Will Science kill all life on planet earth?

[Lost_Found]

modern science and technology are bringing life on earth to an end
nuclear disasters, oil spills, abortion and much more
scientists tell us life on earth has lasted billions of years
but with modern science, common life on earth may last only another hundred years
is there anyone who honestly makes a case that science will not end human life within a hundred years
is science a scourge

 

[ChadS]

Is there a source for somebody saying all human life will be extinct on this planet in a hundred years?

I think it’s extremely unlikely, barring an extinction level event like a super volcano erupting or getting hit with a huge asteroid, that mankind will have disappeared within a hundred years. I think the planet will continue to warm and man will have to adapt to a new and changing environment. I don’t think we’ll reach a point where overcrowding on the planet as a whole is a problem but certain areas will continue to be overcrowded and experience food shortages and shortages of other natural resources. However, this is common and has always been an issue in world history.

ChadS

 

[rossum]

modern science and technology are bringing life on earth to an end
nuclear disasters, oil spills, abortion and much more
scientists tell us life on earth has lasted billions of years
but with modern science, common life on earth may last only another hundred years
is there anyone who honestly makes a case that science will not end human life within a hundred years
is science a scourge

Do you have a non-scientific cure for malaria?
Do you have a non-scientific cure for cholera?
Do you have a non-scientific way to generate electricity?
Do you have a non-scientific cure for typhus?
Do you have a non-scientific way to feed six billion people?

Science is a tool. Are you going to ban axes because an axe-murder uses one to kill someone.

rossum

 

[centurionguard]

Is there a source for somebody saying all human life will be extinct on this planet in a hundred years?

I think it’s extremely unlikely, barring an extinction level event like a super volcano erupting or getting hit with a huge asteroid, that mankind will have disappeared within a hundred years. I think the planet will continue to warm and man will have to adapt to a new and changing environment. I don’t think we’ll reach a point where overcrowding on the planet as a whole is a problem but certain areas will continue to be overcrowded and experience food shortages and shortages of other natural resources. However, this is common and has always been an issue in world history.

ChadS

I don’t think we’ll reach a point where overcrowding on the planet as a whole is a problem but certain areas will continue to be overcrowded and experience food shortages and shortages of other natural resources.

I think human science already has a solution to overcrowding.

Abortion and Euthanasia!

Food Shortages…exist because mankind in his (“greed”) has failed (“globally”) to share it with the poor and destitute who have none.

 

[Catholic90]

Science in and of itself is not good or evil. It is how science is used.

Science helped save the life of me and my second child before he was even born.

Science helped treat the chronic ear issues of my first child.

Science is giving my sons straight teeth.

Science is allowing me to connect to the world while I sit in my PJs at home.

Science allowed the notification that a tsunami was traveling across the ocean, allowing those in Hawaii and on the west coast to move to higher ground.

What is YOUR alternative? Primitive ways of living and lack of knowledge?

 

[Lost_Found]

Are you going to ban axes because an axe-murder uses one to kill someone.

rossum

an axe does not cause mass destruction to most forms of life on planet earth
science does

Do you have a non-scientific cure for cholera?
Do you have a non-scientific cure for typhus?
rossum

no except for not consuming contaminated water and food

Do you have a non-scientific cure for malaria?

no except to avoid exposure. plus, unlike science’s poison concoctions, it does not kill all other manner of life on planet earth

Do you have a non-scientific way to generate electricity?
rossum

no, but electricity generation is part of what’s destroying a good deal of life on earth
currently listen to the news out of Japan

Do you have a non-scientific way to feed six billion people?
rossum

no, but we have six billion people in the first place because of science

I have answered all of these questions which do not pertain to the OP question
could you address whether science is killing unspeakable life on planet earth

 

[Lost_Found]

Is there a source for somebody saying all human life will be extinct on this planet in a hundred years?

I think it’s extremely unlikely, barring an extinction level event like a super volcano erupting or getting hit with a huge asteroid, that mankind will have disappeared within a hundred years. I think the planet will continue to warm and man will have to adapt to a new and changing environment. I don’t think we’ll reach a point where overcrowding on the planet as a whole is a problem but certain areas will continue to be overcrowded and experience food shortages and shortages of other natural resources. However, this is common and has always been an issue in world history.

ChadS

a super volcano is unlikely to erupt and destroy the earth in the next hundred years
a huge asteroid is unlikely to destroy the earth in the next hundred years
i agree that overcrowding will not be an issue, particularly if all forms of life on earth are being destroyed by modern science
the current trajectory indicates destruction of all life on earth
i present no scientific evidence since modern science does not study its own being

 

[Lost_Found]

Science in and of itself is not good or evil. It is how science is used.

Science helped save the life of me and my second child before he was even born.

Science helped treat the chronic ear issues of my first child.

Science is giving my sons straight teeth.

Science is allowing me to connect to the world while I sit in my PJs at home.

you first say that science is just a tool
but then all your statements say “Science” did this and that
if it can do this and that, can it not also destroy all manner of life on planet earth?

i am also glad science has granted us these short-term personal benefits
straight teeth are fantastic
all of this at the expense of destroying all manner of life on planet earth

What is YOUR alternative? Primitive ways of living and lack of knowledge?

it depends on your definition of “primitive” and your definition of “knowledge”

if knowledge means information that results in the destruction of all manner of life on planet earth for my personal short-term comfort, then yes this is an alternative

my alternative is well documented. it has resulted in thousands of years of living without destruction of all manner of life on planet earth.

should we further explore the concept of “knowledge” and “primitive”?

 

[Lost_Found]

my method of communication does not change whether or not modern science is destroying all manner of life on planet earth
you cannot defend your position with distraction
also you mispelled the word “off” further proof that modern science fails us

 

[centurionguard]

a super volcano is unlikely to erupt and destroy the earth in the next hundred years
a huge asteroid is unlikely to destroy the earth in the next hundred years
i agree that overcrowding will not be an issue, particularly if all forms of life on earth are being destroyed by modern science
the current trajectory indicates destruction of all life on earth
i present no scientific evidence since modern science does not study its own being

a super volcano is unlikely to erupt and destroy the earth in the next hundred years.
a huge asteroid is unlikely to destroy the earth in the next hundred years

…

Please explain how you arrived at these presumptuous conclusions?

No science on this entire planet could make a bold claim as to whether such could or could not happen.

Who is it that obscures the plans of God (“Mother Nature”)

Who on earth could have predicted the devastating earthquake in Japan last Friday or the earthquake in Haiti last year?

 

[Lost_Found]

specifically - catholicism has had a great role to play in the pursuit of truth
if by science you mean “knowledge of truths” then i agree catholicism has a role
if you mean the science of primary causes then i agree
this is a far cry from the modern, lower scientific knowledge which is destroying all manner of life on planet earth
i don’t have time to discuss the societies “in tune with mother earth” i believe St Francis who says earth is our sister not our mother

 

[Lost_Found]

haha you have good jokes i like reading your posts
you also mispelled the word “then” in your signature

 

[Lost_Found]

just look at the previous nineteen hundred or so years
compare that to the past hundred years
that is my documentation

 

[Lost_Found]

…

Please explain how you arrived at these presumptuous conclusions?

No science on this entire planet could make a bold claim as to whether such could or could not happen.

Who is it that obscures the plans of God (“Mother Nature”)

Who on earth could have predicted the devastating earthquake in Japan last Friday or the earthquake in Haiti last year?

you guys are swarming me like bees, I’m going for dinner
we’ll continue another day it’s been a slice

 

[Rolltide]

Knowledge is simply a fact. It is morally neutral. Science is simply the discovery of knowledge.

Wisdom is learning to use that knowledge for the greater good. For example, dynamite was one of the most powerful inventions of the last half of the nineteenth century. However, that invention was simply the product of knowledge. With wisdom, I can use it to save the lives of many miners by using it to blast rock, rather than send dozens of men underground to use hand picks. It can be used to excavate gravel for use in cement or in roads. It can even be used to save time and money in demolition. However, used unwisely, it can be used in warfare or in terrorist acts.

The scientific knowledge is NOT the problem. The problem is our flawed human nature, which can CHOOSE to do unwise or evil things because of our free will. Science simply reveals the how in God’s plan.

Remember, science also taught us how to massively increase crop yields, to build cathedrals, to have modern communication, to paint the Sistine Chapel, and many other things that have enriched the human race greatly.

 

[ChadS]

a super volcano is unlikely to erupt and destroy the earth in the next hundred years
a huge asteroid is unlikely to destroy the earth in the next hundred years
i agree that overcrowding will not be an issue, particularly if all forms of life on earth are being destroyed by modern science
the current trajectory indicates destruction of all life on earth
i present no scientific evidence since modern science does not study its own being

What a convenient dismissal. As far as I can tell it adds nothing to the conversation.

ChadS

 

[JaredM]

No I think quite the opposite. I think only though science can we save Earth.

 

[rossum]

No I think quite the opposite. I think only though science can we save Earth.

Earth will survive. It is a matter of how much, if any, life survives on Earth.

Science is a tool. Some of what it does is helpful, some of what it does is not.

rossum

 

[Lost_Found]

…

Who on earth could have predicted the devastating earthquake in Japan last Friday or the earthquake in Haiti last year?

not science obviously

…

Please explain how you arrived at these presumptuous conclusions?

i arrived at these conclusions through observation. the process includes thinking for oneself, something we all did before modern science started thinking for us

…

Who is it that obscures the plans of God (“Mother Nature”)

modern science. it is on course to destroy much of life on planet earth

You people are doing nothing to convice me that modern science is not destroying the better part of life on earth

 

[Lost_Found]

we survived up until recently without modern science
there have been many contented people prior to modern science
arguably much more in tune with what it means to be human, than our modern society

you people are making me feel like the old man in the movie “logan’s run”
live can survive outside the scientific/technologically controlled bubble

anyhow things would be still be acceptable with modern science, if it were not destroying all manner of life on planet earth