100 million years AD

May we PLEASE stick to science and quit with the fringe politics please?!

Especially when they're blatantly wrong for the most part.

After 100 million years you will find probably very little, if not no trace of human beings outside of areas where you may find bone fossils.

Although our construction seems very strong to us, this study was performed 5 years ago by a few institutions and they found that most likely nothing will remain from our civilizations. The buildings will crumble and rot, the iron structures will rust away, the roads and cars will be swallowed up by plant life and subduction, and that's about it.

Redirected to Phantasyorg.com

Seriously.

Okay... raise your hand if you're planning to go extinct. Anybody?

Didn't think so. Cripes... What's 100 million years? Dinosaurs didn't have language, lasers, or liberals, and they lasted almost twice as long!

No! Don't you know that our actions will cause the atmosphere of the planet to vent off into space, followed by the oceans, followed by the crust! Mankind's horrible ecological destruction will do what multiple asteroid impacts and naturally occuring mass extinctions failed to do! DESTROY THE WHOLE PLANET!

What makes them think the earth would even BE HERE in 100m years?! I thought we're not going to last beyond the first time they use the LHC?!

I'm so confused...

Let's say the planet is still here, wouldn't most of the space junk still be swirling around in orbit? Probably a lot more of it than now, so any visitor would first find our hardware and know something happened to the planet.

Nah. By the time we cull ourselves from the evolutionary tree, our space junk will be thicker than peanut butter. After we're gone, the junk's orbits will decay.

Future alien archeologists will find a crust COMPOSED of fallen sputniks.

In the future an entire alien civilization desperately escaping extinction at the hands of some cosmic phenomenon will come to earth. Little do they know that a stable micro black hole formed by LHC is just now aquiring enough mass to become any real threat to the earth. They get sucked in shortly after winning the war against the hyper intelligent squid people.

j/k go LHC!

If squids are so smart, how come they taste so good? :)

You have it backwards. The squids are so smart because they taste so good. Evolution drove them to hyperintelligence to avoid their fate as taste-delicious snacks for the moderately intelligent whale people. 8-P

You are obviously a squid.

Thank you ^.^

This site should stick to science and stop its daily promulgation of articles from this particular religious faith (MMGW).

What I've always found curious and ironic about the proselytes of MMGW is how closely their world-view parallels that of pre-Renaissance, pre-humanism Christianity: Humanity is inherently evil, anathemic, and subversive to the "natural order".

Their eschatological bent, however, is far less kind and actually outright rabid, requiring no less than the destruction of all humanity for the sake of the poor planet and our (hopeful) supplantation by some wiser, greener successor species.

I am willing to entertain a balance of FACTS and measurements -- not homilies.

This site should stick to science and stop its daily promulgation of articles from this particular religious faith (MMGW).

What I've always found curious and ironic about the proselytes of MMGW is how closely their world-view parallels that of pre-Renaissance, pre-humanism Christianity: Humanity is inherently evil, anathemic, and subversive to the "natural order".

Their eschatological bent, however, is far less kind and actually outright rabid, requiring no less than the destruction of all humanity for the sake of the poor planet and our (hopeful) supplantation by some wiser, greener successor species.

I am willing to entertain a balance of FACTS and measurements -- not homilies.

I'd like to welcome you to our club. jscroft will teach you the secret handshake, and you can see Modernmystic for your membership pin.

Very interesting... The politicization of science (notice I do not use it in the religious tense of Science) to validate an inherently anti-human agenda...

You have it backwards. The squids are so smart because they taste so good. Evolution drove them to hyperintelligence to avoid their fate as taste-delicious snacks for the moderately intelligent whale people. 8-P

Thus we know that humans are... delicious.

They'll find the Statue of Liberty half buried in the sand and yell "Damn you! Damn you all to hell!"

Does anyone reading this really believe that humanity will survive 100 millions years? I really doubt we will make it 100k years. The universe is a dangerous place for things that depend upon static conditions.

Does anyone reading this really believe that humanity will survive 100 millions years? I really doubt we will make it 100k years. The universe is a dangerous place for things that depend upon static conditions.

We'll do it. We're crafty.

I disagree with the suggestion that we will be extinct. I think that the human race (or evolutionary decendants of us) will be more or less eternal. We're just so awesome and intelligent.

I'm betting we spawn off intelligent self-replicating robots who, millions of years hence will argue about whether they were intelligently designed. In their case, the scientist will insist that the robot race was designed and the religious freak robots will claim that they evolved. Of course, the serial numbers give it away...

Assuming we're not still here (I think we will be), all that junk we left up there on the moon will still be there.

My god, what is wrong with you people? The man does a thought experiment to explore what effect humans are having on the planet, and you all freak out? Anti-Human agenda? Fringe Politics? Honestly, are you people so radicalised in your views that you can't even read an article without exploding into paranoid rants? I don't see any Zealous Global Warming people posting on here, saying the world is going to end tomorrow and that this article is forwarding a Conservative, inaccurate point of view. The issue of Leftism was not included in this article, it was injected. If we're going to not bring politics onto this website, I suggest you people keep your political views to yourselves.

My god, what is wrong with you people? The man does a thought experiment to explore what effect humans are having on the planet, and you all freak out? Anti-Human agenda? Fringe Politics? Honestly, are you people so radicalised in your views that you can't even read an article without exploding into paranoid rants? I don't see any Zealous Global Warming people posting on here, saying the world is going to end tomorrow and that this article is forwarding a Conservative, inaccurate point of view. The issue of Leftism was not included in this article, it was injected. If we're going to not bring politics onto this website, I suggest you people keep your political views to yourselves.

I'd direct you to read the actual study rather than the blurb on Physorg before you pass judgement on our commentary.

Velanarris: No secret decoder ring as a new member of the club? Shucks.... If you change your mind, just make sure it's not biodegradable. I want all the super-evolved lab mice in the far-flung future to have something to puzzle over in their excavations.

I do like the idea of the hyper-evolved rats the article mentioned. How can we speed that up?

Wait... Aren't WE hyper-evolved rats??

Excuse me while I have an existential crisis.

Velanarris: No secret decoder ring as a new member of the club? Shucks.... If you change your mind, just make sure it's not biodegradable. I want all the super-evolved lab mice in the far-flung future to have something to puzzle over in their excavations.

No we have one, it's made from baby seal fur. Out of season at the moment, we're debating going with polar bear bone.

You know, by AWT, the rat people and the squid people will eventually intermarry and create a race of humans all over again, so the aliens wont know the difference.

I do like the idea of the hyper-evolved rats the article mentioned. How can we speed that up?

Wait... Aren't WE hyper-evolved rats??

Excuse me while I have an existential crisis.

Heheh! We are indeed hyper-evolved rats. That is very funny. It's funny 'cause it's true.

My god, what is wrong with you people?

"But then they stumble on something quite different in a thin layer of rock: a striking signal of climate changes, extinctions and strange movements of wildlife across the planet."

What is wrong with *me* is that I call it zealotry and not scientific inquiry when, as in so many similar articles on this site, the author treats mmgw as though it were as inexorable and established as the gravitational constant.

Any scientific-minded person worth his salt, when posed a question like "will Antwerp be hit in the next 5 minutes by a rogue asteroid bedecked with signs reading 'Meat Is Murder!' and having racks upon racks of Che Guevara T-Shirts" would almost certainly reply: "That would be *highly* improbable."

The point of my awful hyperbole being that the summary of the author's view on mankind's environmental impact is written as though it was accepted fact -- a stealthy rhetorical technique that (surprise) I expect from political and agenda-driven propaganda pieces, but not from scientific inquiries.

Whew! Perhaps I should get a life....

No what was that article about?

I disagree with the suggestion that we will be extinct. I think that the human race (or evolutionary decendants of us) will be more or less eternal. We're just so awesome and intelligent.

But the Squid People are substantially more intelligent and tremendously more awesome. Therefore, the human race will not survive.
Q.E.D.

""Looking to the distant future gives us a warning for the present: our activities have already left a significant footprint on the planet, and not a flattering one. It is not too late to limit it. We would not wish to be dubbed by future explorers the 'amazingly clever and utterly foolish two-legged ape'." "

--- Hopefully between now and 100 million years hence we will have sorted out our current environmental difficulties and built an environmenentally sustainable and enjoyable civilization (read: no Puritanism here, the only worthwhile reason to preserve the environment is for human enjoyment and survival).

Take into account that extra-solar races may view us as squid and a food source. That being said, physical incarnation-type existence is not so important. Individually, we are each heading towards demise of our bodies. No great outcry there. Why the uproar with the suggestion that our great collective continuum may one day expire as well? There was a time when the human race did not exist. There will be a time when the human race will not exist. So what? It comes into being, it goes out, like the particles in the vacuum of space.

Take into account that extra-solar races may view us as squid and a food source.

Given that the biology will be different they'd probably consider us to be rat poison, for their version of rats...

We can't even predict what is going to happen in 10 yrs. This is science fiction and not even good science fiction.

Wow, so many cool comments. The people speak back, very nice. But I thought all mainstream science publications were obviously true because they were "peer reviewed" and clearly cannot exist without widespread support? Apparently only "peers" that are also in the MMGW priesthood count though, since these crap articles continue to appear ubiquitously although the vast majority clearly has realized this emperor is not wearing any clothes... The eggheads will finally realize it 10 years later when they decide the next disaster they can warn us human freedom will cause.

@jburchal - Well, I really don't know what "priesthood" you are referring to, since I am only a simple practicing physicist and not a full-time internet poster. But the article by Jan Zalasiewicz was published in New Scientist AS AN OPINION PIECE and not as a peer-reviewed paper. I find it is interesting to see how a paleobiologist takes his perspective, based on looking at the distant past, and projects it into possible future scenarios. But if you don't find it interesting, why don't you go to the next article?

As for MMGW...that's the stock ticker for Mass Megwatts Wind Power, Inc., right?

Funny that you're a physicist and didn't know what preisthood he was reffering to, but a member of the unwashed masses like me did.

Hey, I am only a plumber, but I know bull**** when I see it... and other types as well...

Humanity is inherently evil

I don't think that's what he's saying. He's saying humanity is inherently stupid. That it may drown itself in its own excrement.

Carlin's right ... the planet's not in trouble. The question is whether we can respond to threats created by our technology. The response to GW -- tribal chest-thumping and disinformation campaigns -- does not inspire confidence, any more than the willingness to continue with nuclear power without a working long-term storage plan.

... But I thought all mainstream science publications were obviously true because they were "peer reviewed" and clearly cannot exist without widespread support? ...

There are some problems:
1) Not all reviewers are impartial,
2) Not all peer reviewed journals look for impartial reviewers,
3) In some subject areas there are very few experts so the pool of peers to do the review are small,
4) There is the 'me too' effect where everybody is either totally for or against something with no middle ground,
5) Some pretty flaky journals exist that are 'peer reviewed' by their own flaky ilk...

sigh~~~ He who allows wisdom to fool himself is indeed -wise- Yes, yes... Time came and go and We've used so many brains, that of humans and rat alike, We've exhausted, drained, wrenched dry so many peptides, that of humans and not so human alike. We've worship it all... Simply to deny our 'absolute failure' a genuine bargain of the role it's playing within the continuum of 'absolute truth'. So, I don't really know wtf is going to to happen. Who cares really? Do you?

I said it once and I'm saying it again. We're the ancient race who will built those stargates and then mysteriously perish. :p

Almost all of you are guilty of the very thing you accuse MMGW believers of... having an opinion about something you have no idea about.

I don't have an opinion on MMGW. It might be true, it might not. I don't have the information to determine one way or another. And thus people discussing MMGW doesn't bother me in the least.

Most of you have made up your minds that it isn't (or probably isn't) true, and thus you get horribly aggravated when you see someone contradict your decided belief and feel the need to immediately start kicking and screaming. What are you hoping to accomplish by spamming the comments section of this article with comments like "Redirected to Phantasyorg.com".

You think you know everything? So do the Christians and MMGW fanatics. Why don't you fools all go form a great big delusional know-it-alls club and shut up for a while.

Speculation has a place in science. Whether you think mankind is capable of eradicating itself or not, it's not fantasy to say that in 100 million years we will be gone, and our remains will consist of a thin layer of sedimentary rock with fossils of styrofoam cups, condoms, and plastic utensiles.

Often when anthropologist find an unknown object they label it as a 'ritual item.' What would the imaginary future civilization think of our remains?

We often speak of poisoning and destroying our planet but it has happened before. The first plant life 'poisoned' our atmosphere with oxygen, driving anaerobic bacteria into extreme biomes and paving the way for the cambrian explosion.

Seriously.

Okay... raise your hand if you're planning to go extinct. Anybody?

Didn't think so. Cripes... What's 100 million years? Dinosaurs didn't have language, lasers, or liberals, and they lasted almost twice as long!

well, but then you should compare dinossaurs with mammals, or at least with primates. You should compare humans against SPECIFIC dinossaurs species. Most of them were short lived compared with the dinosaurs as a group of species.

Anyway, if geologists consider it will be so hard to detect traces of human intelligence, 100 million years from now... wouldnt it be difficult for US HUMANS to detect traces of animal intelligence on Earth 100 million years ago? Who knows? Maybe some dinossaur species got to an intelligent level, but its just to hard to notice their traces.

well, but then you should compare dinossaurs with mammals, or at least with primates. You should compare humans against SPECIFIC dinossaurs species. Most of them were short lived compared with the dinosaurs as a group of species.

Anyway, if geologists consider it will be so hard to detect traces of human intelligence, 100 million years from now... wouldnt it be difficult for US HUMANS to detect traces of animal intelligence on Earth 100 million years ago? Who knows? Maybe some dinossaur species got to an intelligent level, but its just to hard to notice their traces.

Very valid point. Someone give this man a hand.

well, but then you should compare dinossaurs with mammals, or at least with primates. You should compare humans against SPECIFIC dinossaurs species. Most of them were short lived compared with the dinosaurs as a group of species.

Anyway, if geologists consider it will be so hard to detect traces of human intelligence, 100 million years from now... wouldnt it be difficult for US HUMANS to detect traces of animal intelligence on Earth 100 million years ago? Who knows? Maybe some dinossaur species got to an intelligent level, but its just to hard to notice their traces.

Very valid point. Someone give this man a hand.

One quibble. While there may indeed have been an intelligent dino species their brain size and brain mass to body size ratios of every species we've looked at so far were probably not intelligent at all. The only possible exceptions were the small bodied predators.

Some dinosaurs were supposably intelligent for the period they lived in, but not likely to be comparable with many of todays mammals.

well, but then you should compare dinossaurs with mammals, or at least with primates. You should compare humans against SPECIFIC dinossaurs species. Most of them were short lived compared with the dinosaurs as a group of species.

Anyway, if geologists consider it will be so hard to detect traces of human intelligence, 100 million years from now... wouldnt it be difficult for US HUMANS to detect traces of animal intelligence on Earth 100 million years ago? Who knows? Maybe some dinossaur species got to an intelligent level, but its just to hard to notice their traces.

Very valid point. Someone give this man a hand.

One quibble. While there may indeed have been an intelligent dino species their brain size and brain mass to body size ratios of every species we've looked at so far were probably not intelligent at all. The only possible exceptions were the small bodied predators.

Well there's been a lot of research in the way of size to intellect ratio and seeing if it does infact hold true. A lot of the results of that research are indicating that complexity vs size has more to do with ability and intellect. Problem is I'm pretty sure we'll never see an actual dinosaur brain above and beyond the minor indentations and growth patterns on the inside of their cranial cavity.

What is wrong with *me* is that I call it zealotry and not scientific inquiry when, as in so many similar articles on this site, the author treats mmgw as though it were as inexorable and established as the gravitational constant.

If you think about it, the same is true about most proponents of the theory of Evolution. If you really think about it.

If you think about it, the same is true about most proponents of the theory of the Earth being round. If you really think about it.

The Earth being round is a theory? News to me...

My god, what is wrong with you people? The man does a thought experiment to explore what effect humans are having on the planet, and you all freak out? Anti-Human agenda? Fringe Politics? Honestly, are you people so radicalised in your views that you can't even read an article without exploding into paranoid rants? I don't see any Zealous Global Warming people posting on here, saying the world is going to end tomorrow and that this article is forwarding a Conservative, inaccurate point of view. The issue of Leftism was not included in this article, it was injected. If we're going to not bring politics onto this website, I suggest you people keep your political views to yourselves.

Yah, I walked away for a few days.

Look, the people you're talking about are objecting to a pervasive mode of thought. It reaches into every facet of life--INCLUDING science--and is CLEARLY recognizable by both its underlying premises and its style of argumentation.

This article is a somewhat weak example of the genre, but obviously still strong enough for us to have a little fun with.

Here's an idea: if our ideas really bug you that much, be a good liberal and establish a bunch of fake accounts so you can single-handedly down-mod the entire conversation out of existence. :)

...the same is true about most proponents of the theory of Evolution....

...the same is true about most proponents of the theory of the Earth being round....

Case in point. The point is that a theory, when it becomes popular enough, will become a fact. Man-made Global Warming is already a fact in the minds of many. Philosophies are built on it. Politics are attached to it. Laws are passed for it. Movies are made about it. It becomes immune to question or debate.

This bothers some people, and it should.

Easy, brother... words are fungible, but referents are not.

A theory is not a fact. It is a model that transforms old facts into falsifiable predictions regarding new facts.

Perhaps you meant to suggest that a theory, when its elements achieve some critical degree of penetration into the collective romantic consciousness of the public, acquires a degree of independence such that it becomes entirely decoupled from the original.

At that point, resultant philosophies, policies, and feature films reflect the new meme, not the old theory, and neither Hell nor High Water nor Pure Reason can ever bring the two into useful contact again.

If that's what you meant, then I couldn't agree with you more! :)

pretty obvious that that is what he meant (and said as well, unless you are a quibbler)
(you're not a quibbler are you?)