The Unchanging Human: Why humanity will go extinct within the next millennium

This is a serious piece, based on observational sociology and and a reduced study of history from the standpoint of an individual who long ago stopped truly interacting with humanity. Humans are mammals, species homo sapiens. The defining characteristics of homo sapiens are quite simple, we have opposable thumbs and the ability to reason. Obviously, I am being brief with this as there are entire series of books that have been written defining humans versus the other life species residing on this planet.

As the object of this short essay is to show why and how humans will go extinct within the next 1000 years some definitions will be avoided or if necessary the reader will be assumed to understand common definitions. Obviously, an assumption of this magnitude is to assume individual intellect exists for those reading this. I understand that I am overreaching in this regards and this will also play into the reasoning for the time line of humanities extinction.

Simplest is the reason why humans will be extinct. They as a species are incapable of change rapid enough to allow for adjustment to an ever changing natural habitat. Rather we have relied on our ability to combine the opposable thumb with our reasoning to formulate ever more substantially delicate and intricate means of subjugating our surroundings. As a result of doing this, however, homo sapians or modern humans have in fact signed their own death warrants. This planet is as much a living entity as is any other energy based life form. As all matter in our universe is based on a simple principle of energy and the inability to either destroy or create this we are as a species by not allowing ourselves to adapt to what surrounds us effectively ensuring our demise. Energy that remains static will eventually be redistributed as a result of separation of that same energy or it will simply disassociate and reassemble in another form.

Humans by remaining virtually static in our evolutionary patterns thanks to our ever increasing reliance on gadgets versus incorporation of these gadgets into our evolution are ensuring our demise as a species. To continue on as a species we would need to ensure that at least 1% of the viable population of the human race is capable of rapid transitions with regards to their environments and or technological advancements. To do this we need less than .015% of the population of the world today to pass on this knowledge and desire to do so beginning now. Once the currently placed power structures begin to dissolve it will be up too that percentage to utilize their changing abilities and advanced reasoning to ensure they remain extinct and that we begin with a new approach to life. A life with purpose.

Regardless ones belief in the myth based deity of their choice there will always remain a segment of humanity that will by default be incapable of adjustment to environmental, ecological etc., these humans must be allowed to expire naturally. It is not humane to retain life that drags all life down, this does not by default mean that physical disabilities, mental disabilities and or emotional disabilities as commonly defined are bad. Rather that those who cannot adjust to changing conditions on their own should not be helped. There is a pure cold logical base to this approach, obviously, it is not something most humans will accept or promote. Which is why this article is only for the very small percentage that both understands and embraces the approach.

Unless this is done the simple natural ecological shifts that will and always have occurred on this planet will result in billions dead, add to that the odd viral or bacteriological issue with the regular natural disasters that occur and humanity will have effectively decimated itself in under 1000 years. Over the next 50 years the American Southwest will experience major drought and loss of easily obtained supplies of water, this alone will cause massive rioting and deaths. Added to this is the current reliance on a extremely slowly renewable resource versus advancements of use of basically unlimited energy sources will add to the additional slaughter due to military campaigns. Shifting myth based religions strengths will also result in additional loss of life. However, the greatest threat to the human species itself is its complete and utter inability to adjust rapidly with changes occurring.

Questions?

Thoughts?

Sometimes making a statement and asking for feedback is better than simply reciting 1000 various researched subjects. All I ask before you respond is that you do so by first thinking about what it is and why it is that you are planning on responding with.

Free the mind and the body will follow.

wpid-wp-1440276736750.jpeg

Advertisements

About Jesse Mathewson

Jesse Mathewson is the author of the popular blog, jessetalksback.com and provides commentary to many varied places based on a background that includes education in criminal justice, history, religion and even insurgency tactics and tactical training. His current role in his community is as an organizer of sorts and a preacher of community solidarity and agorism. He also runs Liberty Practical Training, a self defense school specializing in the practical applications of defensive approaches versus the theoretical. As an agorist, voluntaryist and atheist his life is seen as crazy and wild by many, though once they get to know him most realize he is a bluntly honest individual who will give you the shirt off his back if he believes it is necessary to help you. Very simple, "That which is voluntary between all individuals involved is always right, if it is not voluntary, it is always wrong."
This entry was posted in Authored by Jesse Mathewson, Voluntaryism and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to The Unchanging Human: Why humanity will go extinct within the next millennium

  1. wunhunglo2 says:

    While a thousand years just a heartbeat in geologic time it is a very long time by human standards. Humans have survived numerous wars, plagues, famines and natural disasters. The only way humans will chance extinction as a species is if we remain tied to this single rock. The solar system has all the necessary elements for a technological species to survive. Plenty of room to grow, plenty of free energy, and plenty of resources to exploit. One large metallic asteroid has more metal than has been mined in all the mines in history. Despite what the AGW crazies say, we are in pretty good shape. Could an all out nuclear exchange between the nuke armed countries kill us off? Yes, possibly. Could an epic monetary collapse and various other SHTF scenarios bring a new dark ages? Yes, but we have been through that before, and it was followed by a Renaissance. Over the next 50 years do things look bleak? Maybe, but that is just a drop in the bucket when talking about a millennium. We are harder to kill than cockroaches, and breed like them too. Oh, yes and there is that opposable thumb…

    Like

  2. Good point made, the problem is that the further along this timeline we get, the more entrenched humans become. Like I said it wouldnt really take a large amount to effect change in a beneficial way, it is however, a waiting game.

    Liked by 1 person

    • jeffreycanthony says:

      The danger is in looking at humans as static, just as humans are failing by looking at too many things as static.

      I myself wonder how much of humanity does this simply because thanks to the force structures, there are no other ways, no other options. The danger of monopolies.

      We believe people do not change, thus we treat them in ways that they never will.

      A very strange story I share carefully, stop me if you’ve heard it.

      My uncle was the poster person for the scoutmaster abuse media scandal almost 4 years ago. The event broke him. Literally. He found out about it a few weeks before it was released, and his brain popped. A stroke he died from within a couple months.

      Back when he had gotten out of college, he had a degree in some social science and wanted to help the world. He was a scout leader, and much like happened to him when he was a late teen, he allegedly abused scouts. It was an epidemic in the culture of the organization of the day. I won’t make excuses for him, I simply state what I have heard, have learned, and have observed.

      He realized he was very wrong just like someone had done to him in the past. And unlike what everyone says about people who have done what he did, he chose to change. He might have been forced into leaving or walking away from the scouts, but then I call that the natural cause and effect of things. Someone does something bad, then it’s not unnatural that they are driven away for the safety of others.

      So he left. And decided to learn more. decided to grow more. decided to do all the things he could think of to give back to the world for the damage he’d done. And he never actually accounted for his repentance from what i saw. He simply drove himself forward, knowing he could never take it back. Or maybe he was always running from his past. We’ll never really know.

      I feel he was misguided in that he moved within political circles after a while, but for him, unlike many of us, did not see that there were options outside of politics.

      But I think he did see some things that resonate with the right ideals. He studied the social causes of many things to include the spread of HIV. How education affects the spread of HIV, and many other things… and I really wonder, if society was not so against people living their preferred sexual preference… that the repression of that part of our society left people without education, and opened up the potentials for abuse. I don’t blame “gays” as those that are pedophiles, but that the culture of forcing others pushed many gays to not even understand their own urges, to demonize them.

      He pushed a lot of the acceptance of gays in the modern day, coming out on public television as a reasonably high level public official in our state, and drove awareness.

      He also avoided contact with kids from his scout days and on, although I will say I spent a week or so at his place about yearly for most of my childhood… and either i wasn’t his type, or he really had changed. Or perhaps he simply chose to not act on his impulses, something that also points at learning, growth, and changing.

      I share this in a strange context. We live in a society where the pedophile is the person who people use as their example as the #1 person that can not change, that will always be a danger in their minds.

      And he changed. He helped found many non profit organizations that built things and helped people, that collected funds to ease the suffering of the dying. He was once assistant to the secretary of health and welfare of our state… and learned later the realities of marijuana used positively by AIDS patients, aiding in their appetite and easing their suffering. He gave money to others, he built, he worked.

      If he changed, i’m sure we’d find many others when given situations where things no longer work, will step up, will change, will grow, and will adapt.

      Sadly people have missed that when we remove the connection of humanity and the importance of meeting our needs instead of having our needs met for us, we take away a lot of what is important for humanity. Many feel this present modern world will progress into a post scarcity society where automation will meet all of our needs, and they feel that this will solve all of our problems. Me, I think that no matter what we do to meet our needs, we have to remind ourselves of what really is important, what needs we have beyond just the physical.

      Just remember, humans wont adapt if they don’t have to. But i’ve met many people who might surprise us all.

      Like

  3. jeffreycanthony says:

    I find it interesting the human reaction to every natural disaster in my lifetime.

    Our socio-economic and governance structures leave cities in places where people are hugely vulnerable to disasters. They spend how much in stolen money to push rebuilding cities in harms ways as opposed to simply moving them or being smarter about the advantages… I understand the value of seaports and transportation, but we can also build inland seaports… stuck in emotional nostalgia perhaps? People afraid of the shift of economy in areas because they’ve manipulated things to take advantage of things that they couldn’t otherwise? Fear of loss, clutching to wealth… mismatched values.

    I don’t think we’ll be extinct, but I feel there will be future shifts in lifestyle, population, values, and needs. Those that cling to ineffective ways will find little success, is the nature of things.

    I also feel we’ve lost teamwork in overreliance on everything.

    I love my toys and gadgets, but they have a place.

    My take on what makes the difference?

    The mentality. The key is how many people actually create and how many simply consume.

    Like

Comments are closed.