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.

 

Top astronomers warn the world could end within 90 years

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Source




The end of the world is nigh. That's what top astronomers will claim during a debate to end the 2011 Edinburgh International Science Festival.

Lord Martin Rees, the Astronomer Royal, believes civilisation has only a 50 per cent chance of surviving to 2100 without suffering a man-made catastrophe.

And the Astronomer Royal for Scotland, Professor John Brown, has an equally bleak outlook, fearing a random event from outer space is the most likely cause of our demise.

They will take to the stage to put forward their stark predictions in the discussion "Fire in the Sky: Cosmic Threats to Earth".

Despite having widely differing views, these two titans of astronomy between them offer global warming, over-population, terrorism, an asteroid falling to earth and a solar blast as potential reasons to panic.


Now this story kind bugs me.

Seems like everyone wants the human race to die out, or wants to make some prediction as to when this is going to happen. Why must we do this? We have survived a lot of close calls in our small transitions to get out of Africa, why do we give ourselves so little credit?

What separates us from the animal kingdom is our ability to adapt, we can thrive in any climate in just about any situation, why would we think that even if something bad happened a percentage of us wouldn't make it through unscathed?

We had a bottleneck in our history which had us down to only 70,000-80,000 and we made it through that, as that is why our whole race is shares 99.9% of DNA with each-other.

Sorry for the rant, I wanted to share it as it is a good story, I just hate that people always count the human race out.

Any thoughts?

Pred...




posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by predator0187
 


They portray it as if it's a joke and this is funny meanwhile the world is ending and we're all just standing still



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
well, E.L.E. 's do happen, and one hasn't happened since the biblical flood. So, i would say that the chances for a big event, (either man made or natural) are pretty good within the next 100 years.

Of course, a medium or small sized natural event could be exacerbated by our nuclear plants failing and melting down.

Ahhh, doom and gloom.......it is what we make it



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   
The world could end in one hour or 1,000 years....not just man made, but threats from space too (not aliens, I mean natural things,like asteroids, comets, etc). It's a crap shoot. A very hostile environment, the universe! But I will say that mankind has increased the risk significantly (as if we needed more risk of annihilation!)



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
these people could very well have information that the vast majority of us do not...convincing people to prepare for disaster without actually naming something specific that could cause mass panic might even be a good idea...i would say that science (nuclear catastrophes, HAARP, gmos, etc) will be a much more likely culprit than a surprise comet strike, but you never know (even though these people might)...



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   
An E.L.E in the stone age would have knocked the survivors back to the stone age

And E.L.E. today would knock the survivors back to the stone age.

And as technology advances, so the level of knock back increases. But so does our chances of preventing it happening.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by predator0187
 


I think because you're calling the events we survived before as "close calls", where as these scientists are eliminating "close call" events - perhaps because we do have the ability to survive them - and jumping straight to E.L.Es, something which none on Earth could survive.

That's speaking about the potential for an asteroid to strike, where as a man-made event has the potential to be prevented, but will it?

No.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
S&F for OP.

I couldn’t agree more. Man is far more resourceful and hearty than people like the individuals cited give us credit for being. Humans are the only species that occupies a niche in nearly every ecology on earth from the arctic to the deserts.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
I agree with Stealthykat. There are a great many things that can go wrong in the world or the universe. That's nature. Happens all the time. The sun could throw some solar storms this way and cause all kinds of trouble. There are comets, tectonic movements, super volcanoes, diseases. And as was previously mentioned; all of these could create a chain reaction that would only exacerbate things. Nuclear plants need people to run them after all. That alone would be reallllly bad for most of us. I think it was James Cameron who said it best "Mankind is Mankind's worst enemy. Some global or celestial body may cause the problem, but our own "technology" will likely finish the job. Some humans may survive. The question is; would humanity survive?



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Just wait till the doomsayers hear about this one. We'll never hear the end of it...

As for complete extinction, I think the human race is touch enough to get through a major disaster.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Trying to be nice out today, may as well enjoy it whatever tomorrow might bring. It's not hard to imagine the Earth as a fragile little bubble that could certainly be popped at any given moment by a number things. That is more than enough reason to me not to hesitate to spread Earth-life as far and wide as possible.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   


Just marketing and well done at that. You will notice that in the article they mention that it's unlikely in our lifetimes.

This is to attract an audience. To make it entertaining. Those types of events can be boring affairs.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   
so accroding to you, if only 90% of us die, that`s nothing to be alarmed about? and actually if you take into account the difference in physical strength and the dependance on technologies that will no longer be available... I really have a hard time believing that about 600 to 700,000,000 of us would survive a mass extinction level event such as those experienced by our ancestors. people will be killing EACHOTHER at unheard of rates in the months following a global breakdown, is my prediction. I would say that within a year or two following such a cataclysmic event, we would be down to less than 500,000 survivors including any new births... I offer no credentials, psychic claims or links, only my own original thoughts. As original as a thought CAN be, that is. Let`s just hope we can avoid a disaster like this from happeningat least in the next 90 years. Maybe in 900 we will be better equipped to handle it



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


I agree it is just an attention getting headline, it just pisses me of that people have so little faith in the human race. I mean good on them for finding an attention grabbing headline, I just don't like the spreading of fear.

Pred...



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by predator0187
 


I agree. The fear mongering is out of control. With the Internet it's predictable though and unavoidable. Look how effectively the idea of Memes is utilized.

Does sound like it would be interesting to attend though. I have no objection to the idea of what if's and what could be possible. Educational and entertaining at the same time.

If I spent my time living where I do, worrying about earthquakes, I'd go mad. Same thing if I worried about Hurricanes and lived in Florida. Best to keep these things entertainment and in particular with the idea of Earth ending events. Still though, I love the doomsday movies.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by iforget
 


A healthy life view. We need a lot more of that around this place. It's great out here also. In the high 40's and sunshine here in April is a spectacular day in fact. You convinced me to go outside for a while and soak up the vitamin D.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by doctor j and inmate c5779
so accroding to you, if only 90% of us die, that`s nothing to be alarmed about? and actually if you take into account the difference in physical strength and the dependance on technologies that will no longer be available... I really have a hard time believing that about 600 to 700,000,000 of us would survive a mass extinction level event such as those experienced by our ancestors. people will be killing EACHOTHER at unheard of rates in the months following a global breakdown, is my prediction. I would say that within a year or two following such a cataclysmic event, we would be down to less than 500,000 survivors including any new births... I offer no credentials, psychic claims or links, only my own original thoughts. As original as a thought CAN be, that is. Let`s just hope we can avoid a disaster like this from happeningat least in the next 90 years. Maybe in 900 we will be better equipped to handle it


Well let's all settle on a "do-able" number.

How does 200,000,000 sound? Nice round number?




posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Dumb ATS'er warns that the 'TOP' will be dropped from these astronomers titles within the next 90 days and they will simply be called astronomers.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 01:44 AM
link   
Professors are degreed bull#ters. Take everything they say with buckets of salt.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 02:19 AM
link   
It sounds to me like we have something less than 90 years left in which to stop laughing at flying saucers, and start mass-producing them. NASA's rockets won't get us to those new-found Kepler planets.


edit on 4/22/2011 by Larryman because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join