Science and Technology Will Extinguish Humanity

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by hujiaqi_beijing, Jul 25, 2009.

  1. hujiaqi_beijing Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8
    The Continuous Development of Science and Technology Will Definitely Make Humans Extinct Soon

    Humanity is facing extinction, which is the conclusion from my study of nearly three decades, and it is not alarming. Natural extinction of humanity will happen billions of years later, but the threat of extinction we are facing is due to the non-rational development of science and technology.

    I. The Means Of Extinction Are Inevitable.


    The power of science and technology is enormous, and it can enhance human capacity by millions of times, or even thousands of millions of times. The electric transmission of information has increased the speed of long-distance communication between human beings by thousands of millions of times; while the large-scale computer has improved the computing capacity of human beings by hundreds of billions of times.

    How many times has the capacity of self-destruction of humanity been improved by science and technology? Now a nuclear bomb could easily destroy a city of millions of people; the biological toxin transformed by use of transgenic technology is even more devastating than nuclear weapons. But no matter how terrible the means of destruction are, they will not extinguish human beings. Even if they are used together with all the nuclear weapons, they will destroy hundreds of billions of people and cause a nuclear winter, but will not result in the extinction of human beings (which is found by research of the relevant bodies). However, apparently the development of science has not reached its summit, and as long as science and technology does not stop developing, they will reach a higher level. Therefore, its destruction power will finally be able to extinguish human beings one day, which means that extinction means are inevitable. This is a relatively easy logic conclusion.

    The above conclusion, i.e. the extinction means is inevitable, is actually agreed upon by the scientific community, but since the following problems did not draw widespread attention, science and technology has always been in non-rational development.

    II. The Means of Extinction Will Be Used Definitely


    When science and technology is so developed that it can produce the means of extinction, such means and developing technology will continue to spread. After the earliest extinction means appear, the second, third and even more extinction means will also appear in succession. The new extinction means will be more accessible, more powerful and more user-friendly for one person to operate independently, and it will be spread to the people who dare to use it sooner or later.

    What is to be stressed is that humanity is not completely evolved. No matter how perfect the social system is, how strict the legal system is or how good the moral atmosphere is, they can only bind the community as a whole. It cannot guarantee one hundred percent that everyone is absolutely rational and will never do extremely bad things which would bring the end of human beings, even if it was only done once by someone.

    III. Extinction Power Can Also Burst Out Unintentionally


    In fact, extinction power will not only burst out because of intentional use, and it can also burst out even if no one makes intentional use of it.
    Science and technology has one large feature, its uncertainty. We often think that the best scientific and technological achievements are the worst. This means that, as the development of science and technology reaches a level that can extinguish humans, the careless use of scientific and technological achievements as well as scientific experiments may lead unintentionally to the extinction power bursting out unexpectedly, thus putting humanity in the abyss leading to extinction.

    Some idealists always wonder if we can avoid such accidents through high meticulousness. It actually is impossible! This is because uncertainty is the inherent characteristic of science and technology, and even Einstein and Newton had a lot of scientific errors. What is more, not everyone is as great as Einstein and Newton.

    IV. Self-extinction Is In The Near Future

    It now appears that a nuclear bomb could destroy a city of millions of people, and the transgenic biological toxins are even more harmful. In fact, such power is not far from the power needed to make humans extinct. Science and technology made its real start in the industrial revolution of the mid-18th century, only 200 years ago. It was in such a short span of 200 years that humans raised the level of science and technology from zero to the level nearly enough to make humans extinct. Today, the production speed of science and technology is much faster than that of the past, and it is in accelerated fission development. Most scientists believe that extinction means will occur in this century, and even within 30 or 50 years. Then, will it be long before the extinction power bursts out after extinction means occur?!
    Therefore, the self-extinction of humanity is actually in the near future, and it is still late even if we take measures right now.

    Hu Jia Qi has been researching the extinction of humanity for the past 30 years and has written 4 books on the issue. They are all in Chinese, but one is currently being translated into English to be published soon in the United States. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to email them to hujiaqi_beijing@yahoo.com. Also, if you would like to be updated on the status of the book or are a publishing house wishing to contact the author, you can email contact him via his website at www-hujiaqi-com.
     
  2. Ro6 Registered Member

    Messages:
    12
    So, you are claiming it is an undoubted certainty that humans with technology will lead us to our extinction?
     
  3. spidergoat nameless monster Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    47,011
    I agree. Although, there is a small chance that fear of such weapons will prevent their use.
     
  4. hujiaqi_beijing Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8
    yes
     
  5. The Esotericist Getting the message to Garcia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,118
    Are you an optimist or a pessimist?
     
  6. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,531
    That's a supposition.

    Granted.
    Bigger and better.
    That's the way to do it...

    Supposition again.

    Really?
    You'd think that the more dangerous something could be the more safety features we'd build into it.
    Oh, wait: we do.

    Well obviously.
    The only time you can state categorically that something has completely evolved is when its entire species is now extinct. If it's still around it's still evolving. But you seem to be assuming that as a species we'll "evolve" away from... what? Human emotions? Wanting the other guy to go away?

    Another supposition.
    Based on the unintentional uses we've had of nuclear weapons?
    Oh, hang on...

    So long as it's sometime before next Friday, it'll save me paying the fine on my library books.
    Another supposition.

    Any sources for that?

    Wrong again.
    I can think of several solutions.

    Tough topic to research since it's all speculative.

    So basically, since you claim that there's no way to stop it and it's inevitable, you're telling us because... you like to make people panic? You enjoy spreading doom and gloom? Or you're trying to sell books?
    I wonder what the point of that would be.
    I hope they're really short books, otherwise we may not get to finish them before it's too late.
    Still we can die happy knowing we made your last few years comfortable by putting our money into your pocket.
     
  7. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,321
    Incorrect by at least one order of magnitude.
    No it isn't. The scientific community does not have a consensus view on this topic. The subject matter lies far outside the field of interest of the vast majority of scientists. Any opinions they hold on the matter they hold, at best, as informed laypersons, not as scientists.
    This is an ignorant statement. There is no such thing as 'completely evolved'. If you are talking of biological evolution then you clearly have no understanding of it whatsoever. If you are speaking of ethical, cultural and moral evolution then you are indulging in the fallacy of equating value judgements with objective facts. Either way the statements is foolish.
    Rubbish. As Dywyddyr has said, give us a source for this outrageous statement.
     
  8. baftan ******* Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,142
    Even if we accept your warning or claim, I want to raise this question: What is your suggestion for our future? Would you recommend us not to do anything or to control our technology? Maybe we should stop reproducing since there is no point... If nothing can stop what's going to happen, what is the point? Because we could easily go extinct by a huge asteroid or uncontrollable pandemic, too. If you are raising technology-helped extinction among other possibilities, you must have a point. Otherwise, instead of doing three decade estimation research, you could reach the same conclusion by following Hollywood's science fiction movies in last two decades, and perfectly being convinced that we are going to be doomed, one way or another...

    So what else in your study?
     
  9. hujiaqi_beijing Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8
    My suggestion is to restrain the further development of science and technology, while promoting safe and widespread use of current technologies. My goal is to promote this issue in order to create an awakening movement among people that will lead to world unification on this topic. I will be posting more articles that explain this solution in more detail. All material is available on my website if you wish to read it now.
     
  10. Enmos Staff Member

    Messages:
    43,136
    Yay !
    No one cares anyway..
     
  11. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,531
    Why?
    To what end?
    Since you have already claimed
    What good would that do apart from make the last few years a little more fraught?
    Let's just party.
     
  12. DRZion Theoretical Experimentalist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,046
    Life has gotten a whole lot better due to technology. There is less death than ever. We have drugs, doctors, hospitals, engineers, airplanes, internet, phones, diplomats, armies, democracies; this is the price of progress.
    I'd say there is more genetic diversity than ever. Genetic diversity is the currency of evolution.

    However, I do have some designs that would end life as we know it.. but so lucrative is their function. Contamination would have to be controlled.
     
  13. Enmos Staff Member

    Messages:
    43,136
    You mean human life.

    Hand it over.
     
  14. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,531
    Really?
    I doubt it.
     
  15. DRZion Theoretical Experimentalist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,046
    Well, yeah. If a cataclysm comes, I think that the human race is, at least genetically, far more capable of coping with it than we have ever before in history.

    It is not something to be taken lightly. I am talking about biological ice-9 .
     
  16. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,531
    Well of course.
    Does it come in different flavours?
     
  17. baftan ******* Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,142
    I read some articles on your website. Before that, I would like to make two remarks about it: The background colour of your site is too dark, too difficult to read the articles. Either change the background colour, or change the font colour, make it readable. Secondly, when I entered your address to the bar, I ended up with a site which says “under construction”. Thanks to help of Google I found it. I think you should give a specific direction so that people can easily reach.

    When we look at the main picture of your ideas…

    I agree with almost all of your descriptions about the general picture of human development, the state of living species and other information about universe. It did not say anything new, because the most of them are already our daily life subjects, while other issues are already discussed in this forum as well as thousands of other places. Agreeing with you on these areas is actually agreeing with the general knowledge of current situation of our civilization.

    Here is a passage from your “Open Letter to 26 World Leaders” article:

    “The extinction of any species is a result of the maladjustment of the natural environment. As the only intelligent life on this planet, there is no need for us to cope with the climatic changes with a naked body and fight against beasts with bare hands. What is more, there is no more relying on nature’s simple food such as berries or fruits, for we can enjoy our productions creatively.”

    If we know this, we also know that we need more science and more technology. Because, among other things, science and technology makes us distinctive species on this planet, and they give us real possibility for a longer survival than our natural limits. If you are able to talk about and be aware of global scale issues, communication, knowledge of universe and many other things, it is mostly due to science and technology. You are basically saying that science and technology should be controlled by world leaders; but these are the main responsible bodies who already controls over our subject issues. Science and Technology are tools, and if they look like some dangerous means to end humanity, it is because some people or authorities are manipulating them towards this direction. These tools can also be directed towards the well being of humanity, it’s a political choice.

    “The restriction of science and technology” is a dangerous path to follow: You may also be restricting the possible outcomes of future science. If you want to ask something useful from world bastards, ask them what are they doing for their people, what are they investing on science, atom bomb or cures for human condition.


    I also share your excitement about the “the problem of the extinction of human beings”. I believe we humans have become the subjects to an interesting possibility of this universe and atoms, forces and life have gained consciousness through our existence. As Einstein once said, “The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is THAT it is comprehensible”.
     
  18. DRZion Theoretical Experimentalist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,046
    A bacterial ice-9 would either freeze the oceans or consume all nutrients, whichever came first. Very dangerous.
     
  19. Enmos Staff Member

    Messages:
    43,136
    :rolleyes:

    Even assuming for a moment that such a thing actually exists, you claim you have it in your possession ?
     
  20. spidergoat nameless monster Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    47,011
    I agree with baftan, science and technology aren't to blame, but rather human biology. It might take further science to solve the problem. At least those who survived would probably need science and technology just to live.
     

Share This Page