"Highly likely human civilization comes to an end by 2050"

[Axiomatic]

https://www.vice.com/en/article/597kpd/new-report-suggests-high-likelihood-of-human-civilization-coming-to-an-end-in-2050

There are reports that the extensive climate change is rapidly increasing and showing signs of crumbling civilization by 2050. What are your thoughts? I am personally depressed and terrified, but I try to not attach too closely to my idea of life and the idea of self. Though I still haven't fully accepted this truth yet.

Are we redeemable? Are we going to be okay? Is it okay if we aren't? 

[Leo Gura]

Lol

Civ not going anywhere.

[Gesundheit2]

In the 1970s, my parents used to hear that the earth will run out of natural oil in 50 years.

50 years later, and we still have the same 50 years expectancy.

[DocWatts]

7 hours ago, Axiomatic said:

https://www.vice.com/en/article/597kpd/new-report-suggests-high-likelihood-of-human-civilization-coming-to-an-end-in-2050

There are reports that the extensive climate change is rapidly increasing and showing signs of crumbling civilization by 2050. What are your thoughts? I am personally depressed and terrified, but I try to not attach too closely to my idea of life and the idea of self. Though I still haven't fully accepted this truth yet.

Are we redeemable? Are we going to be okay? Is it okay if we aren't? 

More likely that the brunt of the suffering and conflict will take place in poorer regions of the planet that had little to do with creating the problem, as completely unfair as that is.

That's not to say that the rich nations will come away from the Climate Crisis unscathed. Expect a worldwide refuge crisis over the next century as parts of the world become unlivable, with all of the political instability that entails. Add to that potential for resource wars over things like water, and things could get ugly indeed.

Wealthy areas that lie along coastlines (or are below sea level) in places like Florida or the Netherlands may simply have to be abandoned due to rising sea levels, if significant resources aren't set aside for things such as sea walls.

A significant portion of the world's economic and technological output may have to be redirected to addressing Climate Change, which may translate in to lower (or at least stagnant) living standards for much of the world; something that could have been mitigated if the problem was addressed sooner.

All of these are far more likely than a global civilizational collapse, especially in the next 50 years.  I don't see such an eventuality being completely off the table if things are bungled badly enough, but it's highly likely it will be a long, drawn out affair that won't happen everywhere at once. 

Unlike case studies such as Rome, we have no idea what it would take for a civilization with nearly 8 billion people to collapse, nor what that would look lile.

[Preety_India]

Yes I believe that the civilization either come to an end or suffer terribly by 2050.

By 2030 itself, we will begin to see extreme changes in climate and wrath of nature and huge changes in resources of planet earth due to extensive exploitation.

NASA predicts shrinking of oceans and lakes in the next 10 years. 

The fish populations are declining and many species are already dying out..

Significant number of species have already died out.

Everything is happening slowly but it will reach a bottleneck. We're gradually getting closer to the point of witnessing huge changes in our environment and tremendous destruction and collapse unless we make big changes.

The human population is the biggest reason for this..and it's not getting lesser, the population is steadily rising and this is a huge threat and the biggest threat of this century. 

Humans are totally responsible for severe changes in climate and reduction in resources

 

 

[DocWatts]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Lol

Civ not going anywhere.

You laugh, but we were incredibly lucky to get through the 20th Century in one piece, as a civilization ending thermonuclear war could have broken out at several different points during the Cold War had events played out just a little differently. Not like there was any real plan in place to prevent that from happening; we were just incredibly fortunate to have individuals with good judgement in place during those key moments.

Likewise, it would seem incredibly presumptuous to consider an eventual ecologically caused civilizational collapse an impossibility if things are bungled badly enough, despite forecasts of it happening in the next few decades being off the mark. Hell, if global civilization continues with 'business as usual' without making significant changes, such an outcome is not only likely but probably inevitable.

Edited July 4, 2021 by DocWatts

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, DocWatts said:

You laugh, but we were incredibly lucky to get through the 20th Century in one piece

It's not luck, it's SELFISHNESS.

What I'm betting on is the most reliable thing there is: the selfishness of mankind.

Mankind will survive because it is too selfish not to.

29 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

Studies: DEBUNKED

Studies? There are no studies for civilization ending.

This is a gross abuse of "science".

What will happen is, human suffering will increase, and then that increase in suffering will force people to start taking environmental issues seriously. It's a good wake up call. Then humanity will self-correct.

The beauty of suffering is that it's a self-correcting mechanism. You don't have to worry about whether it works. It works.

[EnRoute]

People are no longer reproducing themselves. We've fallen below replacement levels. Elon Musk has warned us about the end of our civilization.

Technology requires human resources.

[DocWatts]

30 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

It's not luck, it's SELFISHNESS.

What I'm betting on is the most reliable thing there is: the selfishness of mankind.

Mankind will survive because it is too selfish not too.

If you overlook the fact that what's Good for the self interest of Individuals (or groups) is often at often at odds with the self preservation of the Society, then sure.

Jared Diamond goes to great pains to point out in Collapse (perhaps his best work) that civilizations tend to collapse when the interests and needs of the decision making elites are contrary to the long term survival needs of the society. [Insert obvious parallel to structural problems we are facing today here]

Factor in to this that the majority of humans are still at an egocentric or ethnocentric stage of development rather than an identifying with all of mankind.

Sounds like you're falling prey to a subtle form of Game Denial when you make these assertions.

Edited July 4, 2021 by DocWatts

[Wilhelm44]

This Kali Yuga is coming to an end. It's interesting to note that two unrelated sources both predict the start of a Golden Age in 2035, ie Bentinho Massaro, and the Oneness University.

[Raze]

 

[Tim R]

4 hours ago, Wilhelm44 said:

This Kali Yuga is coming to an end

Lol. The Yugas aren't "real", they are metaphors for the ups and downs of every dynamic system - especially the human psyche. There is no such thing as the Kali Yuga, don't let Shunyamurti scare you?

[Peo]

13 hours ago, Axiomatic said:

There are reports that the extensive climate change is rapidly increasing and showing signs of crumbling civilization by 2050.

It is gone take a lot more then some climate change to kill 7,800,000,000 people. You need a metor or a yellowstone volcano eruption to do that. We will survive, i am not worried. 

[Leo Gura]

5 hours ago, DocWatts said:

If you overlook the fact that what's Good for the self interest of Individuals (or groups) is often at often at odds with the self preservation of the Society, then sure.

Jared Diamond goes to great pains to point out in Collapse (perhaps his best work) that civilizations tend to collapse when the interests and needs of the decision making elites are contrary to the long term survival needs of the society. [Insert obvious parallel to stru

This is all small potatoes stuff. There is an intelligence at work here that is beyond the comprehension of any scientist or academic.

Don't take God for a moron.

The interests of the elites can be reformed with enough pressure. Societies can develop rapidly. Look at how China developed in 70 years. Look at Germany.

If anything our biggest problem is that life has gotten too easy. Some survival challanges will force folks to grow up and cooperate.

[DocWatts]

38 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

This is all small potatoes stuff. There is an intelligence at work here that is beyond the comprehension of any scientist or academic.

I think your metaphysics might be biasing your thinking here. Even if there are underlying teleological factors at play here, whose to say that the continued existence of Civilization is an inevitable outcome of this process? Not like consciousness would be Thanos snapped out of existence if Human civilization collapsed, after all.

If this is the perspective you're coming from, then what role does human agency have in deciding how these problems get resolved?

38 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The interests of the elites can be reformed with enough pressure. Societies can develop rapidly. Look at how China developed in 70 years. Look at Germany.

Just because something is possible doesn't mean that it's an inevitable outcome. Can the interests of the Elites be reformed in time to avoid a global climate apocalypse? I believe they can, but that's far from an assured outcome.

Edited July 4, 2021 by DocWatts

[StarStruck]

There are a lot of civilizations that have gone instinct. Personally I think it is possible for civilization fuck up and take couple of years to recover. In the meantime it will be hunger games for the average joe.

Civilization can be fucked up in so many different ways. Even some excess radiation from the sun could take out something simple like electricity and just wait and see what shit shows unfold.

[Windappreciator]

You guys should really listen to leo on this one.

[Talinn]

Climate change is basically analogous to that time when you got an errand to do. You have to leave the house by 11am but you're reading a really good book and want to finish it before you head out in your car to your destination, where the car is flying out of the neighborhood at 35-40 mph, endangering people in the neighborhood because of your poor time management skills. Which I did a lot when I was 16 ngl. And it caused a lot of stress because I knew, subconsciously, that I could run someone over, but I was too engrossed in my book or game. What if I ruined my whole life just because I wanted to finish two paragraphs in a book I would forget 2 years later? The potential exists, but the brain catastrophizes a lot - usually in most cases you'll complete your errand with no problems as long as you're not too stupid about it. And in most cases the brain knows when to leave the front door at "the last moment." while still retaining a sliver of safety.

All of life is just dancing on the edge--massive change has no other mechanism to move than a looming catastrophe. And I believe what Leo is getting at is that while the ego likes to fuck around, at the end of the day if its survival is threatened, or if it's 10:59 and you gotta go do your errand, it's time to fucking move and no more procrastination will be performed.  The body will move and you'll be on your way. 

Probably if you could this experiment with the same person with similar circumstances, the person would sometimes leave at 10:52, 10:54 or 10:39, all with different experiences. You could say, the person should always leave at 10:39, but what if reading the book for some additional information was pertinent to the task that you were setting out to do at 11am, and the additional ten minutes of reading helped the person?

Given the vastly differing conceptions of what "climate  change", "civilization" and "humanity" all mean or signify, I think you can compare the person preparing to leave at 11am as simultaneously doing a mix of donkey shit and legitimate work to prepare what they have to do at 11am (if such a thing were possible in 10 minutes). We're in a collective phase of a knowledge acquisition, nothing new. 

I'd also add that I think the collective ego has a very buried, occluded element of hubris where it likes to see how far it can push the envelope before getting screwed over. This is definitely in society's shadow that it will never acknowledge. I see a lot of people saying they like to see "what [stupid things] they can get away with". Because if you can get away with something it leads to a feeling of satisfaction and you "win", and if you messed up and you failed, it's ok -- your ego was only messing around after all. So you can tell yourself you won either way.

What do you think climate deniers when climate catastrophists do when it comes crashing at their door? Whatever credibility they still possess will be ripped to shreds as the words that they will spew about "not contributing to the problem" will have absolutely no influence. And that will be one more step to fixing the problem.

Edited July 4, 2021 by Talinn

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, DocWatts said:

Just because something is possible doesn't mean that it's an inevitable outcome.

I never said it was inevitable. It's just not something I would worry about.

Betting against civilization is a bad bet, that's all. The evolution of society is way smarter than you. You are not going to outsmart it with your silly, petty, human, fear-based ideas. You simply lack the vision so to see what civilization will become.

A few degrees of temperature change will not stop civilization. The effect will be like killing 50 termites from a termite colony.

[Blackhawk]

Someone should count how many times the end of civilization has been predicted, and the dates has been passed, and yet it haven't happened.

Fear..

Edited July 5, 2021 by Blackhawk