NationStates Jolt Archive

Altercate.

Mad pro.
100 Years from now there will be an extremely low number of fish in the sea.
Average life expectancy will be 20 years..
and thats only if we last that long.

i disagree.

i disagree.

I agree with all your points. But I don't agree with your disagreement.
I find that irrevocably inane.

In 100 years, I'm gonna be worm food so if the Earth sucks good thing I'm alive now and not then.

In one hundred years, the stars will be right. The Old Ones will awaken, and the world will be plunged into a hellish nightmare of suffering and pain, that shall last until the Crawling Chaos expunges the last, wretched vestiges of humanity from this planet. And throughout this, the Earth shall drift through space, uncaring.

Hopefully by then, we'd be advanced in Space exploration to have found a way to make any planet habitable for human life. We may all have to live in domes and enclosed space, but it still works.

Better. A lot better.

I give earth another 21 years

I'd expect it to be better in some ways, worse in others. I predict that:

Better technology will enable some great things, like tremendous life expectancy, new materials which allow currently-impossible things, cars that not only don't pollute but are actually worth driving, space stations that don't always seem to have something going wrong, etc.

On the other hand, the general populous will probably be even more vacuous than it is now. The use of sim-machines for entertainment/news will make the "TV-addled" condition of today look like a state of enlightenment.

I agree with all your points. But I don't agree with your disagreement.
I find that irrevocably inane.

i can repudiate you statements with immutable remonstrance known alas forever only to myself, for you are clearly unworthy of such majesterial reasoning good sir.

Matrix. Not that robots will rise up in rebellion, but that people will use a virtual simulator so that they can live the lives they want.

I think it'll be better. At least, it'll seem better. It may not actually be any better, but we'll all think we did it ourselves, so our glaring and obvious faults will seem kinda insignificant to us.

In a hundred years ALL of you will be DEAD.

So for you it will undoubtedly be much better than this simulacrum of a life you are leading.

lol, silly china man, stop being so superior.

In a hundred years ALL of you will be DEAD.

So for you it will undoubtedly be much better than this simulacrum of a life you are leading.

In one hundred years, the stars will be right. The Old Ones will awaken, and the world will be plunged into a hellish nightmare of suffering and pain, that shall last until the Crawling Chaos expunges the last, wretched vestiges of humanity from this planet. And throughout this, the Earth shall drift through space, uncaring.

That is currently happening now if you ask me. In one hundred years there will be no earth so thsi will usck for me because by the the life expectincy is growing from medical advances and by 2050 life expectincy will be 100 and I'll be 45. The Earth will die from the pollutants that the fucked up, inconsiderate, retarted species called humans, that I am ashamed to be will have litered, and sent out so much pollutants that the O-zone layer will just break which will cause every living thing on Earth to have its blood boil inside it's skin and it brain blow out of its head. From littering we will kill all decomposers and then hence a thing dies it body shall lay there because there is nothing to decompose it. And with out decomposing trees will become unhealthy and then once more and more trees and animals all over there will be bodies of animlas on ground rotting sending a horrible stench and pollutant into the sky and will stop the water cycle which will cause a large drought, and will inevitably kill all living things. That's my prediction. Either that or we suck the Earth dry of oil and it collapses on us.

In a hundred years ALL of you will be DEAD.

You sure? There have been people around who were 122 years old before. Okay, I'm 23 now, but with the much better healthcare around these days I think I can make it to 1 year more :)

I live on forever or die trying!

Actually when I posted my first post I didn't take into consideration that our current president would be dead, so maybe there is some hope for the future.

In one hundred years, the stars will be right. The Old Ones will awaken, and the world will be plunged into a hellish nightmare of suffering and pain, that shall last until the Crawling Chaos expunges the last, wretched vestiges of humanity from this planet. And throughout this, the Earth shall drift through space, uncaring.

Hmmmm, how very Carlinesque (George) of you!:)

Humanity has a 50 50 chance of surviving the next 100 years

also we are due a good pandemic to wipe out like 90% of us :)... sars failed lolz bird flu dosent look like its going anywhere :(

:):)

can you wipe out humanity?
http://www.funny-games.biz/pandemicgame.html

In a hundred years ALL of you will be DEAD.

Nope, I'll be quite alive and well. I plan on living forever, of course, but I'd settle for a couple of thousand years. Even five hundred would be pretty nice.

by the the life expectincy is growing from medical advances and by 2050 life expectincy will be 100 and I'll be 45.

So you are 2 years old now?

Nope, I'll be quite alive and well. I plan on living forever, of course, but I'd settle for a couple of thousand years. Even five hundred would be pretty nice.

In 2107 you shall be dead AND forgotten.

In 2107 you shall be dead AND forgotten.

The only way that would happen is if I were outright killed, and in that case there's not too much I can do about it. Living well past 100 is going to be a given for people who aren't stupid in a decade or so, let alone 100 years from now. Hell, by that point, we're talking 1,000 and beyond for people who don't kill themselves.

The only way that would happen is if I were outright killed, and in that case there's not too much I can do about it. Living well past 100 is going to be a given for people who aren't stupid in a decade or so, let alone 100 years from now. Hell, by that point, we're talking 1,000 and beyond for people who don't kill themselves.


or be killed presumably, unless we become invincible except for a self destruct button? that only we can press hehe

most people are still too primitive of mind to give up killing eah other :P

In 2107 you shall be dead AND forgotten.

I expect the same to happen to you

So you are 2 years old now?

Yes I know I fucked up math, but I'm to lazy to fix it so go nitpick someone elses post

or be killed presumably, unless we become invincible except for a self destruct button? that only we can press hehe

That would make an interesting short story, actually.

i wonder if we we all invincible except for a self destuct button i wonder how many would have pressed it by now (if it was totally painless)

also i woner how old people would generally get... livin to about 1000 would just get boring

hen if people were still producing offspring we would have to move to other planets

well if the solar system survives... or indeed the whole universde and it dosent implode two weeks on tuesday

100 Years from now...

- China's current rise will have developed further, and declined again
- India will be getting there
- The USA will be on a gradual decline
- The EU will debate having a constitution (still) but will have had major internal conflicts between now and that point, between EU states.

Technology:
Will be largely as it is today. Most technological innovation at the moment is simply refining or rehashing existing developments. This lack of willingness to invest and risk take will continue. Technologies that may development significantly will include composite materials, nanotubes and annoying ring tones.

Environment:
Global warming will cause the loss of life. This will occur mostly in poor countries and so won't be widely noticed in the west. Pollution control treaties will prove ineffective.

Poverty/Economy:
Much of East Asia will resemble economically the United States with seemingly high levels of prosperity hiding vast inequalities, due to industrial growth and some income growth unmatched by the development of a comprehensive social security system. This will be hailed as the "success story" of globalisation and the downside will be mostly ignored. This same situation will persist in the USA, and will spread to much of western Europe, particularly the UK, Germany, Eastern Europe and the Balkans. Africa will remain much as it is.

War:
There will be no WW3, since there will continue to be no clear enemies. There will be numerous smaller regional wars, particularly in the usual hotspots - Europe/Mid-East, West Africa and Latin America. The major powers (China/US/India) will be disinclined to fight on their home turf but will happily sell arms to others.

The only way that would happen is if I were outright killed, and in that case there's not too much I can do about it. Living well past 100 is going to be a given for people who aren't stupid in a decade or so, let alone 100 years from now. Hell, by that point, we're talking 1,000 and beyond for people who don't kill themselves.

People BORN a hundred years from now might live to be 95-ish ON AVERAGE but they will be aged 95 in 2195, not 2107.

It took 12,000 years to lengthen the average life span from 25 to 40 and 6000 from 40 to 60. In the last 2500 years it was raised from 60 to 82.

There is NO way that it will be 100 years in a mere 100 years.

So, you SHALL be dead in a 100 years -- no question about it.

Well, the Earth will no longer be in existence. The following will undoubtedly happen in the next hundred years.

First of all, we will run out of oil in the next couple of years and the world as we know it will come to an end. We will be thrown back to the Dark Ages and will no longer remember what it was like being in civilisation. Then, we will all fry to death due to global warming, and if we do not fry, we will drown. Then for good measure, a meteorite will come along and completely destroy the earth.



If we believed the Greenies, 100 years from now, the Earth would be f****d

i wonder if we we all invincible except for a self destuct button i wonder how many would have pressed it by now (if it was totally painless)

I bet nobody...everyone would be so afraid of everyone else doing it that they wouldn't even consider it. Sort of like MAD, actually.

also i woner how old people would generally get... livin to about 1000 would just get boring

It would only get boring if you let it (not to mention if you enhance your knowledge and senses, it becomes a lot more interesting because you can observe things that were not possible before).

hen if people were still producing offspring we would have to move to other planets

well if the solar system survives... or indeed the whole universde and it dosent implode two weeks on tuesday

The Last Question kind of covered something like this.

People BORN a hundred years from now might live to be 95-ish ON AVERAGE but they will be aged 95 in 2195, not 2107.

It took 12,000 years to lengthen the average life span from 25 to 40 and 6000 from 40 to 60. In the last 2500 years it was raised from 60 to 82.

There is NO way that it will be 100 years in a mere 100 years.

So, you SHALL be dead in a 100 years -- no question about it.

The average life span for males in eg. Belgium went up from about 43 in 1890 to about 77 in 2004.

http://gracehead.com/media/earth.JPG

:fluffle:

Don't confuse him with reality.

I was talking about Belgium, which is a fictional country after all ;)

The average life span for males in eg. Belgium went up from about 43 in 1890 to 77 in 2005.

Don't confuse him with reality.

my god reality is confusing.. most people still choose to live outside reality, maybe when people stop beleving in the supernatural beings they heads will explode :confused:

The average life span for males in eg. Belgium went up from about 43 in 1890 to 77 in 2005.

That calculation includes people killed in wars and many children who died in infancy.

Except where the US government is involved, wars are not as deadly these days and most children even in poorest countries survive (compared to under 50% just 150 years ago, so most families had 3 children minimum).

Actually i would press the button. I love the envirement and hate humans, so to see the thing I hate destroy the thing I love would make me press it.

People BORN a hundred years from now might live to be 95-ish ON AVERAGE but they will be aged 95 in 2195, not 2107.

It took 12,000 years to lengthen the average life span from 25 to 40 and 6000 from 40 to 60. In the last 2500 years it was raised from 60 to 82.


Wow, that's an egregious, terrible, misinterpretation of data. Almost all of those gains in life expectancy happened in the last 200 years; human life expectancy rose from around 49 years in 1830 to 83 years in 2007 and continues to rise. Even if life expectancy only rises at that rate, which is highly unlikely given the advances made against the primary conditions still holding life expectancy down, we would hit 140 years in 2137.

That's like saying in 1979 that computers would never have 1 terabyte of storage capacity because it took 200 years to get from Babbage's punch-card machine to the Commodore 64, or that the human genome could never be sequenced because it would take thousands of years with existing technology. Hell, that's like a bacterium arguing that it would not be likely for anything more advanced to evolve within the lifespan of the Earth because it took over a billion years for them to emerge in the first place. Trends are accelerating, and they're reaching a really steep slope right about now.

It took 3.5 billion years to get to man, and it only took man 12,000 years to get where we are today, of which almost all of the major advances occurred in the past 200 years or so.

That calculation includes people killed in wars and many children who died in infancy.

That's how life expectancy works. The longer people live without dying, the longer life expectancy is. The more causes of mortality you cure, reduce, or manage, the higher life expectancy increases. In reality, there is no hard limit on lifespan. All of the limits are entirely based on environmental factors and the effects of those limits themselves.

Again, some of you seem unable to understand the concept -- you stick to your preconceived notions someone fed into the drawers of your compartmentalised brains.

People dying OF OLD AGE in their 60s were becoming the norm in about 500 B.C.E. This has incerased to people daying OF OLD AGE at the age of about 82-86 today.

It doesn't mean that EVERYBODY will live to old age, but that most people who die OF OLD AGE -- FATIGUE OF MATERIAL will die at that age.

I'm tired of having to ruminate everything for you and spit the half-congested mush into your mouths.

...the world will be just as fucked.

I'm tired of having to ruminate everything for you and spit the half-congested mush into your mouths.

You're not saying anything, honestly, other than a bunch of misinterpreted, mis-extrapolated data that has nothing to do with the real world of modern medicine or the cutting edge of scientific research. All you're saying is that human longevity currently has an upper limit...we all know that. However, even this argument fails because it ignores the huge increase in the number of people living in to their 80's, 90's, and beyond in recent years, far above anything that has been seen in the past. Human longevity is increasing alongside lifespan, not only pushing up the expected amount of time people will live but also increasing the maximum lifespan as well as the quality of that lifespan. The point is that this limit is not set in stone and is starting to move now that science is making it possible to understand, treat, and eventually cure these causes of death.

The only reason it even has that upper limit is because the things that kill us at those ages are the hardest to cure; the bulk of progress on diseases such as cancer, heart disease, Parkinson's, and Alzheimers has been made in the past 20 years, and of that progress the majority in the last 5-7 or so. They are very complex ailments with a lot of various causes and origins that have to be pieced together before they can be cured; medical research is close to cures for Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, but there is still a lot of work to do. Cancer is much more difficult because each cancer functions differently and requires a different set of treatments to cure.

Same is true with general aging. If you control and reverse aging, you not only increase quality of life but also significantly reduce the chance of various illnesses and conditions from taking root.

Don't be rude please.

Anyway, heard of telomeres? Tissue engineering ( to replace organs that are failing because of old age)?

Btw, the main reason why people nowadays are dying later because of old age is hygiene :)

Don't be rude please.

Anyway, heard of telomeres? Tissue engineering ( to replace organs that are failing because of old age)?

Btw, the main reason why people nowadays are dying later because of old age is hygiene :)

I am not rude, just using a metaphor.

I've seen muscle tissue grown in a lab. I have heard of attempts to grow simple neurons.

However,and since aging is primarily a mental category, rather than just physical, I believe I have never seen or heard anything about brain grown in a jar though, which would be the only way to extend life. Would you care to post a link?

As for hygiene, I guess that's why most people have intestinal parasites that Dr. Hulda treates with her walnuts or whatnot?

However,and since aging is primarily a mental category, rather than just physical, I believe I have never seen or heard anything about brain grown in a jar though, which would be the only way to extend life. Would you care to post a link?

You wouldn't need to grow an entire brain, just repair the parts that are breaking down. The human body renews itself all the time; the problem with aging is that the systems that renew the body start to accumulate errors and break down, especially in the body's reserves of stem cells. To slow or reverse that decay, you might need to replace small components certain parts, or use various tools to remove accumulated plaques and repair telomeres, but there would be no replacement involved.

Aging is an extremely complex degenerative disease that operates at all levels of the human body's biological functions, but one that is curable in the same way as any other condition. Since aging is in a lot of ways the mother of various other ailments, progress against them also sheds light on the aging process itself. A cure for aging, or at very least a way to slow the process, will probably be available in no more than 15-20 years if progress continues at its current rate.

like when you recrd somthing off the television the quality will be slighlty worse with slight gliches.... then if you record again from that recording the resulting tape will be slightly wose again and so on, just as when cells renew they wont be quite as good as last time

I <3 metaphores :p

In one hundred years, I, or a very good digital copy of of me, will still be posting on NSG.

In a hundred years ALL of you will be DEAD.

So for you it will undoubtedly be much better than this simulacrum of a life you are leading.

Clearly, Oh Divine One.

anyway, one hundred years from now, i'll be a kumquat, i have nothing to worry about.

in 100 years, we would have discovered warp drive and meet the vulcans, and started Earth StarFleet, and we all know it

You wouldn't need to grow an entire brain, just repair the parts that are breaking down. The human body renews itself all the time; the problem with aging is that the systems that renew the body start to accumulate errors and break down, especially in the body's reserves of stem cells. To slow or reverse that decay, you might need to replace small components certain parts, or use various tools to remove accumulated plaques and repair telomeres, but there would be no replacement involved.

Aging is an extremely complex degenerative disease that operates at all levels of the human body's biological functions, but one that is curable in the same way as any other condition. Since aging is in a lot of ways the mother of various other ailments, progress against them also sheds light on the aging process itself. A cure for aging, or at very least a way to slow the process, will probably be available in no more than 15-20 years if progress continues at its current rate.

Stop trying, he's not listening.

Stop trying, he's not listening.

I did... I have to admit, I do like him, though. Although I vehemently disagree with everything he says, he made some excellent insults and has a very readable writing style.