The coming dark ages
-
[Serious Post] /* Disagreement expected */ Things go up and then come down (unless they break orbit) The first world and most of the rest of the world has been in ascendancy of technological and social conditions for several centuries now, and the ascendeancy rate appears to have become an exponetial factor. While I'm sure that there is massive room for more improvement on the planet and beyond, at some stage a sustainability issue must become critical. Examples could be what happens when we run out of our fossil reserves and have no suitable replacement. How do we defend the first world when 99.99% of the planets habitants are on the other side of the borders. If climate chages screw up the "the Ocean Conveyor Belt" and vast areas of the world become intolerable to live in. Or what if the current krill processing operations create total oceanic lifeless ness from breaking the food cycle. I see a whole host of dangers facing the planetary population in the distant future, sure many of them can be debated for hours with no real answer, and only retrospectively time will tell what we should have been doing now. (as it always does) At some time I see it as inevitable that our descendants will enter a knew dark age. The last western dark age was caused by a variety of faxtors, and I expect the next one will be as well. So anyone agree with me ? Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
Warning Link to the minion's animation, do not use. It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
I was wondering the other day what happened to all those people who went off with their families and hid themselves in remote parts of scotland with vast food reserves etc. in readiness for the mass chaos they thought was going to happen as a result of the Yr2K bug? There were plenty of news articles before the event, but I don't recall seeing eny after. Maybe they are still there? :~ Debbie
-
[Serious Post] /* Disagreement expected */ Things go up and then come down (unless they break orbit) The first world and most of the rest of the world has been in ascendancy of technological and social conditions for several centuries now, and the ascendeancy rate appears to have become an exponetial factor. While I'm sure that there is massive room for more improvement on the planet and beyond, at some stage a sustainability issue must become critical. Examples could be what happens when we run out of our fossil reserves and have no suitable replacement. How do we defend the first world when 99.99% of the planets habitants are on the other side of the borders. If climate chages screw up the "the Ocean Conveyor Belt" and vast areas of the world become intolerable to live in. Or what if the current krill processing operations create total oceanic lifeless ness from breaking the food cycle. I see a whole host of dangers facing the planetary population in the distant future, sure many of them can be debated for hours with no real answer, and only retrospectively time will tell what we should have been doing now. (as it always does) At some time I see it as inevitable that our descendants will enter a knew dark age. The last western dark age was caused by a variety of faxtors, and I expect the next one will be as well. So anyone agree with me ? Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
Warning Link to the minion's animation, do not use. It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
The list of possible disasters confronting us is endless. I think SARS is a perfect example of how fragile our civilization is. If the thing had been only a little more deadly and spread a little more easily it could have brought the global economy to its knees. In some ways, I think a nice long dark age might be the best thing that could happen to us. I don't think defending the "first world" would be a problem. Populations would die off in exact proportion to their numbers. In very short order, long before the dreaded third worlders could launch assaults into the first world, the population of the planet would return to much more natural (and sustainable) levels. The problem would be recovering from it - considering that we have used up the bulk of the planet's easily available energy supplies. For example, how could we dig coal to make steel when we need steel to efficiently get to the remaining deeply buried coal deposits? If we do have a new dark age, depending on its severity, it could very well last forever.
-
[Serious Post] /* Disagreement expected */ Things go up and then come down (unless they break orbit) The first world and most of the rest of the world has been in ascendancy of technological and social conditions for several centuries now, and the ascendeancy rate appears to have become an exponetial factor. While I'm sure that there is massive room for more improvement on the planet and beyond, at some stage a sustainability issue must become critical. Examples could be what happens when we run out of our fossil reserves and have no suitable replacement. How do we defend the first world when 99.99% of the planets habitants are on the other side of the borders. If climate chages screw up the "the Ocean Conveyor Belt" and vast areas of the world become intolerable to live in. Or what if the current krill processing operations create total oceanic lifeless ness from breaking the food cycle. I see a whole host of dangers facing the planetary population in the distant future, sure many of them can be debated for hours with no real answer, and only retrospectively time will tell what we should have been doing now. (as it always does) At some time I see it as inevitable that our descendants will enter a knew dark age. The last western dark age was caused by a variety of faxtors, and I expect the next one will be as well. So anyone agree with me ? Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
Warning Link to the minion's animation, do not use. It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
Colin Davies wrote: So anyone agree with me ? Mostly, yes. However, I think, as with many things in life, the "dark ages" will come about from a completely unexpected (or little recognized) area. It's easy to look at nature and say "look at how we're abusing the environment". On the other hand, it's a lot more difficult to predict how technology is changing our social climate. It seems that most developing countries pick up the worst habits of first world countries, not the best. And the influences of first world societies are destroying the cultural connection that people have, both here and abroad. Some people say this is good, what with global economics etc., but I would argue (as others have) that people who are disconnected from their past live with a lot more anxiety and fear. Technology is also creating a crisis in spiritual beliefs (of course, various priests in the US have certainly added fuel to this fire). Similar to a societal bond, a spritual bond is pretty much necessary to weather the storms of daily life. (I imagine that a lot of people would disagree with me). While technology can solve technical, physical problems (while at the same time creating new ones), it does not have solutions for social, spiritual, and familial issues, contrary to the beliefs of many. Others may argue this, but they are simply replacing quality with quantity, close intimacy with distant acquaintance. I was recently visiting a high school in the area (Rhode Island, USA), and was appalled at the science text books. From a presentation point of view, I felt sensory overload with all the pictures, cute drawings, and sound bites. From a content point of view, the were teaching by example, instead of observation and critical thinking. Teaching by example results in the student learning only the example and rarely being able to generalize the solutions, and is a much weaker form of teaching, as the teacher can convey "content" without careful meditation on the choice of words and the flow of sentences. Personally, I feel that this is where the real dark ages will be. Having destroyed our cultural, social, and family bonds, coupled with the shift in education from observation to example, and finally the constant bombardment of media in all forms, the human race is going to suffer many generations of selfish, immediate gratification attitudes and actions and a continuing spiral of ever growing need for more and more external stimulation, whether from drugs, music, movies, o
-
[Serious Post] /* Disagreement expected */ Things go up and then come down (unless they break orbit) The first world and most of the rest of the world has been in ascendancy of technological and social conditions for several centuries now, and the ascendeancy rate appears to have become an exponetial factor. While I'm sure that there is massive room for more improvement on the planet and beyond, at some stage a sustainability issue must become critical. Examples could be what happens when we run out of our fossil reserves and have no suitable replacement. How do we defend the first world when 99.99% of the planets habitants are on the other side of the borders. If climate chages screw up the "the Ocean Conveyor Belt" and vast areas of the world become intolerable to live in. Or what if the current krill processing operations create total oceanic lifeless ness from breaking the food cycle. I see a whole host of dangers facing the planetary population in the distant future, sure many of them can be debated for hours with no real answer, and only retrospectively time will tell what we should have been doing now. (as it always does) At some time I see it as inevitable that our descendants will enter a knew dark age. The last western dark age was caused by a variety of faxtors, and I expect the next one will be as well. So anyone agree with me ? Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
Warning Link to the minion's animation, do not use. It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
Colin Davies wrote: Examples could be what happens when we run out of our fossil reserves and have no suitable replacement. There is replacement - nuclear power, people just need to stop fearing from it. Colin Davies wrote: So anyone agree with me ? Humans are structured to survive, even "dark age" will be, if ever, small temporary problem.
-
Colin Davies wrote: Examples could be what happens when we run out of our fossil reserves and have no suitable replacement. There is replacement - nuclear power, people just need to stop fearing from it. Colin Davies wrote: So anyone agree with me ? Humans are structured to survive, even "dark age" will be, if ever, small temporary problem.
-
[Serious Post] /* Disagreement expected */ Things go up and then come down (unless they break orbit) The first world and most of the rest of the world has been in ascendancy of technological and social conditions for several centuries now, and the ascendeancy rate appears to have become an exponetial factor. While I'm sure that there is massive room for more improvement on the planet and beyond, at some stage a sustainability issue must become critical. Examples could be what happens when we run out of our fossil reserves and have no suitable replacement. How do we defend the first world when 99.99% of the planets habitants are on the other side of the borders. If climate chages screw up the "the Ocean Conveyor Belt" and vast areas of the world become intolerable to live in. Or what if the current krill processing operations create total oceanic lifeless ness from breaking the food cycle. I see a whole host of dangers facing the planetary population in the distant future, sure many of them can be debated for hours with no real answer, and only retrospectively time will tell what we should have been doing now. (as it always does) At some time I see it as inevitable that our descendants will enter a knew dark age. The last western dark age was caused by a variety of faxtors, and I expect the next one will be as well. So anyone agree with me ? Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
Warning Link to the minion's animation, do not use. It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
If there is a dark age, I see a major factor in its arrival being the speed of change. Humans, although intellectually capable of handling change, are not emotionally capable of handling it in the same way. Consider that only 100 years ago, the majority of the population was making its living in agriculture and knew very little about the goings on outside their own towns, let alone worrying about the problems facing the other side of the globe. We're at a point where each successive generation has a host of issues to deal with that the previous generation could not even imagine. In trying to cope with the newness of our world we're becoming lost, and feeling more and more helpless. BW "I always wanted to be somebody, but now I realize I should have been more specific." - Lily Tomlin
-
[Serious Post] /* Disagreement expected */ Things go up and then come down (unless they break orbit) The first world and most of the rest of the world has been in ascendancy of technological and social conditions for several centuries now, and the ascendeancy rate appears to have become an exponetial factor. While I'm sure that there is massive room for more improvement on the planet and beyond, at some stage a sustainability issue must become critical. Examples could be what happens when we run out of our fossil reserves and have no suitable replacement. How do we defend the first world when 99.99% of the planets habitants are on the other side of the borders. If climate chages screw up the "the Ocean Conveyor Belt" and vast areas of the world become intolerable to live in. Or what if the current krill processing operations create total oceanic lifeless ness from breaking the food cycle. I see a whole host of dangers facing the planetary population in the distant future, sure many of them can be debated for hours with no real answer, and only retrospectively time will tell what we should have been doing now. (as it always does) At some time I see it as inevitable that our descendants will enter a knew dark age. The last western dark age was caused by a variety of faxtors, and I expect the next one will be as well. So anyone agree with me ? Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
Warning Link to the minion's animation, do not use. It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
Colin Davies wrote: How do we defend the first world when 99.99% of the planets habitants are on the other side of the borders. There are at least two ways to do it: 1) Enforce more disarmament laws to forfeit the rights of the 99.99% to defend themselves with any weapon including weapons of mass desturction. If they don't have the weapons to defend themselves, they won't attack the first world. 2) Pre-emptively eliminate those miserable, stupid, non-human and uncivilized 99.9%. After all,the planet earth and its resources belong to WASPs.
-
[Serious Post] /* Disagreement expected */ Things go up and then come down (unless they break orbit) The first world and most of the rest of the world has been in ascendancy of technological and social conditions for several centuries now, and the ascendeancy rate appears to have become an exponetial factor. While I'm sure that there is massive room for more improvement on the planet and beyond, at some stage a sustainability issue must become critical. Examples could be what happens when we run out of our fossil reserves and have no suitable replacement. How do we defend the first world when 99.99% of the planets habitants are on the other side of the borders. If climate chages screw up the "the Ocean Conveyor Belt" and vast areas of the world become intolerable to live in. Or what if the current krill processing operations create total oceanic lifeless ness from breaking the food cycle. I see a whole host of dangers facing the planetary population in the distant future, sure many of them can be debated for hours with no real answer, and only retrospectively time will tell what we should have been doing now. (as it always does) At some time I see it as inevitable that our descendants will enter a knew dark age. The last western dark age was caused by a variety of faxtors, and I expect the next one will be as well. So anyone agree with me ? Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
Warning Link to the minion's animation, do not use. It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
The dark ages were mainly a result of the vacuum left by the fall of the Roman Empire. The Arab world flourished during Europe's dark ages. Also, even though we consider it a period of stagnation, we really didn't regress all that much and there were technological advances at the time. If our western civilization does collapse, the arab world and china will probably pick up the slack. They would be affected of course, but life would go on.
Jason Henderson
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill
-
[Serious Post] /* Disagreement expected */ Things go up and then come down (unless they break orbit) The first world and most of the rest of the world has been in ascendancy of technological and social conditions for several centuries now, and the ascendeancy rate appears to have become an exponetial factor. While I'm sure that there is massive room for more improvement on the planet and beyond, at some stage a sustainability issue must become critical. Examples could be what happens when we run out of our fossil reserves and have no suitable replacement. How do we defend the first world when 99.99% of the planets habitants are on the other side of the borders. If climate chages screw up the "the Ocean Conveyor Belt" and vast areas of the world become intolerable to live in. Or what if the current krill processing operations create total oceanic lifeless ness from breaking the food cycle. I see a whole host of dangers facing the planetary population in the distant future, sure many of them can be debated for hours with no real answer, and only retrospectively time will tell what we should have been doing now. (as it always does) At some time I see it as inevitable that our descendants will enter a knew dark age. The last western dark age was caused by a variety of faxtors, and I expect the next one will be as well. So anyone agree with me ? Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
Warning Link to the minion's animation, do not use. It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
Let me add one other thing... IMO, the opening up of space exploration and colonization for regular people would eliminate the potential for a collapse (at least for a while). Some of the greatest economic and social changes have been brought about by the colonization and exploitation of new frontiers. If we don't open space, we will all rot on this rock. Being a religious guy, I do believe it will all end someday, but until that time comes, we need to strive for those new frontiers.
Jason Henderson
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill
-
Let me add one other thing... IMO, the opening up of space exploration and colonization for regular people would eliminate the potential for a collapse (at least for a while). Some of the greatest economic and social changes have been brought about by the colonization and exploitation of new frontiers. If we don't open space, we will all rot on this rock. Being a religious guy, I do believe it will all end someday, but until that time comes, we need to strive for those new frontiers.
Jason Henderson
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill
Jason Henderson wrote: Being a religious guy, I do believe it will all end someday, but until that time comes, we need to strive for those new frontiers. Isn't that fighting the inevitable? -- I was quite impressed until I hit the floor Isn't that what friends are for? Pain looks great on other people That's what they're for
-
Jason Henderson wrote: Being a religious guy, I do believe it will all end someday, but until that time comes, we need to strive for those new frontiers. Isn't that fighting the inevitable? -- I was quite impressed until I hit the floor Isn't that what friends are for? Pain looks great on other people That's what they're for
The act of living is fighting the inevitable.
Jason Henderson
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill
-
The act of living is fighting the inevitable.
Jason Henderson
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill
You are so right on so many levels. -- I was quite impressed until I hit the floor Isn't that what friends are for? Pain looks great on other people That's what they're for
-
Humans, maybe. But humanity?
"Der Geist des Kriegers ist erwacht / Ich hab die Macht" StS
sighist | Agile Programming | doxygenIf you are human, this is humanity. :) -- I was quite impressed until I hit the floor Isn't that what friends are for? Pain looks great on other people That's what they're for
-
[Serious Post] /* Disagreement expected */ Things go up and then come down (unless they break orbit) The first world and most of the rest of the world has been in ascendancy of technological and social conditions for several centuries now, and the ascendeancy rate appears to have become an exponetial factor. While I'm sure that there is massive room for more improvement on the planet and beyond, at some stage a sustainability issue must become critical. Examples could be what happens when we run out of our fossil reserves and have no suitable replacement. How do we defend the first world when 99.99% of the planets habitants are on the other side of the borders. If climate chages screw up the "the Ocean Conveyor Belt" and vast areas of the world become intolerable to live in. Or what if the current krill processing operations create total oceanic lifeless ness from breaking the food cycle. I see a whole host of dangers facing the planetary population in the distant future, sure many of them can be debated for hours with no real answer, and only retrospectively time will tell what we should have been doing now. (as it always does) At some time I see it as inevitable that our descendants will enter a knew dark age. The last western dark age was caused by a variety of faxtors, and I expect the next one will be as well. So anyone agree with me ? Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
Warning Link to the minion's animation, do not use. It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
The main problems I see for the stability of the world are: The unbalancing effect of technology - the potential for small groups (religious cults, terrorists) to wreak major havoc with technologies which multiply their capabilities. Economics guarantees that technology will always march forward, multiplying each person's capabilities, allowing for more productivity. But the flipside of that is that each person can wreak greater havoc. Nuclear weapons, synthetic viruses, etc are all problems. Any one of these could cause economic chaos leading to economic collapse and poverty (even in the first world) which would all spark a new dark age, but humanity would survive. One scenario would be one or more nuclear detonations in the US, which would cause huge devestation in the world economy. The poverty would, in turn, cause many people to turn to religion - especially the more radical forms. It would be the best thing that could happen to extremist Islamist movements. This would increase the likelyhood of a repeat attack. Natural evolution of a new disease could cause a lot of problems. AIDS is deadly, and it incubates for years (allowing for a decent transmission period), but it doesn't spread easily enough to be truely catastrophic (except in poor areas). SARS spread easily, but its symptoms appear relatively quickly and it has a death rate of "only" 5-10%. A truely devastating virus could emerge leading to enormous death and economic ruin. The key ingredients are: easy transmission (like SARS, not AIDS), long incubation period where it is communicable, but not symptomatic (like AIDS, not SARS). The unfortunate part is that the odds of such a virus appearing are higher now than at any time in our history. This is because every living human being is like a little evolutionary labratory for bacteria and viruses. The more humans there are, the more chances bacteria and viruses have to mutate into something nasty. ------------------------------------------ "What happened in that Rhode Island club is shocking. To think that over a hundred people would attend a Great White concert." - The Onion
-
The main problems I see for the stability of the world are: The unbalancing effect of technology - the potential for small groups (religious cults, terrorists) to wreak major havoc with technologies which multiply their capabilities. Economics guarantees that technology will always march forward, multiplying each person's capabilities, allowing for more productivity. But the flipside of that is that each person can wreak greater havoc. Nuclear weapons, synthetic viruses, etc are all problems. Any one of these could cause economic chaos leading to economic collapse and poverty (even in the first world) which would all spark a new dark age, but humanity would survive. One scenario would be one or more nuclear detonations in the US, which would cause huge devestation in the world economy. The poverty would, in turn, cause many people to turn to religion - especially the more radical forms. It would be the best thing that could happen to extremist Islamist movements. This would increase the likelyhood of a repeat attack. Natural evolution of a new disease could cause a lot of problems. AIDS is deadly, and it incubates for years (allowing for a decent transmission period), but it doesn't spread easily enough to be truely catastrophic (except in poor areas). SARS spread easily, but its symptoms appear relatively quickly and it has a death rate of "only" 5-10%. A truely devastating virus could emerge leading to enormous death and economic ruin. The key ingredients are: easy transmission (like SARS, not AIDS), long incubation period where it is communicable, but not symptomatic (like AIDS, not SARS). The unfortunate part is that the odds of such a virus appearing are higher now than at any time in our history. This is because every living human being is like a little evolutionary labratory for bacteria and viruses. The more humans there are, the more chances bacteria and viruses have to mutate into something nasty. ------------------------------------------ "What happened in that Rhode Island club is shocking. To think that over a hundred people would attend a Great White concert." - The Onion
Brit wrote: This is because every living human being is like a little evolutionary labratory for bacteria and viruses. The more humans there are, the more chances bacteria and viruses have to mutate into something nasty. I really think the planets population is a problem, there has been analysis for ages now that the increase would start to level off, but this has been repeatedly been shown retrospectavly to be incorrect. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
Warning Link to the minion's animation, do not use. It's a real shame that people as stupid as you can work out how to use a computer. said by Christian Graus in the Soapbox
-
Jason Henderson wrote: Being a religious guy, I do believe it will all end someday, but until that time comes, we need to strive for those new frontiers. Isn't that fighting the inevitable? -- I was quite impressed until I hit the floor Isn't that what friends are for? Pain looks great on other people That's what they're for
It is wether you are religous or not. In fact that might be one of the few things that many religous people and atheists can agree on. Eventually the universe will end. Cheers The universe is driven by the complex interaction between three ingredients: matter, energy, and enlightened self-interest.