Catastrophic conditions will prevail on Earth
Humanity has 100 years to save itself from doom, says Stephen Hawking
From an Article by Mike Wehner, BGR Blog, New York Post, May 5, 2017
While much of humanity concerns itself with saving the planet from the ravages mankind has inflicted upon it, one of the world’s brightest minds is already warning that we should actually be spending our time planning our ultimate escape. Stephen Hawking — the cosmologist, author, and physicist who holds more awards and honorary titles than should even be allowed — says that we have about 100 years until Earth is a big old pile of gross, and that if we don’t focus our efforts on colonizing other planets, namely Mars, humanity faces complete and total extinction.
Hawking’s warning that humans should start packing their bags comes as a result of the scientist’s belief that endless peril lies ahead thanks to overpopulation, climate change as a result of pollution, and even the threat of mankind building an AI or even a manmade virus capable of destroying us outright. Hawking has said before that mankind is done for, but his latest prediction is his most dire prediction yet.
In a new BBC documentary entitled “Stephen Hawking: Expedition New Earth,” the 75-year-old Hawking will attempt to prove that his theory isn’t as crazy as it seems. “Professor Stephen Hawking thinks the human species will have to populate a new planet within 100 years if it is to survive,” the BBC says. “With climate change, overdue asteroid strikes, epidemics and population growth, our own planet is increasingly precarious.” The documentary will be split into two 60-minute programs and will air on BBC Two before presumably finding its way to American television.
Note: If we destroy planet Earth in the coming 100 years, there is no point of populating another planet because mankind would mess it over just as fast, if not faster. DGN
- > > > > > > > > > > >
How long do we have left on Earth?
Comments by Stephen Baxter, British Interplanetary Society, May 9, 2017
We have 100 years to move beyond the Earth or face extinction according to renowned physicist, Professor Stephen Hawking. He thinks humanity needs to become a multi-planetary species within the next century, revising his hopes for our species down from an earlier warning which gave us 1000 years. So why does he feel our time is running out even quicker?
>>> Stephen Baxter, the British science fiction author, is a Fellow of the British Interplanetary Society. Amongst his many books is the 2009 novel, Ark, about a desperate evacuation from an Earth in the grip of an environmental catastrophe. What does he make of Professor Hawking’s warnings? Hear the BBC Audio Tape here:
Point Your RSS Reader to FrackCheckWV.net/feed/
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I find it astonishing that someone so smart could be so stupid.
Yes, humanity faces many serious perils, all of them of our own making. But the notion that we could solve any of these problems by leaving a planet perfectly suited to human life–except for the damage we’ve done–and go to a planet with the wrong temperatures, wrong atmosphere, and above all, no life…even if we could terraform Mars in a few decades (extremely doubtful) we would also have to import entire complex ecosystems from Earth, as we depend on them.
Would this REALLY be easier than ceasing to trash our homeworld?
And even if by several miracles we pulled it off, as you say, why wouldn’t we promptly begin to wreck the ecological and social atmosphere of Mars?
Mary Wildfire, Roane County, WV
This is heavy stuff!
This animal, man, keeps living like animals have for eons. Our intelligence isn’t well adapted for understanding the “grand scheme of things.” Oh, we get a piece here and there with great labor – think how much work is required to extend new knowledge. A third of a lifetime training, often years for an important discovery, and then it must be communicated to the few other humans who want to know. Extending knowledge backwards in history is similar.
What we are good at is drawing up into groups and grabbing what we can. Sometimes it is spectacular, like the early Europeans in the New World. Sometimes it is petty theft. Sometimes it is using control of government – which is the only institution which today can legitimately use force – to get your group what is needed by others, too.
Hardly anyone balances the waste and cost of war and preparation for war against what can be done constructively with the same resources.
Hardly anyone understands the difference between the organic life of the past and industrial life of the present.
Many do not consider empathy with others a building block of society.
Many do not see future generations as needing consideration.
We are a crude beast, indeed!
Tom Bond, Lewis County, WV