Stephen Hawking: Earth will turn into fireball in less than 600 years

What I'm saying is that when considering predictions 600 years into the future, we should remember that Captain Picard's Enterprise is only half as far into the future as that, and they had total control of the weather in Kirk's day.

 

The earth will be populated by unicorns in 600 years. Just as valid a prediction since none of us will be around to prove it.

 

Then you don't understand the word 'valid'...

 

This issue is ALL OVER the news - both in the US and around the world. Constantly.

If you aren't getting the news, the first step would be to dive into how that happened.

 

600 years out? Any prediction is valid.

 

Funny that you would reference the will of the people in your argument. Which do you think would go over better, "hey everybody, let's stop using fossil fuels" or "hey everybody, let's scrub the atmosphere with technology"? We've already seen how poorly the former statement has been received. And you keep talking about funding. Your way of doing things is what requires all that funding. My suggestion is to let things happen organically and let entrepreneurs find ways to make the operation profitable. THEN you will have will AND funding.

 

I've heard that Hawking was much more concerned about the ramifications of human population growth and what that would lead to when applied to the various constraints of earth - one of which is human impact on climate.

Climatologists do not believe the climate change problem is one of 600 years from now. It's far more near term than that.

What some are saying is that Hawking may believe we'll work on climate change, but in the end lose to the various cumulative problems of the "population bomb".

Maybe you were taking it as an indication that we have a couple hundred hears to worry about it, but that is certainly not what science says, and I don't believe Hawking believes that, either.

BTW: I think a weakness in his projection is that human populations do have the ability to stop growing. Japan, for example, is growing at the rate of immigration only. And, they didn't have to take some sort of governmental action to cause that.

At any rate, 600 years has no place in climatological forecasts. We need to be working on this now, or the ramifications will be serious long long before 600 years.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...licies-Australia-Saudi-Arabia-bring-rear.html

The CCPI ranks countries according to their emissions, efficiency, development of emissions, renewable energy and climate policy.

The US is ranked #31 out of 58 nations.

The US has about 5% of the world's population but is responsible for about 25% of the greenhouse emissions.

And #31 is the best we can do?

Lastly, how many times will you find comprehensive news articles on climate change potential on FOX News? This thread has about 80 responses as of this writing and there is no consensus from PF members. Renewable energy sources accounted for about 10% of total U.S. energy consumption. Renewable energy accounted for 8% of the federal government's energy so our government can't even keep pace with the general public. Climate change and evolution in our public education system are hot topics which have no consensus on what to teach our kids...in fact it is left to each state to decide what and how to teach...since we can't even educate our kids on this topic we're in for big trouble down the road...

 

Once again incorrect? Hawking is using population growth, over time, factoring in how much fossil fuel energy will be generated, how much greenhouse gas emissions there will be, and then theorizes at what point in time he believes mankind had better be colonizing other planets. His comments make perfect sense! The ONLY thing that is in question is when Earth becomes hostile to humans and how critical it will be? I suspect Hawking believes, as I believe, that the collective we will fail in whatever remediation is necessary, therefore, Hawking is suggesting to relocate humans away from Earth...IMO a very VALID argument...

 

It's not funny at all...the will of the people control this nation and the world. Logic dictates if we trust climate change science, and our leaders understand the potential, they would simply mandate changes...but they are not doing this because of the backlash from people and politics. For me science rules but for others it's their will that rules...those who accept science can find consensus while others can't find agreement...which is where we are today...

 

People who focus on Fox news simply aren't interested in knowing what's actually going on.

I look at Fox news on a mobile device. It's startling how devoid it is of stuff other than partisan garbage.

I agree education in science in America is a serious problem, and that it's going to leave us in serious trouble. Besides the standard issues of energy, environment, climate, economic competition is moving toward high tech, innovation, information, etc. - all of which require more education.


I'm not sure what the government energy mixture actually even means. Do you?

I don't know how they could go about getting electricity from a different source than what is available near their offices. Maybe government officials travel more than an average citizen. Maybe they're adding in the military or something.

 

With geometrically & exponentially increasing human farming failures in controlling earth's population & it's energy use of the past 50 years neglect & disregard for the environment doctrine like the Catholic Church church believed in the geocentric theory (that the earth is the center of the universe and all other objects orbits around it); however, Galileo …Galilei (1564-1642) challenged that theory, he believed in the heliocentric theory in which the sun is the center and the earth and orbits around the sun. Little if any of some

nor exist with any fossil remnants at all excommunicated.

 

Don't worry. Things will take care of themselves. We don't need to do the controlling. Never have and never will.

 

Well, if Hawking isn't talking about climate change, I guess the entire discussion about it is off topic. As to this population bomb speculation, I agree, the projection is weak. Not only are there examples like Japan, but there are again the unknowns of future centuries. Human population could be decimated next week for all we know. Wars, pandemics, tsunamis, supervolcanos, etc. could make the idea of a "population bomb" a fantasy.

Actually, the idea of predicting just about anything that far in the future is sullied by a thing called the technological singularity. Given how close we are to achieving AI which exceeds human intelligence, and the rapid progress in that area, it is almost unfathomable that we won't have crossed that Rubicon before the 21st century is done. And then all bets are off.

 

The reason it is funny is because you choose to promote an idea where the will of the people is known to be lacking (and for obvious reasons), but pooh pooh an idea that would likely have more public support (in no small part because it wouldn't be a government mandate but a freedom-affirming entrepreneurial opportunity).

 

Without a doubt the church's virgin birth gala of lynching enforcement from the years of Galileo will take care of it's megalomaniacal human farming Fifth Reich control just as Rehnquist's pseudo science the cross was higher than any number of US Constitutions for the Bicentennial & the cross was also higher than the flag for 9/11 & it's subsequent patriot act of a master race of Islam Christiananality pedophile mentalities in that rule the earth & destroy the world master plan at all costs.

 

FYI;
Fox News finished far and above its competition in the ratings for the first quarter of 2017, with the network putting up the highest-rated quarter ever in cable news history in the total day viewership measure, according to Nielsen data released Tuesday. This marks 61 consecutive quarters that Fox News has finished number one among cable news networks in total day and primetime viewership.

Fox News averaged 1.72 million total day viewers, with 359,000 of those falling in the key adults 25-54 demo. CNN finished second with 826,000 total day viewers and 266,000 viewers in the demo. MSNBC came in third with 781,000 total day viewers and 185,000 viewers in the demo.

We watch a 10PM Fox news in the SF Bay area and it has no political overtones.

The fact that we refuse to teach our kids today about climate change and evolution pretty much dictates at least the next 20-25 years will remain unchanged from today's political circus. This probably translates to another generation of doing little to nothing on climate change.

I think there was some law passed that mandated the federal government use 30% alternative energy by 2025. While the general public today is at 10% the federal government is at 8%...when the federal government should actually be setting an example. Trump claims 'the wall' will be covered in solar panels, I guess to provide lights for those desert coyotes, yet he is not advocating this for all government?

 

The 'will' of the people is a known quantity...we can see this in our government and society every day.

Your idea of sucking carbon out of our atmosphere rooted in the entrepreneurial spirit as justification should be pooh-poohed since if it was a valid business venture people would be doing this today...what are they waiting for?

 

What about all the African people living out in the sticks burning wood fires and popping out babies? What if that's what Hawking meant by the Earth turning into a fireball in the next 600 years? It's the stick fires.

 

As in previous posts, I do not accept the idea that we can make decisions on the basis that there could be some stupendously unlikely or difficult to control factor in the future that makes current action on recognized problems irrelevant.

 

Assuming Earth continues on the path to becoming a fireball in 100-600 years, will it actually be possible to reengineer the entire atmosphere of Earth and to reverse all other tangental negative effects, like loss of ice and warmed oceans and scorched soils and depleted aquifers and loss of food/animals, etc.? Not only must mankind know how to do this, but also be able to make it happen in a timely fashion. This Herculean effort is a bit tantamount to terraforming Mars!

 

There could be good reasons for government sources of energy being different from general public or business sources. So, until there is some sort of breakdown or proposal for how government could change its energy sources, I don't see your stat as being an indication of lack of leadership.

I DO agree that government has been weak on leadership on this issue, of course. I just don't accept your state until I see some sort of analysis.

The indications of lack of leadership come in such factors as the degree to which government helps the fossil fuel industry vs. how much they promote clean energy. And, the many decades of refusal to move on transportation issues such as public transit and energy efficiency standards for cars - which even helped the US auto industry be so vulnerable to foreign corporations.

Every other industrialized nation taxes fuel far more than we do, and they use it to offset other forms of taxes, such as income tax - encouraging conservation while allowing individuals to lower their taxes through their behavior if they want to.

Today, there are severe limits on home owners who want to add the cost effective solar power production that is available today. Why?

 

We know who creates the co2 pollution.

The largest per capita contributor is the USA.

The nation with the largest total contribution is China. But, China is working aggressively to fix that. It's oddly fortunate that they really don't have a choice, as they have a serious air quality problem in their cities. Today, they own the most clean energy patents and are the world's largest producers and exporters of clean energy technology.

They are committed. (In fact, every nation in the world is a signatory of the Paris climate accord - except the USA.)

The USA is not committed. However, we do have states and cities that are trying.

 

Amen!

We're far too absorbed with self gratification, with amazingly little concern for our children.

The US seems to be on cruise control, thinking we're magically immune to competition and that all that follows is irrelevant.

 

lol