

reply to post by ArMaP


dont be silly your arguing semantics and well any fool can make an argument over the loose interpretation of a word in general conversation.

Chernobyl wasnt 50 years ago even, it occurred on 26 April 1986 24years roughly...it wasnt a small village either.

As to some of the other content in your posts..come on, the reason there are digs to discover ancient civilizations is because nature has hidden them....not because it's cool to dig in a remote location for years...
Yer I admit there would be remonstrates of modern man but as a general man language nature would win and devour most if not all traces of modern life as we know it.

Now please refrain from arguing over nothing set an example of how one should act in the forum you moderate...

This is running on my local TV.

It's just populism. Pretty uninteresting IMO. I would even say propaganda.

reply to post by Rollo

Yes, I am also arguing semantics, because that's what we use to communicate.

If we use words or expressions with more than one meaning we should write or say them in the best way to avoid confusion or misunderstandings.

To me, 1000 years means exactly that, and even if you leave some error margin that wouldn't be a 100% error margin.

And although we have digs to find ancient civilisations and their artefacts (there have been several in the place where I live), there are also many cases in which there isn't any need for them because those things are visible after 2000 years or more.

And as for Chernobyl, I don't think it's a good example either, because it was a special case and we don't know how the radiation affected all the fauna and flora of the area.

good point with the radiation possible effect, but on a whole, lets investigate the most comment artifacts left , as you said castles, ancient buildings...

But apart from the few buildings and ruins(that haven't been protected restored and maintained) it's safe to say it's like there was never any trace of most civilizations....the only lasting thing is cave art...on natural geography, but even then time will be the victor there too.

That show always makes me think of the possibility of ancient civilizations being far more advanced than we give them credit for. We see pyramids and what not and scratch our heads on how a primitive civilization could have possibly constructed such things without advanced technology like we have today.

Well if civilization was wiped away today and 1000 years from now signs of our being were erased, the pyramids would still be there. The Great Wall Of China would still be there. Mt. Rushmore would still be there. However our tools of construction would be gone and pretty much anything else to show that we are an advanced civilization. 5,000-10,000 years from now when civilization is starting to arise again looking back on history we could be looked as primitive. Without all the solid evidence still intact to show how we built the things that stood the test of time people of the future will be on forums like this discussing how the only logical explanation would be that aliens had to have helped us get to where we are today.

That's my theory. The ancient civilizations that we look at as being primitive were probably far more advanced than we give them credit for, just everything that could explain their being has been lost with time.

-Pi

reply to post by PiReight


oh for sure...I think our arrogance of modern life is astounding, we always imagine well I will speak in regards to people I have talked to about this sort of thing, and the over riding idea of past ages is dirt, oppression, suffering, primitive hard life.

Well yer they didn't have all the modern microwave ovens, spray and wipe, cars, tv etc...but if that is our medal of superiority..then wow we suck!

They had community, healthy non GM crops, no pollution, more spiritual, in touch with nature...technologies we are still in awe of....etc

Hell I wish we could re-gain some of the old ways, ie food, community and the like. If life only lasted 40-50 years who cares! No need for botox, silicon breasts and medical insurance, and being bombarded with advertising to buy buy buy buy buy...!!!!
While say that some of modern advances have been great dont get me wrong...but if anyone barks up about the past ages and slavery...hell most people are in slavery at the moment!

[edit on 27-4-2010 by Rollo]

I really like this show, and so do my kiddos.
I like how they don't argue what happened, and just POOF we are all gone, and how things erode and just how much we actually have a hand on how things work. I just assumed that the power companies would just keep churning it out. Okay dating myself, but I thought it would be like that cheesy 80's movie "Night of the Comet"

And for the Mod posting on this, I can't even begin to imagine what it would be like to live near actual landmarks like you do. Being from America, we are still the new kids on the block and not surrounded by such a vast and rich history. (yes we have our own wonderfully rich history, but not like our Global Neighbors.)

And for the person who said humans are like a virus.. I totally get your point. I felt it was a great example, and not damning us as the eeviiill virus people. Even a regular person just trying to get their history geek flag in the air got the point. No need to fight semantics on it.

Anywhoo.. I feel this is a pretty interesting show, that stemmed from a pretty interesting documentary, and just shows how things work, how things erode and how humans can change the landscape of things.

reply to post by PiReight


PiReight I really like your theory. S n F for you

reply to post by Rollo


One has to assume that some of the pace of reforestation has to do with unusual growth due to the radiation from the disaster though, its not as if the site of that incident can be used to accurately assess the normal speed of re growth, its not a normal environment.

Yes.. made of Stone or Petra.. a reply to: ArMaP

originally posted by: Rollo
wow it's an old show I think from memory I saw it 2years ago now...
Interesting all the same, Chernobyl is almost virgin forest again with abundant wildlife... Buildings are being reclaimed by nature and in a few years you wouldnt even know there was a city there.

In Russian, Chern-obyl means black cloud, an apt name for the town.

After a couple of years the place would be inhabitable for a very long time. Once all the nuke plants pop off it will be tough living. within a few month they will all hopefully have burnt out and just sit there spewing stuff with the wind.

Professor Jason Wright, who is an associate professor in astronomy and astrophysics at Pennsylvania State University, published a paper a while ago called "Prior Indigenous Technological Species". (Those professors sure know how to name a paper to stir the imagination.)

Some of you might find it interesting.

The Daily Mail ran a rather more sensational article on it, complete with a picture of an alien.

Here is a quote from those science buffs at the Daily Mail:

In a new paper, titled 'Prior Indigenous Technological Species', Professor Wright suggests that ancient aliens could have lived on either Mars, Venus or even Earth.

And Professor Wright claims that there's a chance we could soon discover 'technosignatures' left behind by the aliens.

In his paper, published in arXiv, he writes: 'A prior indigenous technological species might have arisen on ancient Earth or another body, such as a pre-greenhouse Venus or a wet Mars.'

But most evidence of these aliens would probably be lost by now.

Now if you read the actual paper, it is pretty devoid of any proof of anything at all. But it does deal with some of the things being brought up in this thread. Such as our ability to detect such signs of a previous civilisation.

Article in The Daily Mail (For the sensationalist angle)

The Actual Paper (For those who are really interested)

Cheers,

BT

a reply to: ararisq
look at the planet as a whole just not your little neck of the woods. We are making this planet uninhabitable for humans. I won't say destroying the planet because it will be here long after we're gone. In my opinion from what I have studied we are contributing very little to global warming. This is just part of the cycle for this planet.

Back on topic, I have seen the show referenced by the op and enjoyed watching the planet heal.