AuthorTopic: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week  (Read 2135 times)

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39354
    • View Profile
☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« on: November 12, 2019, 07:34:42 AM »
Stated another way, sometime in the  next 14,000 Years, Homo Sap stands a good probability of going Extinct.  ::)  That would be the In the Year 16,020.

It will come In the Year 9595.  So spaketh Zager & Evans.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/zKQfxi8V5FA" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/zKQfxi8V5FA</a>

http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/blog/2015/05/17/the-human-extinction-survey/

RE

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-7673963/Humans-1-14-000-chances-going-extinct-year-getting-struck-lightning.html

Tuesday, Nov 12th 2019 6AM 32°F 9AM 31°F 5-Day Forecast

Humans have a 1 in 14,000 chance of going extinct next year - more likely than the odds an individual has of being struck by lightning, study finds


    Looked at fossils and archaeological data from artifacts 350,000 years old
    Calculated that humans have a 1 in 14,000 chance of going extinct any give year
    This is of natural events, but experts say it increases with man-made risks

By Stacy Liberatore For Dailymail.com

Published: 14:54 EST, 11 November 2019 | Updated: 06:05 EST, 12 November 2019


Humans have a higher risk of going extinct in the next year than an individual does of being attacked by a shark or struck by lightning, a new study has found.

Researchers concluded the probability of our species dying off from natural causes in any given year is one in 14,000.

The team has also noted the risk increases when man-made threats are added to the calculation - this includes nuclear weapons or climate change.

The recent study into human extinction was conducted by researchers at the University of Oxford, which set out to determine the total probability of human extinction from natural causes, including asteroid impacts and super volcanic eruptions.

The team looked at the 200,000-year reign of humans on Earth to determine the probability we could disappear from the planet.

Scroll down for videos
Experts concluded the probability of our species dying off from natural causes in any given year is one in 14,000 (stock). The team has also noted the risk increases when man-made threats are added to the calculation -this includes nuclear weapons or climate change
 4

Experts concluded the probability of our species dying off from natural causes in any given year is one in 14,000 (stock). The team has also noted the risk increases when man-made threats are added to the calculation -this includes nuclear weapons or climate change

This calculation means that humans have a greater chance of becoming extinct than an individual has of being struck by lightning (1 in 700,000), being attacked by a shark (1 in 650,000) or even dating a supermodel (1 in 880,000), as reported by The Sun.

In a second part of the study, the team looked at fossil data and found that the probability decreased to one in 23,000.
RELATED ARTICLES

    Previous
    1
    Next

    Put speed limits in the sea to cut ships' carbon emissions...
    Dissolving dead bodies in WATER rather than cremating them...

Share this article
Share

The team gathered archaeological and fossil records from artifacts that are hundreds of thousands years old – many of which came from Morocco and Ethiopia.

Last year, a separate team of researchers designed a model to determine the three possible fates for our planet as Earth's population grows and the effects of climate change worsen.

Mathematicians modeled how advanced civilizations on ancient exoplanets might have survived or perished when faced with a similar changing environment.
The team gathered archaeological and fossil records from artifacts that are hundreds of thousands years old – many of which came from Morocco and Ethiopia - in a second part of the study
 4

The team gathered archaeological and fossil records from artifacts that are hundreds of thousands years old – many of which came from Morocco and Ethiopia - in a second part of the study

They showed that humanity could go through a soft landing, a gradual die-off, or full blown collapse.

Experts said a die-off, in which as much as seven in ten of a planet's inhabitants were wiped out before stabilizing, was by far the most common outcome.

A soft landing was the most positive outcome, and occurred when a civilization adapted to its changing planet without a mass extinction.

During a full blown collapse, the planet was too sensitive to recover from damage caused by its inhabitants, leading to a rapid annihilation of all intelligent life.

Even when planets switched to renewable fuels to save themselves from extinction, the damage done was sometimes still enough to wipe out the inhabitants, according to the models.

Scientists said the simulations reveal 'a radical truth about the challenge we face as we push the Earth into its human-dominated era.' 
Last year, a separate team of researchers designed a model to determine the three possible fates for our planet as Earth's population grows and the effects of climate change worsen The red dots show where the civilization is stable with its environment. The green line shows how the population grew with its environment
 4

Last year, a separate team of researchers designed a model to determine the three possible fates for our planet as Earth's population grows and the effects of climate change worsen The red dots show where the civilization is stable with its environment. The green line shows how the population grew with its environment
This image shows a modeled population in which it uses its resources poorly leading to a highly unstable environment. As conditions on the planet collapse, the civilizations in these scenarios are quickly wiped out leading to a 'full-blown' collapse
 4

This image shows a modeled population in which it uses its resources poorly leading to a highly unstable environment. As conditions on the planet collapse, the civilizations in these scenarios are quickly wiped out leading to a 'full-blown' collapse

The team, led by scientists at the University of Rochester in New York, used models for population growth on Earth to mark out how alien planets may have grown.

Using statistical models they mapped out possible histories of alien worlds, the civilizations they grew, and the climate change that followed.

They called these societies 'Exo-civilizations' and say that learning from their mistakes could help us prepare for the effects of climate change.

Unfortunately, of the three fates observed, none were positive.

The most common outcome observed by the team was known as the die-off.

As the civilization on the simulated planets used energy, its population exploded, but its use of resources pushed the planet away from the conditions the society had become accustomed to.

As the population continued to expand the planet became uninhabitable, forcing a devastating drop in the number of civilians until a sustainable planetary civilization was achieved once more.

In many of the models, researchers observed that as much as 70 percent of the population perished before a steady state was reached again.

The second outcome viewed by the team was the soft landing - the most positive outcome of the three observed.

This time, the growing population and the planet maintained a smooth transition to a new, balanced equilibrium, partly through low-impact resources.

Although the localisation changed the planet, it did so without triggering a mass extinction, like those observed in the first outcome.

Outcome number three was a full-blown collapse, which also started with a skyrocketing population.

However, these worlds were too sensitive to change and were unable to cope with a rapidly expanding, resource-hungry civilization.

As conditions on the worlds collapsed around them, the civilizations in these scenarios were rapidly wiped out.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 16638
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #1 on: November 13, 2019, 01:22:37 AM »
Stated another way, sometime in the  next 14,000 Years, Homo Sap stands a good probability of going Extinct.  ::)  That would be the In the Year 16,020.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-7673963/Humans-1-14-000-chances-going-extinct-year-getting-struck-lightning.html

Tuesday, Nov 12th 2019 6AM 32°F 9AM 31°F 5-Day Forecast

Humans have a 1 in 14,000 chance of going extinct next year - more likely than the odds an individual has of being struck by lightning, study finds

I recall being convinced by an argument you made in these pages some tome ago about the sheer difficulty of total extinction. Yo9ur argument was based on the math. If there are eight billion people on earth, and some vector wipes out 99.9 per cent, that still leaves 800,000 souls to pick up the pieces.

Some silly shit-- as advertised.
“The old world is dying, and the New World struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters.”

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39354
    • View Profile
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #2 on: November 13, 2019, 02:26:05 AM »
Stated another way, sometime in the  next 14,000 Years, Homo Sap stands a good probability of going Extinct.  ::)  That would be the In the Year 16,020.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-7673963/Humans-1-14-000-chances-going-extinct-year-getting-struck-lightning.html

Tuesday, Nov 12th 2019 6AM 32°F 9AM 31°F 5-Day Forecast

Humans have a 1 in 14,000 chance of going extinct next year - more likely than the odds an individual has of being struck by lightning, study finds

I recall being convinced by an argument you made in these pages some tome ago about the sheer difficulty of total extinction. Yo9ur argument was based on the math. If there are eight billion people on earth, and some vector wipes out 99.9 per cent, that still leaves 800,000 souls to pick up the pieces.

Some silly shit-- as advertised.

Indeed.  For the ENTIRE planet to become totally uninhabitable for Homo Saps is either going to take quite some time, or an EXTREME event like an impact with a Planet Killer Asteroid.  Even full on Global Thermonuclear War would'kill off EVERYBODY.

On the Math end of things, with the current say 8B Meat Packages taking up space, a 99.9% Knockdown would leave 8M Naked Apes on the Planet, not 800K.  To get down to 800K, you need a 99.99% Knockdown, aka only 1:10,000 survives the Zero Point.

So, barring a Cosmic Event over which we have no control at the moment, (despite claims if we could detect the incoming early enough we could nudge it out of the way with Nuclear tipped Rockets built by Elon Musk) Homo Saps are not going Extinct in 2020.  Nor in your lifetime or mine.  MAYBE it could happen by your Grandchildren's generation.  Even that is a stretch though.

This is a new simulation, with an Asteroid about the size of the one that Knocked off the Dinosaurs.  Not a Planet Killer like the one I have used in the past, but probably big enough to spell DOOM for Homo Saps.  It doesn't have to be all that big.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/6jRtnpbclzY" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/6jRtnpbclzY</a>

RE


Save As Many As You Can

Offline K-Dog

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3245
    • View Profile
    • K-Dog
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #3 on: November 13, 2019, 06:05:46 AM »
That video is horrible.  Nothing like reality.  The Daily Mail article is similar.  Nowhere is the methodology behind the modeling discussed and that's mathematical masturbation by the dunce hat crowd.
Under ideal conditions of temperature and pressure the organism will grow without limit.

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39354
    • View Profile
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #4 on: November 13, 2019, 06:47:38 AM »
That video is horrible.  Nothing like reality.  The Daily Mail article is similar.  Nowhere is the methodology behind the modeling discussed and that's mathematical masturbation by the dunce hat crowd.

It's a tad more realistic than the Planet Killer simulation the Discovey Channel did which I have long ued in these discussions. :P

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/bU1QPtOZQZU" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/bU1QPtOZQZU</a>

That is like the MOON crashing into the Earth.  No Asteroid that big has EVER hit the Earth since the earliest days of it's formation when the planets were accreting matter in their orbits.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9469
    • View Profile
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #5 on: November 13, 2019, 08:58:29 AM »
Just more "Fear-Porn" to sell us more useless crap from China.....
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world.
You don’t know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Offline K-Dog

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3245
    • View Profile
    • K-Dog
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #6 on: November 13, 2019, 10:39:27 AM »
Stay with the discovery channel even if it is wrong.  It is closer.
Under ideal conditions of temperature and pressure the organism will grow without limit.

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39354
    • View Profile
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #7 on: November 13, 2019, 11:14:16 AM »
Stay with the discovery channel even if it is wrong.  It is closer.

Where's YOUR Math to show it is closer? ???  :icon_scratch:

I do still like the DC simulation better though.  The Music background is way superior. lol.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9469
    • View Profile
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #8 on: November 13, 2019, 11:48:03 AM »
Stay with the discovery channel even if it is wrong.  It is closer.

Where's YOUR Math to show it is closer? ???  :icon_scratch:

I do still like the DC simulation better though.  The Music background is way superior. lol.

RE


When the "BIG GUY" destroys, the murder weapon ISN'T space rocks.

It's ice balls "B@@M"  :coffee:

The murder weapon turns to liquid.

Please review goog earth at the great lakes area & 10,0000 lakes in Mn.

Shot gun blast of ice  :icon_mrgreen:
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world.
You don’t know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39354
    • View Profile
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #9 on: November 13, 2019, 12:13:28 PM »
Stay with the discovery channel even if it is wrong.  It is closer.

Where's YOUR Math to show it is closer? ???  :icon_scratch:

I do still like the DC simulation better though.  The Music background is way superior. lol.

RE


When the "BIG GUY" destroys, the murder weapon ISN'T space rocks.

It's ice balls "B@@M"  :coffee:

The murder weapon turns to liquid.

Please review goog earth at the great lakes area & 10,0000 lakes in Mn.

Shot gun blast of ice  :icon_mrgreen:

Whether the impacting object is Ice or Rock is irrelevant.  It's just a matter of Kinetic Energy, which is strictly Newtonian Mechanics

KE= 1/2 MV2

the BIGGER the object is, the FASTER the speed it arrives at, the more energy it carries with it.  Velocity is the real key here, becaue that is a Square Law.

So, say the Moon got knocked out of orbit and hit the Earth?  It is a fucking BIG ROCK, but it is not far from the Earth and has little time to accelerate.

However, if a Comet (basically water ice) less than 1/8th the size of the moon came Rocketing in from say around Jupiter, because the speed it would develop as it accelerated in the Gravity Well of the SUN was so great, it would have many multiples of the total KE.  I will leave it to K-Dog to work out the exact Math. LOL.

Put it this way though.  If an Ice Cube about the size of Alaska came rocketing in from YOUR ANUS (Uranus), we're all TOAST.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9469
    • View Profile
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #10 on: November 14, 2019, 04:34:30 AM »
Stay with the discovery channel even if it is wrong.  It is closer.

Where's YOUR Math to show it is closer? ???  :icon_scratch:

I do still like the DC simulation better though.  The Music background is way superior. lol.

RE


When the "BIG GUY" destroys, the murder weapon ISN'T space rocks.

It's ice balls "B@@M"  :coffee:

The murder weapon turns to liquid.

Please review goog earth at the great lakes area & 10,0000 lakes in Mn.

Shot gun blast of ice  :icon_mrgreen:

Whether the impacting object is Ice or Rock is irrelevant.  It's just a matter of Kinetic Energy, which is strictly Newtonian Mechanics

KE= 1/2 MV2

the BIGGER the object is, the FASTER the speed it arrives at, the more energy it carries with it.  Velocity is the real key here, becaue that is a Square Law.

So, say the Moon got knocked out of orbit and hit the Earth?  It is a fucking BIG ROCK, but it is not far from the Earth and has little time to accelerate.

However, if a Comet (basically water ice) less than 1/8th the size of the moon came Rocketing in from say around Jupiter, because the speed it would develop as it accelerated in the Gravity Well of the SUN was so great, it would have many multiples of the total KE.  I will leave it to K-Dog to work out the exact Math. LOL.

Put it this way though.  If an Ice Cube about the size of Alaska came rocketing in from YOUR ANUS (Uranus), we're all TOAST.

RE



Your letter math is skewed .....

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/I1nk6dG5j1s&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/I1nk6dG5j1s&fs=1</a>
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world.
You don’t know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39354
    • View Profile
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #11 on: November 14, 2019, 05:04:23 AM »
Your letter math is skewed .....

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/I1nk6dG5j1s&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/I1nk6dG5j1s&fs=1</a>

Your video is about Gravity, not Kinetic Energy.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9469
    • View Profile
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #12 on: November 14, 2019, 05:09:04 AM »
Your letter math is skewed .....

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/I1nk6dG5j1s&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/I1nk6dG5j1s&fs=1</a>

Your video is about Gravity, not Kinetic Energy.

RE


Define gravity....
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world.
You don’t know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 39354
    • View Profile
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #13 on: November 14, 2019, 07:06:22 AM »

Define gravity....

Gravity is the attraction one Mass has for another Mass.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline azozeo

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 9469
    • View Profile
Re: ☠️ Stupid Science Article of the Week
« Reply #14 on: November 14, 2019, 07:12:49 AM »

Define gravity....

Gravity is the attraction one Mass has for another Mass.

RE


Close.....

Electro-magnitism & Air Pressure  :icon_mrgreen:
I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world.
You don’t know what it is but its there, like a splinter in your mind

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
1287 Views
Last post May 12, 2016, 02:19:50 PM
by Surly1
0 Replies
636 Views
Last post April 16, 2018, 09:39:20 PM
by RE
12 Replies
769 Views
Last post January 09, 2019, 05:49:57 AM
by Surly1