3 ms·

if a virus would wipe out say 50% or 75% of humanity, it would be terrible for us but wouldn't be that bad for mother nature. It may provide a couple of decades

if a virus would wipe out say 50% or 75% of humanity, it would be terrible for us but wouldn't be that bad for mother nature. It may provide a couple of decades (if not centuries) in which nature is able to recover from us. I think thanks to global warming, there will be many more diseases coming our way. Things that our immune system has never previously had to fight against and for which there is no cure.

jokowueu 7y ago
Might be a alit more if some of our nuclear reactors arnt shut down properly
- PeterisP 7y ago
  From the perspective of mother nature, Chernobyl is just a wildlife preserve already now; if our reactors explode, that would be bad for us but no big deal for ecosystems after some reasonable timeframe e.g. 10000 years - long term for us, but short term for evolution. From the perspective of Earth, a few millenia of active humanity is just a tiny spike that's inducing lots of rapid change, but very short.
  - jokowueu 7y ago
    Chernobyl was controlled if the firefighters didn't sacrarice their lives most of Europe would have been irradiated and that was just caesium . Uranium would have been a nightmare
blackrock 7y ago
That’s a pretty grim outlook there. Humanity will survive this outbreak. China will survive it too. But, you and I, individually, may not. It will depend on how healthy you are, or how strong your immune system is. If you want to identify global warming as the culprit, then one of the biggest polluters are civilian airplanes, and the US Military. There is no technology now, or on the near horizon, that will replace this. And those that fly on civilian planes the most, are those who can afford the tickets, which are normally the First World western countries. Would you like to tell them that they can no longer take their distant tropical vacations anymore? Maybe that’s what we need to do to save humanity?

jokowueu 7y ago

Might be a alit more if some of our nuclear reactors arnt shut down properly

PeterisP 7y ago
From the perspective of mother nature, Chernobyl is just a wildlife preserve already now; if our reactors explode, that would be bad for us but no big deal for ecosystems after some reasonable timeframe e.g. 10000 years - long term for us, but short term for evolution. From the perspective of Earth, a few millenia of active humanity is just a tiny spike that's inducing lots of rapid change, but very short.
- jokowueu 7y ago
  Chernobyl was controlled if the firefighters didn't sacrarice their lives most of Europe would have been irradiated and that was just caesium . Uranium would have been a nightmare

blackrock 7y ago

That’s a pretty grim outlook there. Humanity will survive this outbreak. China will survive it too. But, you and I, individually, may not. It will depend on how healthy you are, or how strong your immune system is. If you want to identify global warming as the culprit, then one of the biggest polluters are civilian airplanes, and the US Military. There is no technology now, or on the near horizon, that will replace this. And those that fly on civilian planes the most, are those who can afford the tickets, which are normally the First World western countries. Would you like to tell them that they can no longer take their distant tropical vacations anymore? Maybe that’s what we need to do to save humanity?