Extinction Level Events

Zardnaar

Legend
Some of the other threads (generation ships etc) have made me start this thread. Extinction level events have been a part of mainstream pop culture since at least the 80's and have been a sci fi trope before that. For some of them there has been a fair amount of panic (nuclear war, climate change) but for the most part I do not count them as ELE. This is because unlike most animals humans can adapt and I think it would be fairly hard to wipe humans out at least to extinction levels. Not claiming a few things would not really suck and kill billions but there would be survivors.

Nuclear War

Post apocalyptic nuclear war stories are a dime a dozen and were fairly common during the cold war. Nevertheless I have severe doubts as to such a war actually wiping us out as a species. Being near a blast would really suck but since 1945 there have been around 2000 nuclear detonations. However a nuclear war miht have that many warheads or more going off all in a short time frame. A limited nuclear war would not wipe us out although the dust etc thrown up into the atmosphere might cool the planet temporarily similar to a large volcano going off. The worlds nuclear arsenal is apparently a bit less than 10 000 and in a full scale nuclear war I have doubts as to how many would actually be launched due to a break down in communications and military high commands getting vaporised.

The real threat is a hypothetical nuclear winter where the amount of dust thrown up into the atmosphere. Even then some humans would likely survive either somewhere in the world or the dust might clear quicker than previously thought possible. How many nukes it would take to cause this and how long lasting the effects would be is unknown although even a short term disruption to world wide crops would kill billions. But there would be survivors. A nuclear winter lasting more than a few months or a year or two would likely be an extinction level event but you do have survivalists and under ground bunkers in places like North Korea so it would depend on things like food stockpiles and how long it would take for the dust to settle to let in enough light to grow crops. Left over radiation while bad would mostly be localised and we are not talking about Fallout 4 type levels in 200 years. Certain nations (eg various Pacific Islands). would probably be unlikely to be even hit so the only real threat to them would be global effects.

Extinction level event: Plausible but unlikely IMHO.

Climate Change

The world is getting warmer and where I live you can see it with your own eyes (glaciers are melting). While this is catastrophic for our current levels of consumption/economy and for certain parts of the world (desert nations, islands, coastal areas etc) its not an extinction level event. Humans will survive along with the right crops and animals. Humans survive in the tropics and deserts and the world has been hotter in the past and life survived. Its very bad news for certain species though.

Extinction Level Event (for us). No.

Asteroid Strike

A genre of bad 90's movies current thinking is a large asteroid wiped out the dinosaurs and it could wipe out us. Apparently however that asteroid hit the exact right spot and had it landed somewhere else the dinosaurs would have survived. The effects were likely similar to a nuclear winter but on a global scale and it caused one of the 5 mass extinction events. A similar sized asteroid would have to hit the right spot, cause a nuclear winter type effect that would last long enough for our food stocks and supplies to run out. Even then something would survive (birds, sharks, crocs and cockroaches survived the Dinosaurs). Then again Earth might get hit by a bigger asteroid. To wipe us out you would need to duplicate the asteroid strike and assume that our technology could not divert it (a few degrees would cause a miss if caught early enough) or that out technology would not let humans survive for long enough for the atmosphere to clear which may have taken less than a year. The further away from the strike the better the chances of survival would be as presumably there were pockets last time around as some things survived.

ELE: Probably not.

Super Volcano.

A super volcano is basically a very large volcano blowing up and causing climate change due to dust in the atmosphere. Humans have survived super volcanoes so in theory it would have to be a very large one. A popular candidate is Yellowstone National Park. Once again this feeds back into the nuclear winter thing with dust in the atmosphere blocking sunlight. Much like my previous entries this depends on how long the dust would last for and how bad the dust actually is. Volcanic activity can definitely render a planet uninhabitable but the scale required is massive, probably more than a single super volcano. Google Deccan traps or Siberian Traps to get an idea of the level of volcanic activity required. Life survived the Siberian ones although its possible it caused one of the previous mass extinction cycles. A single super volcanoes going up I don't see it wiping us out although it might cool the planet for a year or two causing crop failure etc.

Extinction Level Event. No.

Super Disease

Another popular one for a dooms day scenario. I don't really see any disease no matter how bad having a 100% kill rate along with a 100% infection rate which would be what is required to wipe out a species (or at least humans). I can't really see us engineering a bio weapon either that is that effective. Humans have survived smallpox, the black death, and various other plagues throughout history so yeah.

ELE. No.


These are the most common scenarios you read about or movies are made about. All of the above scenarios are catastrophically bad but probably won't wipe us out as a species. Unlike animals we can bunker down in the short term or have stockpiled food stocks to survive- at least in the short term. I'm not talking about most of the population surviving, most households would be in trouble in a week or two but some people have bunkers, bolt holes, stockpiles etc so in theory someone would survive at least short term. So what would kill us off.

1. Poisoning/Removing The Atmosphere.
Global warming won't kill us but this will and some doomsday scenarios with climate change think that we might cause a run away greenhouse gas effect and turn the planet into Venus. Terra is far enough away from the sun I don't think that would happen. The world has been warmer before and all the C02 used to be in the atmosphere once upon a time so I don't really see that happening. I don't know how we could poison the atmosphere but if we do yeah we're in a lot of trouble. Otherwise some sort of natural (or unnatural) catastrophe that destroys the atmosphere would do us in. The Earths magnetosphere keeps us safe from that, but if that goes (it will happen at some point) we're gone.

2. Poisoning the Oceans.
Most of the previous mass extinctions seem to have hit the oceans very hard and the oceans seem to be the lifeblood of the planet. If we collapse the food chain in the oceans it will effect the land which could have flow on effects such as environmental impact that will last longer than a few months or a year or two.

3. Snowball Earth
One theory has it that the Earth froze over millions of years ago. Global warming would not do us in this might. Life did survive the last time round and there may have been a narrow band around the equator where life did survive. The last time this happened (650 mya maybe) the earths atmosphere probably was not breathable by humans anyway.

4. Future tech.
This is a cover all for anything we invent in the future that we don't know how it works. This includes things like self aware AI (that wipes us out), fusion bombs (miniature super novas), anti matter bombs (blow the planet/continent up), nanites that consume the planets, or a death star super laser. Beats me its future tech, 200 years ago people probably didn't imagine nuclear weapons.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Shasarak

Banned
Banned
You should check out The End of the World by Josh Clark, a 10 part podcast series.

He goes over a lot of what you started with here in episode 4: Natural Risks but also included gama ray bursts and super novas. There is one episode on the dangers of AI, one on Biotech (a lot more dangerous then you rate it), one on Physics Experiments (we want to smash what together?) and the weakest one in my opinion the Simulation (where some kid turns off his game of Civ and we are all deleted).

One especially hilarious way that the world could have ended was by a specially designed bacteria that would have turned every plant on Earth into alcohol. Yeah, I'll bet you did not see that one coming.
 

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
One especially hilarious way that the world could have ended was by a specially designed bacteria that would have turned every plant on Earth into alcohol. Yeah, I'll bet you did not see that one coming.
Tangent:
The book Cold War Hot has several short stories, each exploring a different point in history when the USA and USSR could have started shooting at each other. The last story was intended to 'lighten the mood' a bit. A 1980s Soviet invasion of West Germany is defeated by parachuting thousands of quarts of vodka in the path of their infantry.
 

Zardnaar

Legend
Tangent:
The book Cold War Hot has several short stories, each exploring a different point in history when the USA and USSR could have started shooting at each other. The last story was intended to 'lighten the mood' a bit. A 1980s Soviet invasion of West Germany is defeated by parachuting thousands of quarts of vodka in the path of their infantry.

Germans left behind poisoned alcohol in the closing stages of the war. Not sure how many Soviet troops it killed.
 

Aeson

I learned nerd for this.
There was a documentary on National Geographic Channel about the zombie apocalypse. The conclusion is basically, it's a non starter. The same reason was given for disease pandemic. Those infected would be contained too quickly for it to spread. Also the body tends to rot. After a time there be no body left to spread the infection. Yet it doesn't seem to slow the number of people that think it will happen. Just like any capitalist system, there are those that encourage the fear in order to make a profit.
 

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
Those infected would be contained too quickly for it to spread.
IF the outbreak happens in a society where civil order is normal. The latest Ebola outbreak (in eastern Congo-formerly-Zaire) is near a city and within range of some armed militia - who raided the hospital, chased all the patients outside, and stole a bunch of the medical supplies. The more mobile patients headed towards the city, seeking protection and help.

There is a disaster movie waiting to be written, based on follies like that.
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
While a disease pandemic ELE isn’t the most likely, its actual probability is extremely dependent on a host of factors, like virulence, methods of contagion, incubation period, environmental durability, ease of diagnosis & detection, what treatment exists, etc.

And of course with the mobility of modern society, any disease that has high virulence (especially airborne or via aerosolized fluids), slow to moderate incubation, etc.- say, a nasty strain of flu- has this wonderful new vector known as air travel.

In a gaming context, I used targeted asteroid bombardment by time traveling Illithids as the crucial ELE in a post-apocalyptic D&D campaign setting.
 
Last edited:

The revealing question to ask might be: If we had time to prepare, which would be harder: Building a colony on another world (Mars probably), or creating habitats to survive in on Earth? What if we had to prepare for all of these possible catastrophes at once?
(Without preparation, one could claim the Mars colony is better - except building that colony itself requires preperation - and time we could spend on building a safe habitat on Earth.)
Interestingly, the "Gamma Ray Burst" is a scenario where we wouldn't be safe on Mars or probably any planet we can reach in the forseeable future. But AFAIK, there are no known stars near enough that seem capable of creating such a burst and be a danger to us. (How boring...)


Another thing is: Make no mistake, any of these events would be brutal to humans. Climate Change for example we can probably survive, but how many people would die due to crop failures, and how many more would die because of the resulting wars over resources?
None of this is nice, it would still be better to avoid any we can avoid.
 

Janx

Hero
The revealing question to ask might be: If we had time to prepare, which would be harder: Building a colony on another world (Mars probably), or creating habitats to survive in on Earth? What if we had to prepare for all of these possible catastrophes at once?
(Without preparation, one could claim the Mars colony is better - except building that colony itself requires preparation - and time we could spend on building a safe habitat on Earth.)
..snip..

And that's why I posted those article links on the other thread.

It is easier to build a "colony" inside a huge cave on earth than it is to build a rocket or ten and send what is needed to Mars.
It is easier to keep those people alive in that cave on earth than it is to maintain shelter, air, heat, radiation shielding, etc on Mars.
It is easier to return to the surface than it is to leave Mars to come back and reclaim Earth

The big difference in an ELE between us and the dinosaurs is that we make stuff and are allegedly smarter. We can relocate, build better shelter (where did T-Rexes sleep? hammocks slung between two brontos' necks?). Granted, plenty of humans did stupid stuff during the last few plagues to suggest we can count on our own stupidity to help kill us during an ELE. But it's possible we could fare better if the dumb people die.
 


Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top