Documentation, plx D:
Hah, well, most of what I’m saying is theory, as is what everybody else says, but here’s a bit of documentation that explains a few things: http://www.is.wayne.edu/mnissani/PAGEPUB/CH2.html
Bah, my source states that he doubts extinction. =(
VIII. Extinction? Extinction of humankind is often mentioned in this context. However, based on what we know now of the effects of nuclear war, extinction is highly improbable: under any likely set of assumptions, it seems that some of our kind will be able to pull through the hardships and survive. But because extinction cannot be completely ruled out, and because it is the worst imaginable outcome of nuclear war (actually I find it hard to imagine at all[FONT=Courier New]-[/FONT]no people walking this earth[FONT=Courier New]-[/FONT]forever), it should be rendered even more improbable by reducing the risk of nuclear war.
Well, considering we’ve designed bunkers incase of a nuclear winter (supposedly) there really won’t be any way we go extinct unless a series of huge endeavors stalemate us from a global recovery.
From what I’ve been reading, at least 10% of the human population would survive both a nuclear war and a nuclear winter, and most of those people live in the backwoods.
There’s a problem though - that 10% will likely suffer cancer and great health problems. It’s not certain that they’d survive for say, another two hundred years. On the other hand, they might unify the world in an effort to prevent the catastrophe from ever happening again.
Nah, that 10% is relatively untouched. The only problem with that 10% is they won’t be the best and brightest of humanity, and so we’ll be set back about 1000 years, and we may or may not lose certain technologies forever.
He didn’t leave out the possibility of the entirety of mankind being wiped out though. It’s by no means certain that as much as 10% would survive (although it’s less probable that they do not).
As for the remaining 10%, yeah, they would be the dumbest (most people living in the backwoods aren’t educated) people on the planet (although, possibly most self-reliant). I don’t know about a thousand years, it all depends on whether a few decent scientists survive by being out in the field. They could reverse engineer certain technologies, or already possess the knowledge of how several technologies worked. Either way they’d be able to train some new scientists if they survived.
As for the whole “the smart guys get whacked” thing, it’s happened before. I wonder how much further we’d be along if the Black Plague hadn’t annihilated half of Europe’s population back in the 1300’s. We’d probably be building colonies on the planets in our solar system by now.
Yeah but man, I’d really like to see what plant/animal life turns into after a worldwide nuclear bombardment.
And I’d like to see what kind of evolution would take place as those plants/animals as its root. Think of the possibilities.
It’s already known that cockroachs will win the battle for earth.
Have you never watched a Godzilla movie?
Think giant reptiles and anthropods.
That’s the corect answer . I could not say it beter .I bet in the future the Human stpidity will be so big that it will end the world.
I smell irony.
I smell pie.
Either way, I’d have to agree with Grega. We’ll survive aliens, nuclear wars, diseases, asteroids, demons, what-have-you. And we’ll be killed by our own stupidity and ignorance. Well…I guess there is some irony to that…
I’ll take Nuclear War… and it’ll most likely be an accidential one, unless a country develops a defense system similar to the Star Wars project… and if that happens, the possiblilty of MAD is gone for the country that has the defense capability. Either way.. if that doesnt happen, the idea of MAD doesnt really settle well with people. So that nearly rules out the event of a purposely triggered nuclear war.