User Controls
Scientists Predict There's 90% Chance Civilization Will Collapse Within 'Decades'
-
2020-08-02 at 2:20 PM UTChttps://www.ibtimes.sg/scientists-predict-theres-90-chance-civilization-end-will-collapse-within-decades-49295
It is just a matter of few decades when the world will witness the "irreversible collapse" of the human civilization, unless mankind drastically changes the course, said researchers from the Alan Turing Institute and the University of Tarapacá.
The physicists, Mauro Bologna and Gerardo Aquino have predicted that deforestation will claim the last forests on Earth between 100 and 200 years but the end of civilization would come sooner. As per their prediction, civilization has only a 10 percent chance to survive, which they described as the most "optimistic scenario."
The End of Civilization
The team of researchers believes that the end of civilization will come within decades. In the new study, which was published in Nature, the researchers wrote, "Clearly it is unrealistic to imagine that the human society would start to be affected by the deforestation only when the last tree would be cut down."
Before humans started to dominate the world, the planet was covered by 60 million square kilometers of the forest but now there are less than 40 million square kilometers of forest, revealed the study.
As trees and forests play a huge role to balance Earth's ecosystem, fewer forests will cause more deduction of oxygen from the blue planet and create an unwanted change in the food chain. "It is highly unlikely to imagine the survival of many species, including ours, on Earth without [forests]," the study added.
Collapse of Civilization Pixabay
Based on the scientific model, the researchers came to the conclusion that due to resource consumption, a catastrophic collapse in the human population is the most likely scenario of the dynamical evolution based on current parameters.
The calculations have shown that maintaining the actual rate of population growth and resource consumption, particularly forest consumption, the humans have only a few decades left before the collapse of the civilization
The research finding added that "A rapid disastrous collapse in population occurs before eventually reaching a low population steady-state or total extinction. We call this point in time the 'no-return point' because if the deforestation rate is not changed before this time the human population will not be able to sustain itself and a disastrous collapse or even extinction will occur."
Deforestation Is Leading Towards the End
As most deforestation is happening in the tropical regions, a report by scientists from the University of Maryland revealed that the tropics lost about 61,000 square miles of forest in 2017-- an area equivalent to the size of Bangladesh.
Deforestation consequences Pixabay
The World Bank estimated that since the beginning of the 20th century, around 3.9 million square miles of forest have been lost. As per a 2018 report by The Guardian, every second, a chunk of forest same as the size of a soccer field is lost.
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) have claimed that there are four commodities-- responsible for tropical deforestation-- these are beef, soy, palm oil, and wood products. They have estimated that an area almost the size of Switzerland—around 14,800 square miles-- gets lost due to deforestation every year.
Experts believe that developing alternatives to deforestation can help decrease the need for tree clearing which will save the human civilization from extinction. For example, instead of expanding agricultural land by cutting trees, if people adopt sustainable farming practices or new farming technologies and crops, the need for more land would be diminished. -
2020-08-02 at 2:33 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe https://www.ibtimes.sg/scientists-predict-theres-90-chance-civilization-end-will-collapse-within-decades-49295
It is just a matter of few decades when the world will witness the "irreversible collapse" of the human civilization, unless mankind drastically changes the course, said researchers from the Alan Turing Institute and the University of Tarapacá.
The physicists, Mauro Bologna and Gerardo Aquino have predicted that deforestation will claim the last forests on Earth between 100 and 200 years but the end of civilization would come sooner. As per their prediction, civilization has only a 10 percent chance to survive, which they described as the most "optimistic scenario."
The End of Civilization
The team of researchers believes that the end of civilization will come within decades. In the new study, which was published in Nature, the researchers wrote, "Clearly it is unrealistic to imagine that the human society would start to be affected by the deforestation only when the last tree would be cut down."
Before humans started to dominate the world, the planet was covered by 60 million square kilometers of the forest but now there are less than 40 million square kilometers of forest, revealed the study.
As trees and forests play a huge role to balance Earth's ecosystem, fewer forests will cause more deduction of oxygen from the blue planet and create an unwanted change in the food chain. "It is highly unlikely to imagine the survival of many species, including ours, on Earth without [forests]," the study added.
Collapse of Civilization Pixabay
Based on the scientific model, the researchers came to the conclusion that due to resource consumption, a catastrophic collapse in the human population is the most likely scenario of the dynamical evolution based on current parameters.
The calculations have shown that maintaining the actual rate of population growth and resource consumption, particularly forest consumption, the humans have only a few decades left before the collapse of the civilization
The research finding added that "A rapid disastrous collapse in population occurs before eventually reaching a low population steady-state or total extinction. We call this point in time the 'no-return point' because if the deforestation rate is not changed before this time the human population will not be able to sustain itself and a disastrous collapse or even extinction will occur."
Deforestation Is Leading Towards the End
As most deforestation is happening in the tropical regions, a report by scientists from the University of Maryland revealed that the tropics lost about 61,000 square miles of forest in 2017– an area equivalent to the size of Bangladesh.
Deforestation consequences Pixabay
The World Bank estimated that since the beginning of the 20th century, around 3.9 million square miles of forest have been lost. As per a 2018 report by The Guardian, every second, a chunk of forest same as the size of a soccer field is lost.
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) have claimed that there are four commodities– responsible for tropical deforestation– these are beef, soy, palm oil, and wood products. They have estimated that an area almost the size of Switzerland—around 14,800 square miles– gets lost due to deforestation every year.
Experts believe that developing alternatives to deforestation can help decrease the need for tree clearing which will save the human civilization from extinction. For example, instead of expanding agricultural land by cutting trees, if people adopt sustainable farming practices or new farming technologies and crops, the need for more land would be diminished.
no.
https://niggasin.space/thread/29380 -
2020-08-02 at 2:37 PM UTC
-
2020-08-02 at 2:45 PM UTC
In this paper we afford a quantitative analysis of the sustainability of current world population growth in relation to the parallel deforestation process adopting a statistical point of view. We consider a simplified model based on a stochastic growth process driven by a continuous time random walk, which depicts the technological evolution of human kind, in conjunction with a deterministic generalised logistic model for humans-forest interaction and we evaluate the probability of avoiding the self-destruction of our civilisation. Based on the current resource consumption rates and best estimate of technological rate growth our study shows that we have very low probability, less than 10% in most optimistic estimate, to survive without facing a catastrophic collapse.
-
2020-08-02 at 2:59 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-63657-6
^ cant even predick covid19 fatality 3 months ahead right.
wants us to belive they can somehow magically predick climate 100 years ahead correctly.
all models are just superstitions. scientifique superstitions.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-08-02 at 3:05 PM UTCScientists
-
2020-08-02 at 3:07 PM UTCyeah how many decades ago was global cooling and then warming supposed to cause an apocalypse? i stopped paying attention to these hippie prophets long ago. birth rates are collapsing and so will the population. the earth will be fine.
-
2020-08-02 at 3:30 PM UTC1. Good
2. We have much more pressing short-term problems than global worming and deforestation -
2020-08-02 at 3:51 PM UTC
-
2020-08-02 at 4:05 PM UTCA single tree makes available more oxygen over its lifetime than three people will ever use in reapiration. Fundamentally, Keenan what your saying is right yet it occurs to me that I have more than one third of a tree. I have actually over eight trees and they are just for me.
So fundamemtally the problem is expecting other countries to bear the burden of providing trees for city dwellers in developed nations. Ohhh but we cut all are trees down a long time ago. Why do you think the dodo bird and the buffalo went extinct. Oh but wait, we replanted a few trees and now we only cut down the juiciest trees and leave others. Hello world, it is called sustainability and news flash : it works.. Kind of..
But you tree freaks will go on hooping and hollering for them to save the Amazon yet you didnt even save you're own forest and look in the mirror and ask if you even have any trees of.youre own before telling others what to do with they're s.
So, Keenan it becomes evident that you want that palm olive dish detergent and you dont even have your own trees. Where's YOU'RE forest at? Oh but wait you can't so you don't. -
2020-08-02 at 4:09 PM UTC
Originally posted by I Live In Your Crawlspace Secretly4 A single tree makes available more oxygen over its lifetime than three people will ever use in reapiration. Fundamentally, Keenan what your saying is right yet it occurs to me that I have more than one third of a tree. I have actually over eight trees and they are just for me.
So fundamemtally the problem is expecting other countries to bear the burden of providing trees for city dwellers in developed nations. Ohhh but we cut all are trees down a long time ago. Why do you think the dodo bird and the buffalo went extinct. Oh but wait, we replanted a few trees and now we only cut down the juiciest trees and leave others. Hello world, it is called sustainability and news flash : it works.. Kind of..
But you tree freaks will go on hooping and hollering for them to save the Amazon yet you didnt even save you're own forest and look in the mirror and ask if you even have any trees of.youre own before telling others what to do with they're s.
So, Keenan it becomes evident that you want that palm olive dish detergent and you dont even have your own trees. Where's YOU'RE forest at? Oh but wait you can't so you don't.
worse, they are cutting entire forests down in the name of "green energy" to replace fossil fuels, because sparing oil deep underground is more precious to the planet than entire forests. -
2020-08-02 at 4:33 PM UTC
-
2020-08-02 at 8:42 PM UTC
-
2020-08-02 at 9:50 PM UTCJokes on them, you know what has a lot of oxygen? Water, in fact it has 2 oxygen for every Hydrogen. Ever heard of electrolysis motherfuckers? Man made climate change isn't real but if the ice caps are melting anyway, good, three birds with one stone, we can electrolyse all that water into oxygen to breath and hydrogen to power fusion, or just combust, explode, the point is we can get energy from hydrogen and we need to breathe oxygen. Good thing the planet is literally covered in water.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-08-02 at 9:54 PM UTCRemember when 'civilization' used to mean something?
IE, there were civilized people on earth, and savages.
Now any two human beings doing anything constitute a 'civilization'. Our language has become fake and guy, just like ourselves. -
2020-08-03 at 12:44 AM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker Just step away from your keyboard and look around
At any time in the last 10,000 years you could have made basically that same argument.
The planet being unable to remove CO2 from the atmosphere at the rate it is put in is a much more serious issue.
Originally posted by Sophie Jokes on them, you know what has a lot of oxygen? Water, in fact it has 2 oxygen for every Hydrogen. Ever heard of electrolysis motherfuckers? Man made climate change isn't real but if the ice caps are melting anyway, good, three birds with one stone, we can electrolyse all that water into oxygen to breath and hydrogen to power fusion, or just combust, explode, the point is we can get energy from hydrogen and we need to breathe oxygen. Good thing the planet is literally covered in water.
Climate change is caused by too much CO2 (and other gasses, like water vapour), not too little oxygen.
Originally posted by rabbitweed Remember when 'civilization' used to mean something?
IE, there were civilized people on earth, and savages.
Now any two human beings doing anything constitute a 'civilization'. Our language has become fake and guy, just like ourselves.
All civilisations are equal bigot. -
2020-08-03 at 5:22 AM UTCCO2 is good. Termites used it to save the planet.
-
2020-08-03 at 10:09 AM UTCSoy-boy, the amount of CO2 we have now is nowhere near unnatural, nor is the warming and cooling period.
-
2020-08-03 at 11:42 AM UTC
Originally posted by Kev Soy-boy, the amount of CO2 we have now is nowhere near unnatural, nor is the warming and cooling period.
While I agree we should improve efficiency and reduce waste as much as possible, the reason I'm not totally sold on global warming or any other man-made climate change is that the oldest climate records we have are from ice cores roughly 200,000 years old.
Assuming we had 100% accurate and complete climate records from 200,000 years ago to now (we don't), how can we possibly model the baseline temperature levels for a planet that's 60 billion years old? That's literally trying to draw a statistical conclusion with 2 out of 60,000 datapoints. In no other field would that be taken seriously. -
2020-08-03 at 11:47 AM UTCClimate science is a joke, but it doesn't matter. We do know that CO2 levels in the general atmosphere are rising, and will soon be at dangerous levels.
