Humans to go extinct?
 

Haha! Highly unlikely. When I'm 85 I'll make a bunch of predictions so far into the future that I won't have to worry about being alive to be called out on them.

Is it really unlikely? I mean at some point, the Earth simply doesn't have enough to support the population of everything that is on it. I don't know where that point is and neither does this dude but is it that far-fetched to imagine a situation where all countries go to war over resources?

Not to mention, we seem to be naturals when it comes to screwing things up.

Ok, an asteroid or comet or gamma ray burst, could possibly slam into the Earth in the next 100 years, eventually killing all humans.

But, yes, it is highly unlikely in the next 100 years that humans will be extinct. The great resource wars of the late 21st/early 22nd centuries are speculation at best.

Yeah, dude is a 95 year old micro-bioligist whose biggest cited worry is climate change....a subject to which his knowledge extends thusly:

"'The Aborigines showed that without science and the production of carbon dioxide and global warming, they could survive for 40,000 or 50,000 years. But the world can't. The human species is likely to go the same way as many of the species that we've seen disappear."

So, there was no global warming in the last 40,000 to 50,000 years? The Aborigines survived, but the rest of us didn't? This dude (excuse me, Sir) appears to have a lot of fear surrounding climate change, but not necessarily all that much concrete behind it. Even the author of the article finds Fenner's hypothesis 'speculative' and 'overly pessimistic'.

Yeah. That would account for population reduction or a collapse of society of some sort. But extinction? Not seeing that.

The problem I have with a 'resource war' is the implication that the largest nations with the most resources wouldn't easily win, as they pretty much always have, and therefore survive any threat of extinction rather handily. Certainly, you're going to need a lot of resources just to engage in a 'resource war', and the more resource poor a country gets, the less likely it is to engage in some sort of massive global conflict.

It is my purely personal and completely unscientific opinion that when major resources start to disappear, the resulting conflicts would be more localized and take place mainly between neighboring poor countries, attempting to grab local/neighboring resources, while the larger resource rich countries look to isolate themselves and conserve their own resources, rather than engaging in a massive globalized and weaponizedd resource grab.

Well, we had some interesting thoughts in this thread:

Colossal Events Poll- In your lifetime, you will see... (Please read 1st post first) - Front Office Football Central

SI

Nice find.

(Well, I created it and it's still one of my favorite posts I've ever made, if we can have such a thing :D)

SI

That's a sweet thread.

Really? When did you join us?

Exactly.

No way we go extinct, but I would predict some massive population declines in lesser developed countries.

Humans are incredibly adaptive and resourceful. No way we go out altogether. The bigger question is who fills the void once we've renounced the throne.
Darg nabbit, I can't find a clip of the "it's a bug planet!" scene.

some 95 year old guy predicts shit because he can't be told he's wrong in less than 5 years.

when i'm 95 i'll make all sorts of ludacris (damn the rapper i forget how to spell the correct word) predictions too

Titan A.E. :D

Hard to take a scientific prediction seriously from a guy who can't program the clock on his VCR.