2 ms·

Is it really true that we're more at risk now than our ancestors were? They had smaller numbers, less access to life saving technology, worse conditions to grow

• ethanbond 4y ago
  Fair question. The way I see it there was never a moment before the Cold War that a single person’s decision could even have a chance at destroying human civilization (if not the species itself). Since the Cold War, that has been true every single moment of every day, and there are probably hundreds or thousands of individuals who are capable of making a decision that will trigger nuclear annihilation (check out Daniel Ellsberg’s Doomsday Machine for an alarming inquiry into this topic). Now we have the additional risk of man made biological risk amplified by cheaper and cheaper genetic engineering as well as natural biological risk amplified by a nonstop global travel network. Neither of these risk vectors existed til recently either. IMO the only analogous risks pre-cold war were what, asteroid strike or volcanic event? Those are rare and, more importantly, not modulated upwards by any human action or human system. Nuclear and bio risk probably only climb with more people and more technological advancement.