Surviving for next 1000 centuries has nothing to do with global warming or controlling human population.
An important aspect is how humans govern themselves.
The American "great experiment" has provided some answers in this regard.
The Soviet experiment has provided some answers in what doesn't work- though it should have been obvious enough so that we shouldn't have required such an experiment.
One question is can humans today build a govt that works without tradition as a crutch, and without first requiring a mature governing class.
Take the failed state of Afghanistan- how could it become a functioning healthy state?
With Afghanistan one might say it will take decades for this to "develop"- but the question is why can't it be accomplished as soon as within 1 year?
The only reason it can't be done within a short period of time is because we lack the knowledge of how to do this.
But we don't need to focus just on Afghanistan- there are no shortage of other obviously failed states one could pick from. Or there isn't a lack of states which are regarded doing fairly well which could be improved.
Can we do the simple task of merely identifying a state which is doing well.
What yardsticks could be use to measure it? What are the important yardsticks that will actually predict when a state is doing better or worse?
Space/Science » in reply to Surviving 1,000 centuries, can we do it ?
re: Surviving 1,000 centuries, can we do it ?
The whole thread (37 posts)
- Surviving 1,000 centuries, can we do it ?
- I think so, or at least whatever we evolove into. (n/t)
- If idiots remain in charge as they are today, I doubt Humanity will survive for ONE more century. (n/t)
- Maybe it's best humanity not survive.
- re: Surviving 1,000 centuries, can we do it ?
- A relevant article in the latest New Scientist
- Re: Section 4.3. We're gonna need to monitor volcanos. (n/t)
- Psychologically probably not.
- This is like neaderthal predicting 21st century and that is less than 100K years
- SPACESHIP EARTH