Hello, I would like your opinion for a cancer issue: us.

We are plague for this planet, that's a truth, and we will long as we continue this self-destructive way of living multiplied by an increasing population. Planet earth is outnumbered and is loosing this battle. However, it would be selfish to think that our home will die with us, because we are merely a spot in this planet's life, and the cycle of life will continue without us, that's for sure.

But, we have technology, intelligence and -limited- resources, we can resist extinction-threatening situations. If we were to be wiped out of Earth, the price to pay would be very high. A lot of creatures would die with us, and nothing guarantees that mankind would be eradicated (even if only 100 of us survive)

So that leaves me to the question:
Would a massive extinction phenomena be capable of killing us without exterminating every life-form in our planet except maybe for bacteria?

The beginning of your post is very out there, Gvn. Humans are arrogant and many think themselves to be better then the rest of living things, that they go to heaven a... blah blah blah. You know that your post questions religion right? I completely agree with you, but you have to understand, this can and will turn into a nasty debate if someone comes by and feels like making an altercation.

Gvn

Would a massive extinction phenomena be capable of killing us without exterminating every life-form in our planet except maybe for bacteria?

Who knows? Humans will in end be the destruction to their own race, end of story. They will take down other races as well. Will it destroy everything? With these worthless world leaders these days, it can be likely. Heck, it could be because of that cold war with Russia and the US where they both made multiple atomic bombs. Maybe we exterminate ourselves, and the bombs, left without care, explode and then whatever managed to survive originally dies. Why knows?

You're right, maybe I'm out of focus. I want to discuss the extinction phenomena by itself and not the reasons why we deserve that. I don't want neither to question religion here, not discuss this topic from a religious point of view, even when in most religions there's an end, but it is more poetic and fantastic than realistic.

If you were the person/entity/god/creature in charge of wipe out humans, but at the same time you want to preserve most of other life-forms in the process, which method would you use? Don't you think that humans are a hard-to-eradicate plague?

Nice topic here!

Well if I would be this god/entity, I probably would like to create a virus like as deadly as ebola, with a long incubation time like HIV making it incapable of bieng detected normally and to prolyferate wider before it starts acting in the guest, and make it be transmissible by air, you know like flu, oh and make it to be a retrovirus, so that we won´t find a cure for it, and that would make it xD

Or if that miracle of nature never occur, I think in the end we will be erradicated in a nuclear war, and there are a lot of species that resist radiation, so the biodiversity would still exist in some way.

Cheers...

I agree. I would probably create some disease that attacks only humans (there things like that all over, fungi in the rain forest who attack only one specific type of ant, and for every and there is a specific fungi) and spread it all over.

Either that, or make some form of mutation into humans so that they can't reproduce in any way, be it natural or in a peetree (spelling?) dish, or by mixing our kind with apes. Leave no option out there at all for the survival of man kind. It would take at most ~100 years for it all to be over, and the stress of not being able to reproduce would only speed it up, having humans kill eachother in between themselves other than just letting old age get to their bones.

Now I have a question for you, Gvn: Why are you thinking about eradicating man kind?

Human-specific diseases exist (AIDS, for example), but they are not devastating enough to cause us extinction. AIDS-vaccine has showed poor but hoping results in some trials, and sooner or later that disease would be controlled. If a worse disease appears (or is designed) it cannot kill too fast, because it wouldn't be able to spread, but it cannot kill too slow, or basic measures like quarantine would stop it easily. Even with the perfect balance (like avian flu if it were easily transmissible between humans), it would kill most, but no all of us.

Stopping every way of reproduction? Hard, but effective. But it does not sound realistic: mutations can be spread globally, but a mutation capable of frustrate every single mechanism of reproduction? (natural, in-vitro, even cloning) Very hard. Genetic therapy would fix the problem for some people, and again our technology will save us from extinction.

4thEspada

Why are you thinking about eradicating man kind?

Let's say I'm fantasizing. But my real intention is to emphasize in the huge problem that we have become for our planet.

Gvnkwyr

Let's say I'm fantasizing. But my real intention is to emphasize in the huge problem that we have become for our planet.

Excuse me... what? What kind of danger we humans makes to our planet? We would need to detonate many-many nukes to do something what would destroy our planets... but now in our common life it is hardly possible. This planet was long time before humans, and will be long after them... and the one who will destroy it will be probably our sun or some giant asteroid.

I really don't understand those people who scream "save the planet"... it don't need to be saved.. at least not by us.. this what we can do is "saving ourselves". Planet doesn't matter is there oxygen in atmosphere... humans do, planet doesn't matter if there is any atmosphere at all... well we do. For planet she can become radioactive desert with no signs of life... and planet will still "stand" (or float, or whatever ;p ), while we care... we want sunny, greeny, oxygenious planet... but all those green movements, those eco-guys and eco-girls are still saying "save the planet"... well if it is their true motivation, than they obtain wrong path...

If I could have a say in this topic,first the fact that humans will be extincted.sorry but that's not happening,because we have the technology to create organs for those who lost some,detection devices to know when we are lost,the weapons we are creating are so futuristic that video games will become a training process,and if a disease cam a long we will remove with a blink of an eye (not to overdo it),the number of people dying,yes it's alot,but the number we are producing beats it,so if you "nuked" (such an awful word)the world if it's possible,there will be survivors.
hiding in there underground shelters

I agree with most of what Lunco said.
However, we do not deserve to be wiped out, Gvnkwyr. The planet is just a resource and it depends on how we exploit it. With further technological advancements we can do this whithout being distructive, like we are already doing to some extend. Sure we would like to have plants and animals still present no matter how advanced we become, but there is no greater reason why they exist. except for us, if we want them to.
What I say may seem repugnant to a lot of people, but I'm a realist :p

However, if you really would like to wipe out humanity, Gvnkwyr, you could always somehow engineer a way to make all the major volcanoes around the world to erupt simultaneously, probably by the use of powerfull explosives planted at specific locations inside the volcanoes, witch will then cause the earth to be blanketed by a massive shroud of ash and smoke around the planet and cause a new ice age. One-tenth of earths population might die in this winter, but if your still not satisfied by then, Gvnkwyr, then you could always finish off the survivors with a nasty virus. The planet will revive in a few thousand year along with new live ^_^

It is possible that such a type of extinction could occur to humans, as it had long ago to the dinosaurs. Though, I personally wouldn't wish for it.

You are welcome to your opinion of mankind, and in fantasizing its extinction. However, I urge you to think about this issue with more compassion for human life. For your own sake, for the sake of your friends and family, for your future children, and everyone else that is a part of the mankind that you feel deserves extinction. Because, we are ALL a part of mankind. We are all people laughing and crying in our lives, sailing the heights and plumbing the greater despairs, and ultimately doing the best that we can with what we are given. It is very easy to think "mankind deserves extinction", but who do we mean by that? People just like you and me. Little kids on the playground. An old man and his grown son playing chess. Not just mankind, but people.

And consider further this. We are not separate from the planet. We are just as much a part of this planet as the trees, the birds, and the fish in the sea. We are still born, live and die within the constraints of our physical body, depend on the air around us to breathe, the nourishment of the plants and the sun, and when our days feeding upon the Earth end we return our life to it, beginning the cycle anew. Wishing extinction upon us is to wish extinction of a part of the Earth, like wishing extinction upon any other species on the planet that we deem "threatening", like the deers or rabbits that overpopulate and ravage the forest when the natural conditions are just right.

Thinking about setting extinction upon humanity is something of a "quick-fix" way of looking at this issue, and in my opinion somewhat immature. Death is not the answer. It is better to accept responsibility for our existence on Earth, no matter how insurmountably difficult or impossible it may seem, and do our best to curb the problems we cause here, whilst ever seeking what benefits we can add. We should follow the example set by others, those who are already taking steps to lead changes in our lifestyles that minimize the detrimental impact of our existence here, and promote the flourishing of life everywhere. We can do this. I believe in this, that despite the obstacles it is an attainable future.

We are not a cancer. Those who corrupt and don't have any consideration about the natural resources, these are truly the cancer.

Think about the future when machines will be ruling: they will tell us what to eat, drink and also behave, and those poor men will be sentenced to death. Or, we might face a new glacial age and then they will die too, and the ones who loved the planet will know how to survive...

I am inclined to say, yes, it is possible. However such an event would likely be a product of humans. As you said, humans have a destructive nature. This paradox may or may not lead to one of two things. Either we turn into the classic sci-fi parasitic alien race moving from planet to planet with an ever-growing population, or we end up killing ourselves. Of course, I don't plan on dying in my lifetime! :D

I'm back (AH1N1 got me, quite ironic after starting this thread)

I must to say that some of you have seriously misunderstood me. I'll try to answer everything:

Lunco

Excuse me... what? What kind of danger we humans makes to our planet? We would need to detonate many-many nukes to do something what would destroy our planets... but now in our common life it is hardly possible.

We are a thread for our planet not because we have the potential to destroy the planet phisically, because we are fully capable to destroy THE LIFE ON THIS planet. I think that was obvious, but I see now that it needs to be clarified. "Save the planet" is actually "Save THE LIFE ON the planet", because any different interpretation would be ridiculous. We cannot destroy the planet, but we can leave it as a dead place like Venus or Mars, populated by bacteria (the only known life-form capable to survive such extreme environments). Cleared my point, it is logical to think that we are a dangerous threat for the really nice thing that makes Earth different from every other near planet: LIFE. Not our lives, but biodiversity and every single creature of this beautiful place.

Phoenolf

(...) first the fact that humans will be extincted. Sorry but that's not happening, because we have...

Yes, we have resources and technology, but we will have them forever? Resources are limited, and even if we have success in bringing materials from outer space, developing better sources of energy or recycling materials, not everyone will have access to the newest scientific advances. The poorest people would die and the population will be seriously reduced (half or current population is poor). However, scarcity of resources is not enough to eradicate us (I mentioned it at the beginning), it would be necessary a crisis or a harsh situation that blocks access to resources and accelerate the problem. At the current speed, we'll leave planet before resources run out.

Ali3n

However, we do not deserve to be wiped out, Gvnkwyr. The planet is just a resource and it depends on how we exploit it. With further technological advancements we can do this whithout being distructive, like we are already doing to some extend. Sure we would like to have plants and animals still present no matter how advanced we become, but there is no greater reason why they exist. except for us, if we want them to. What I say may seem repugnant to a lot of people, but I'm a realist :p

I totally agree. Is very repugnant to say that other life forms different than us are here only because we want to, and the only reason for them to exist is our will and necessity. I also agree that if we administrate better our environment, our natural resources and our own population we can save the planet and live efficiently without being destructive, and the current efforts humanity are doing are not only far from enough, but very hypocritical and selfish. Is true that we don't deserve to be wiped out, but we are very close to deserve it. At the other side, your strategy is cool, but costly, and of course no-one would want to do it (aliens maybe). However, even after all that you've said, some humans would survive, and that would kill practically all of the other current species, and that's not my purpose. A massive disaster would act like a "reset button" for life, and surely earth will recover and new life forms will appear, beginning a new chapter of this planet's history, but at a great cost.

RedZ

However, I urge you to think about this issue with more compassion for human life.

I'm just being realist, thinking globally rather than individually. If I see every person individually, nobody deserves to die, I won't be capable even to think in harm them, but a different thing comes in place when I think globally and I notice all destruction and suffering that we have caused. It would be excellent if a magic method of selective punishment for those who thread the life on earth, but that does not exist. Our current solution would be dichotomous: we change or we die. Think about this: If mankind face extinction, who will die first? People just like you and me, little kids on the playground, an old man and his grown son playing chess, our friends and family, the children of tomorrow, the poor. The masses are not compassionate, believe me. In a situation of life or death, even you will lose your compassion.

RedZ

Wishing extinction upon us is to wish extinction of a part of the Earth, like wishing extinction upon any other species on the planet that we deem "threatening", like the deers or rabbits that overpopulate and ravage the forest when the natural conditions are just right.

Yes, you are right. Eradicating humans is eradicating a part of this planet, and with us a lot of other species. However, we are not behaving naturally. Rabbits overpopulation would be easily controlled by predators and shortly life will achieve balance, but humans, we do not behave naturally.

RedZ

Thinking about setting extinction upon humanity is something of a "quick-fix" way of looking at this issue, and in my opinion somewhat immature. Death is not the answer.

Yes it is, I said I was fantasizing. Death is the easiest answer, but is not the best. The best way to save our environment is if all of us we change the way we live, if we acquire natural conscience and we start to do the right thing. I would really like that day would come, but being realistic, that won't happen. We'll face extinction before we change radically our life-style.

Arthurgomes

We are not a cancer. Those who corrupt and don't have any consideration about the natural resources, these are truly the cancer.

Yes, that's true, but people like you and me are damaging indirectly our planet. Do you use to turn on the TV and PC at the same time? Do you prefer to drive (or being taken) instead of walk or bike to a near place? Do you throw your garbage instead of recycling it? You don't need to kill the baby seal or pour nuclear waste to the ocean to kill this planet, little actions done in a massive scale (let's say 3 billion people) make severe damage to our environment.

Thanks to all for your comments, my whim was deeply discussed and answered, the underlying problem was raised and I hope the conscience that all of us will need to change this apocalyptic situation was subtly sown.