Can the human race survive the next 100 years?

If a worldwide (not localized) nuclear war breaks ou

Not sure i understand what a localized nuclear war is.

Who would be the powers behind that?
 
One thing I have wondered for quite awhile is the shortest time frame between nuclear explosions.

is the shortest August 6 and 9, 1945, does that still stand?

Pretty much firecrackers by todays standards
 
Nuclear war will not exterminate the human race. There are MANY underground military and civilian bases which have the capability of supporting groups for decades.

Remember that survival is food and water.

I think a gamma ray storm would be pretty cool. Ultimately, only chemistry can be our undoing. Some atmospheric catalyst could cause irreversible devestation. Like I said, groups will hide underground for decades, but upon return to the surface will find a dead planet.

oooooooo... if the earths mantle freaked out and boiled all the ocean's water. That would be enough to kill EVERYTHING!!!!! muahahahahaha
 
Manhattan Project chief scientist Dr J. Robert Oppenheimer was known to be familiar with ancient Sanskrit literature. In an interview conducted after he watched the first atomic test, he quoted from the Bhagavad Gita: "'Now I am become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds.' I suppose we all felt that way." When asked in an interview at Rochester University seven years after the Alamogordo nuclear test whether that was the first atomic bomb ever to be detonated, his reply was, "Well, yes, in modern history."
Click to expand...

Well, we are still here....
 
The human race will not just survive millions of years, it will live on forever. The human race will become the matrix of other races and will blend in its genes into other civilizations. The human race will have countless number of wars and countless number of Apocalypses and many stages of peace and happiness as well.
 
kmguru said:
When asked in an interview at Rochester University seven years after the Alamogordo nuclear test whether that was the first atomic bomb ever to be detonated, his reply was, "Well, yes, in modern history."
Click to expand...

Well, we are still here....
Click to expand...

Him implying in "modern history" means he believes civilizations before us existed which had/have the nuclear power ability? :bugeye:
 
Alchemists were a wierd bunch who blew up anything they could. Im sure they got some radioactive uranium isotopes.

"What do you want to do with this, professor?"

"BURN IT!"
 
Slacker47 said:
Alchemists were a wierd bunch who blew up anything they could. Im sure they got some radioactive uranium isotopes.

"What do you want to do with this, professor?"

"BURN IT!"
Click to expand...

you dont get a nuclear reaction that way. There needs to be an actual knowledge in physics to accomplish something as a nuclear explosion.
 
with the advent of the hydrogen bomb the goal posts have been moved so far it's absurd to think that there can be such a thing as survivability of any nuclear war.

Yeah, you can say there are underground bunkers, but the correct term is tombs.
Thermos don't take out cities they take out countries.

J. Robert opened the genie's bottle , Teller took it to another level.

I don't think there is going to be any country that's going to sit back and be pounded by fission bombs and not resort to hydrogen bombs when the going gets bad.

Russia isn't, China isn't , The UK won't and neither will the US
 
PieAreSquared said:
Not sure i understand what a localized nuclear war is.

Who would be the powers behind that?
Click to expand...

1. Pakistan and India nuking each other would count as localized nuclear war.
2. A small nuke going off in an American city also falls in this category.

Slacker47 said:
Nuclear war will not exterminate the human race. There are MANY underground military and civilian bases which have the capability of supporting groups for decades.
Click to expand...

We didn't say exterminate (although debatable) but determie. Cutting 95% of humankind determine the human race...
 
A Paki-India war would qualify i guess.. Looks like India has a thermo and a number of cruise missiles..est. 30-35 weapons..pretty low yield on the thermo.This lower yield raised skepticism about India's claims to have detonated a thermonuclear device.

PackingSam about the same number of weapons, 12k range and a boosted in the 25-35k range

If one were to go off in a US city, it would be more shock effect than anything , the yield would be pretty low. They could do more damage with the right chemy plants
 
Russia and China going at each other..would be a different story. Certainly Japan and Korea would be caught up in the aftermath.
index.html
 
...And Africa, well, they will just kill anything and run around in circles :rolleyes:

In any event, America wins.
 
Genetically engineered "super viruses" would be among the top reasons the human race might be wiped out, in my opinion.
 
imho, there is only one thing thats capable of wiping out humans - we ourselves. But then thats also an act of nature since we r part of it.
 
Nuclear is a great consideration, but look at history. Historically disease, famine, and plague has been the fall of nations. Why should this ever change?
Man is too afraid of the repercussions to use THE BIG BOMB. Ultimately our end comes as a combination of lack of food (famine) the sickness that comes from the lack thereof (disease) and some virus that will rise from the ruin of so many people (plague). As for the next hundred years, well why not ask what is the next intelligent species because ultimately no one knows and can't know until that day is here.
 
But something I always think is that the problems such as climate change, disease outbreaks, population problems etc. could trigger another world war.
 
So in conclusion it seems that outside threats are of the once in a couple hundred thousand years catagory, that we are not going to kill each other off being racists, etc.

HOWEVER, no one has brought out any really new factor which should be brought in. For example, what happens when other animals experience a population crash? Lets look at that for a moment:

Apparently something happens inside the individual when his population density reaches a certain level. It is not absense of food or too many preditors, disease or fighting that causes the population crash. It is that stress begins to rise in the individual. In some animals, it leads directly to death, in others decreased immunity to diseases and parasites. Also, it leads to hostility. Among locusts, it grows into canabalism and the swarms that come across and devestate crops are only fleeing because those behind them will eat them.

Some of this applies also to us. In other words, stress builds up and the medical bill becomes more than we can pay. Crime increases. Behavior in general breaks down. That means that what lies ahead is a gradual BUT IRREGULAR breakdown in behavior. We will have Obama cycles but more Bush cycles, and the general direction is increasingly toward a population crash.

The only way to stop it is to adopt a whole new way of thinking and world view that will work AGAINST rather than WITH our procreative urge and really adopt society to a no-growth population ideal.

Freddie Rocker says that the population will level out in perhaps a hundred years. What I say is "yes," but that is only if we survive that long. I think that the amount of change in the last half century balanced against what can happen in the next half indicates that we have only about 50 years left.

I know from the study of world civilizations throughout history that each comes to a final end eventually, (as the majority have already and have faded into history) but that each is eventually replaced by a new and more advanced one. That is what we must have very soon: a new civilization . . . one that is fitted to solve this situation.

charles
http://atheistic-science.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top