Disagree--a disaster doesn't need to kill all humans in order to take us out. All it needs to do is kill enough of the population that what's left can't surviv

Disagree--a disaster doesn't need to kill all humans in order to take us out. All it needs to do is kill enough of the population that what's left can't survive. We've already seen localized extirpation of humanity this way--many areas of the New World were depopulated by disease. It was probably not a 100% kill but if the survivors don't have the right skills (and note that most people do not have the right skills to survive in a collapse scenario) they'll die anyway. Survivalists always are about maintaining existence at a lower tech level--but that's relying on things they can't replace. That's not going to be viable in the long term. Not to mention the problem that sufficiently hungry people will go after any stores of food they're aware of.