1000 yrs from now

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

1000 yrs from now

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> 1000 yrs from now

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

1000 yrs from now - 8/26/2005 6:26:32 AM

FangsNfeet

Posts: 3758
Joined: 12/3/2004
Status: offline

In a thousand years from now I wonder how much of collarme will be read and or saved for documentation of how we lived the life style of the 21st century. How different will BDSM be then in the future? After all, even if CM isn't read by our future seed, we still cause a domino effect for future generations.

then again, it's not impossible that CM will still be up with a past generation of mods.

_____________________________

I'm Godzilla and you're Japan

Post #: 1

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/26/2005 6:30:48 AM

EmeraldSlave2

Posts: 3645
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

I think at best collarme will be a blip in the history books. But it's a cog in a million that keeps the machine moving towards the future. That far into the future I'm sure there will be an entirely new sub culture whispering around the fringes. One can be optimistic and think that more personal freedoms will have been allowed and sexuality will be a celebrated thing, with the diseases gone and pregnancy only ever done by purposeful choice. That far ahead? I honestly don't know.

(in reply to FangsNfeet)

Post #: 2

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/26/2005 2:17:38 PM

sub4hire

Posts: 6775
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

What makes you think the planet will survive 1000 years from now? I think it will be long gone by then.
Look at the damage we've done in a mere 100 year's let alone a thousand.

(in reply to FangsNfeet)

Post #: 3

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/26/2005 3:10:09 PM

anthrosub

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/2/2004
Status: offline

I had a similar thought when I first read the OP. I know from the research that's been done that oil, natural gas, and coal will be all but depleted (oil and gas will only last another 300 years or so). But I don't think we will be gone or the earth destroyed. The earth can take care of itself and will come back, albeit changed, but come back it will.

I think humanity will be taking a few steps backwards from a technology and cultural perspective. Crossing oceans will be by sail, aircraft will most likely be high efficient gliders launched from large towing cables attached to large spring-loaded spools or something like that. Horse drawn carriages will be making a big comeback as cars will likely be expensive electric powered devices that most people won't be able to afford.

The population will certainly be much smaller as we will no longer be able to produce food in the quantities that fossil fuel driven machines have made possible (plus all the natural fertilizer will be depleted anyway). Irrigation will be greatly reduced. We are already exhausting the natural groundwater levels in the United States. For example, the Oglala acquifer in the central U.S., which underlies 5 states is responsible for 20% of our beef production by providing irrigation for livestock feed, has been reduced by 50% in the last 75 years. At current levels, it will take 5000 years for it to recharge to full capacity from snow-melt off the Rocky mountains.

Our culture and that of the rest of the world will be greatly affected by these forces whether we want to accept it or not. I seriously doubt space travel is going to arrive in time to provide us with another place to exploit. I bet the United States and Canada end up dividing into smaller countries and will resemble Europe in many ways. When you think about it, European civilization has been around for about 1500 years in various forms. One thousand years from now, this area will probably experience similar changes.

The next major conflict we will experience after things settle down in the Middle East (if that will ever happen) will likely be with China. China has been patiently doing its own thing while the rest of the world has been squabbling over land and resources. China will eventually make its move when the time is right and the rest of the world will resist. But China will have its day and then decay just like all the others. Nothing is permanent.

These are some of my thoughts.

anthrosub

_____________________________

"It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled." - Mark Twain

"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde

(in reply to sub4hire)

Post #: 4

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/26/2005 4:38:09 PM

sub4hire

Posts: 6775
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

quote:

Our culture and that of the rest of the world will be greatly affected by these forces whether we want to accept it or not. I seriously doubt space travel is going to arrive in time to provide us with another place to exploit. I bet the United States and Canada end up dividing into smaller countries and will resemble Europe in many ways. When you think about it, European civilization has been around for about 1500 years in various forms. One thousand years from now, this area will probably experience similar changes.

True, however 1500 year's ago the most resources they were using up was wood. They really were'nt doing any major damage to the planet like we are today.

I don't think people will be here in 1000 year's. Something will because the Earth will have already started to regenerate itself. Not us though. We are rapidly using up our resources now our ancestors barely touched the planet before us.

(in reply to anthrosub)

Post #: 5

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/26/2005 5:35:48 PM

happypervert

Posts: 2203
Joined: 5/11/2004
From: Scranton, PA
Status: offline

quote:

The population will certainly be much smaller as we will no longer be able to produce food in the quantities that fossil fuel driven machines have made possible

I've got a far more optimistic vision of the future. Anthrosub's predictions of scarcity remind me a lot of those of Paul Ehrlich in the '70s. However, economist Julian Simon offered a different explanation as described in this link. This about sums up the debate:

quote:

Ehrlich and others believed the Earth's resources were becoming scarcer due to an expanding population using them at an increased rate. Therefore he predicted that the prices of these resources should increase. Simon countered Ehrlich's argument by saying that an increasing population was a sign of economic vigor, which drove technological advances such that costs of production and other factors would decrease the price of these resources."

So they made a bet based on the prices of metals 10 years in the future, with Ehrilich expecting higher prices. He lost.

So I see it as a simple matter of economics. There is plenty of energy available from solar, tides, winds, lightening, etc. It just isn't cost effective yet to pursue. But folks will adapt, and we're also getting smarter about managing the environment. Take, for example, this article about environmental economics showing how hard dollar values can now be put on the benefits swamps provide; even third world governments can appreciate that. Also, if the population is lower a thousand years from now, it will because prosperity brings decreases in reproduction like we already see in Japan, not because it is forced on humanity by scarcity of resources.

However that relatively rosy outlook assumes political stability and not having some maniac blowing up the world. Unfortunately, there are more Bush kids out there, and if Jenna ever gets elected president of the US she could prove to be even more reckless than her dad.

< Message edited by happypervert -- 8/26/2005 5:54:40 PM >

_____________________________

"Get a bicycle. You will not regret it if you live." . . . Mark Twain

(in reply to anthrosub)

Post #: 6

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/26/2005 6:20:54 PM

anthrosub

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/2/2004
Status: offline

Well that may be all well and true but the big factor in all this is the population. In the past 1500 years, the world population has doubled at least four times. I don't remember the exact years this was estimated to have occurred but one was in the early 1800's just after the War of 1812. The next one was at the start of the 20th century and the next one after that was less than 30 years ago. If you notice, the time it takes for the population to double is taking less time each cycle. In other words, we are growing exponentially.

This can't continue and it's already been forecast that a major collapse is likely within the next century or so. We are depleting resources such as fossil fuel, fertilizer, forests, and marshlands, using up land for agriculture and housing that's critical for natural processes like exchanging carbon dioxide for oxygen and filtering pollutants out of fresh water. Top soil is flowing into the rivers and tidal regions like there's no tomorrow. Global desertification is accelerating at an abnormal pace. The polar regions are melting at an advanced rate. The ozone layer is shrinking. This is all not something that will stop until the source of the pressure is gone...namely...human population.

I gave the example of the groundwater in the central United States. Here's another, out in the great plains where all the factory farming takes place. There's a cemetery where some pioneers in a wagon train are buried. They died while crossing the plains in the 1860's. All around this cemetery is enormous fields owned and harvested by corporate farming conglomerates. The average height of all the surrounding fields...all the way to the horizon in all directions...is roughly 2 feet below the height of the cemetery. This is how much erosion has taken place due to farming in the past century (with a smaller population than there is today).

Farms don't let fields go fallow so the topsoil can replenish itself anymore. Instead, they drive huge tractors around with a large drum shaped tank that "injects" nitrogen in the ground to feed the crops. One environmental group compares this to being addicted to drugs. Every spring, the ground needs a nitrogen fix or else it won't produce a good yield of crops. Year after year of doing this has turned the soil almost to the consistency of sand. There's no topsoil and that's why there's so much erosion. Nothing is there to hold the soil down so it washes away with each rain season (along with all the chemicals put into the ground for pest and weed control).

In environmental science you learn about an area's carrying capacity. This is a measure of how much the area can support a population of human, animal, and plant life. Right now, we have exceeded the natural carrying capacity of the major agricultural areas of the earth. In other words, we have created an artificial capacity that depends on machines and chemicals to keep it going. When the fuel and fertilizer runs out, the food supply is going to collapse very quickly. That's not speculation.

anthrosub

_____________________________

"It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled." - Mark Twain

"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde

(in reply to happypervert)

Post #: 7

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/26/2005 6:54:42 PM

kisshou

Posts: 2425
Joined: 2/11/2005
Status: offline

but anthro don't you think in a thousand years we will have already colonized other planets?

I don't think any of collarme will be saved that far into the future.

Anti gravity BDSM ;)

(in reply to anthrosub)

Post #: 8

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/26/2005 9:16:54 PM

anthrosub

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/2/2004
Status: offline

I'm sure you're kidding with me but to answer that question, we have a lot to accomplish first. Mars is probably the most likely planet we could colonize. The inner planets (Venus and Mercury) are simply too hot. The outer planets beyond Mars are gas giants or extremely cold with hardly enough sunlight to power anything, let alone grow plants for food.

With the best technology we can develop right now, it would take 18 months to reach Mars. That's a hell of a long time to be in a space capsule. Exercise and muscle atrophy would be a real problem not to mention boredom. The nearest star outside our solar system is 4 light years away. That means we would have to travel for 4 years at the speed of light to reach it and it doesn't have any planets that we've been able to detect, so another star would have to be found and it would be even further away.

I think we would be better served focusing our efforts on learning to balance our existence here on Earth. Historically, humans have had plenty of room and resources on this planet to grow and only in the past couple centuries have we pretty much closed the circle on doing that. There's no more wilderness to discover...not even under the oceans really. We've reached the point where we're all bumping into each other, hence all the conflict with clashing cultures.

This is the beginning of a new phase for humankind. We need to learn to live with our differences, compromise, and work together to make it all work. Until that can be achieved, things are going to continue to get pretty ugly. Think of it as a group of people marooned on an island with no way to get off. There's only so much resources and space to go around. The population and how the island is treated needs to be monitored to maintain equilibrium; otherwise, it's a disaster waiting to happen.

anthrosub

< Message edited by anthrosub -- 8/26/2005 9:17:23 PM >

_____________________________

"It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled." - Mark Twain

"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde

(in reply to kisshou)

Post #: 9

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/27/2005 8:27:35 AM

sub4hire

Posts: 6775
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

quote:

So I see it as a simple matter of economics. There is plenty of energy available from solar, tides, winds, lightening, etc. It just isn't cost effective yet to pursue. But folks will adapt, and we're also getting smarter about managing the environment. Take, for example, this article about environmental economics showing how hard dollar values can now be put on the benefits swamps provide; even third world governments can appreciate that. Also, if the population is lower a thousand years from now, it will because prosperity brings decreases in reproduction like we already see in Japan, not because it is forced on humanity by scarcity of resources.

How will we breathe or will we live in bubbles? Remember the polar ice caps are also melting.

(in reply to happypervert)

Post #: 10

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/27/2005 9:50:05 AM

happypervert

Posts: 2203
Joined: 5/11/2004
From: Scranton, PA
Status: offline

quote:

In the past 1500 [sic] years, the world population has doubled at least four times. I don't remember the exact years this was estimated to have occurred but one was in the early 1800's just after the War of 1812. The next one was at the start of the 20th century and the next one after that was less than 30 years ago.

Interesting that this population growth has occured since Malthus made similar gloomy predictions.

Of course people have done and continue to do a lot of stupid things in managing the environment. As I recall the Oglala acquifer was mainly drawn down because farm subsidies caused huge cotton production in that area. The Russians did something similar by irrigating for cotton with water divertied from flowing into the Aral Sea, and now the water is too salty where there had once been thriving fisheries. Practices improve as people learn from these examples, the Dust Bowl of the 30s and others. We've got a long way to go in getting really smart about managing the environment but that doesn't mean we'll destroy ourselves before we get there.

Problem with predictions for the future is that they often assume that current trends, behavior and technology stay constant. They don't. Obviously population can't continue to grow at exponential rates into infinity, but rather than collapsing I'd expect it to stabilize at some equilibrium point. There's plenty of nitrogen and if fertilizer doesn't come from fossil fuel it will come from somewhere else; if population strains the ability of the land to produce more food then vegetable production could shift to the sea or hi-rise hydroponic farms. There are countless other possibilities beyond our imagination so I'm confident that 1000 years from now that life on earth will be prosperous and very different what we know now.

I know you read a lot of philosophy and other stuff that is too deep for me. However, I'd suggest some science fiction . . . except for gor. heh

_____________________________

"Get a bicycle. You will not regret it if you live." . . . Mark Twain

(in reply to anthrosub)

Post #: 11

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/27/2005 10:40:20 AM

anthrosub

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/2/2004
Status: offline

We're on the same page. I don't think we'll destroy ourselves outright but do believe we'll make the way we've been living up till now virtually impossible, so that's a "destruction" of sorts. Our current population trends are not sustainable so at some point as you say, there will be a forced correction. Life as we know it will change dramatically out of necessity. Predictions will likely change as time goes by but overall, the inability for the Earth to support what we're doing now will become difficult to ignore.

This is what I mean by things will get ugly. People as a society don't seem to come together willingly to work towards a common goal until things get pretty bad (and obvious). World War 2 is probably the only time in history where the bulk of the world's population was galvanized into a concerted effort.

When someone takes the time to see what's really going on out there, stuff like banning abortion, fighting against family planning, and other perspectives that ignore consequences of unhindered population growth become pretty absurd. These same people or others like them are the same people who scoff at things like the danger of ozone depletion. They don't know what they're talking about in the larger scheme of things. In other words, they're ignorant.

I'm 50 years old and can tell you I've seen the changes increased population is having in the three areas I've lived most of my life. These include metropolitan and urban areas (like Montana, NH, and Washington DC). The world population doubled when I was in my twenties and is likely to double again before I die if I live to a natural old age. There was a time when it took centuries for the population to double, which made it virtually invisible to people. Now it's happening within a single lifetime. I think this is something most people aren't aware of. It puts a whole new perspective on the matter.

anthrosub

_____________________________

"It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled." - Mark Twain

"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde

(in reply to happypervert)

Post #: 12

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/27/2005 10:59:32 AM

pinkpleasures

Posts: 1114
Status: offline

anthro has answered a question i have had for years: why is it in sci fi movies, no one bathes?

pinkpleasures

_____________________________

(in reply to anthrosub)

Post #: 13

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/27/2005 3:58:56 PM

anthrosub

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/2/2004
Status: offline

LOL. I've always wondered why they never show people having to take care of nature's call; especially in movies where everyone's has to wear a space suit all the time.

anthrosub

_____________________________

"It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled." - Mark Twain

"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde

(in reply to pinkpleasures)

Post #: 14

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/27/2005 4:31:24 PM

pinkpleasures

Posts: 1114
Status: offline

quote:

LOL. I've always wondered why they never show people having to take care of nature's call; especially in movies where everyone's has to wear a space suit all the time.

anthrosub

Here's another question about sci fi movies, anthro; why are criminals sent to other, livable planets rather than colonizing them? Will the future just be a replay of Australia? <Has a major Aussie Men jones, LMAO>

pinkpleasures

_____________________________

(in reply to anthrosub)

Post #: 15

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/27/2005 5:22:16 PM

happypervert

Posts: 2203
Joined: 5/11/2004
From: Scranton, PA
Status: offline

Well, I wouldn't say we're on the same page exactly; I think we see the same potential for problems though differ in likelihood that change will be forced upon us. Perhaps I shouldn't disagree with you there because Jeffrey Sachs makes similar arguments in this article; however the critical phrase is this:

quote:

Part of the confusion of the public debate reflects different population trends in different parts of the world. The fastest population growth is taking place in the poorest regions.

I believe that we can expect the rate of population growth to decline as development reaches the poorer regions of the world. We see this already as low skilled jobs migrate to low wage areas, and as those areas become developed they improve education so they can compete for better jobs and eventually the lowest skill jobs migrate somewhere else. And as those areas develop the birth rate drops as parents decide it is wiser to put their resources into raising and educating one or two kids instead of having a bunch of poorly educated kids to use as manual labor on the farm.

For example, South Korea of even 30 years ago was relatively undeveloped and considered a cheap imitator of Japan. Now low skilled jobs leave there for Vietnam or Indonesia, and here's an article describing that their birth rate is well below the replacement rate. I think it would be a mistake to assume that we wouldn't eventually see such a migration of jobs, development, and declining birth rates to Africa if some governments there can make it attractive to do so.

Of course, such development increases demand for resources and energy and can be a messy business in the early stages as governments are more interested in development than pollution controls. Eventually as prosperity takes root they become more vigilant as it becomes necessary to attract and retain talent required to move higher up the economic food chain.

So I see a lot of change too, though done more through incentives than from a having no choice.

_____________________________

"Get a bicycle. You will not regret it if you live." . . . Mark Twain

(in reply to anthrosub)

Post #: 16

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/27/2005 6:34:02 PM

anthrosub

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/2/2004
Status: offline

I understand the factors you're pointing to and I'm sure you know how this all plays out involves an enormous number of variables. But generally speaking, development of other parts of the world will be driven by a few things that are basically fixed and cannot be changed. The developed parts of the world today are here not just because of cultural similarities or one copying another; these areas have an environment that was conducive to allowing it to happen.

The North American continent, Western and Eastern Europe and the Northeastern region of Asia are (and in some areas...were) areas rich in natural resources. This is not the case in Central America, large portions of Africa, or the Middle East. Some areas are simply too difficult to exploit and maintain the regions natural ecology (such as the Brazilian rainforests). The problem with thinking the rest of the world will one day be developed like current areas are is resources. Where will they come from and how economical would it be to bring them to areas that have none.

The Persian Gulf and surrounding area has nothing but oil. The rest is sand. Once the oil is gone in 300 years, why would anyone want to transform it into something like, lets say the Southeastern United States? The same can be said for large portions of Australia. These areas and others like them had a human population in the past but only because the numbers were very small and the environment more or less mitigated population growth simply by having scarce resources to begin with.

The point I'm trying to make is it will be too expensive to develop every part of the world to be on par with areas like the U.S., Japan, Korea, Europe, and parts of Russia. Not many people realize that during the Soviet era, Russia was essentially a third world country once you drove 100 away from Moscow or St. Petersburg and it remains that way today. About the time we may or may not have gotten our social act together so we can cooperate and help develop "poor" areas of the world, the resources necessary will have reached critical levels making it economically unfeasible.

Besides, would we want that sort of environmental pressure being put on the world everywhere? The United States consumes something like 5 times what the rest of the world consumes. We're basically having a party here that will one day come to a decisive end.

Here's something else to think about. When the oil starts reaching critical levels, do you think the countries that have what's left are going to just ship it out to other parts of the world? Imagine a time when oil is at a point where it would cripple a nation's ability to fuel it's military machine for defense. Do you think the United States will let itself get into such a state? Every other developed country will be doing the same thing.

We import oil for a strategic reason...so that when the day comes and the oil is running out, we will still have our own stockpile to rely on. It makes no sense to burn up our own oil and become dependent on other parts of the world. Instead, we pay a premium to burn up the other guy's oil first. They get rich but one day they won't have any oil and we will. This isn't discussed publically and it's such a long term strategy, few people realize it's happening right under their noses.

anthrosub

_____________________________

"It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled." - Mark Twain

"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde

(in reply to happypervert)

Post #: 17

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/27/2005 6:38:48 PM

anthrosub

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/2/2004
Status: offline

I can think of only one SciFi episode in Star Trek where the criminals were shipped out in suspended animation on the "SS Botany Bay." One of the "Aliens" sequels had a prison planet but it was basically one big building instead of the whole planet. But like you say, there really hasn't been a movie that depicts criminals colonizing another world. Probably because by definition they wouldn't have the education or character to accomplish such a thing.

anthrosub

_____________________________

"It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled." - Mark Twain

"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde

(in reply to pinkpleasures)

Post #: 18

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/27/2005 8:19:19 PM

pinkpleasures

Posts: 1114
Status: offline

quote:

I can think of only one SciFi episode in Star Trek where the criminals were shipped out in suspended animation on the "SS Botany Bay." One of the "Aliens" sequels had a prison planet but it was basically one big building instead of the whole planet. But like you say, there really hasn't been a movie that depicts criminals colonizing another world. Probably because by definition they wouldn't have the education or character to accomplish such a thing.

anthrosub

What about "7 Monkeys" with Bruce Willis? Or did i misunderstand a damned movie? LOL.

pinkpleasures

_____________________________

(in reply to anthrosub)

Post #: 19

RE: 1000 yrs from now - 8/27/2005 9:01:53 PM

anthrosub

Posts: 843
Joined: 6/2/2004
Status: offline

quote:

What about "7 Monkeys" with Bruce Willis? Or did i misunderstand a damned movie? LOL.

Now that's a movie I haven't seen. After he made "The 5th Element" I've been sort of leary of Bruce Willis movies. It was Ok I guess but seemed a little too focused on making a fashion statement. SciFi on television seems to be getting a little watered down lately. The last series I've really enjoyed was "Babylon 5." The SciFi channel showed the entire 5 years worth of episodes in 6 months a couple years ago, so I made it a point to watch it every night and loved it.

anthrosub

_____________________________

"It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled." - Mark Twain

"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde

(in reply to pinkpleasures)

Post #: 20

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> 1000 yrs from now

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.094