It's late afternoon on May 21, the Day of Rapture, and despite repeated gazes through my window, I've failed to see bodies headed skyward to confound local air traffic and rendezvous with the angels.
This admits to only two explanations: Either none of my neighbors qualify for salvation, or Harold Camping is wrong in predicting that the countdown to the end of the world begins today. I vote, without surprise, for the latter.
Forecasting Armageddon has become trendy of late, with a great deal of attention being given to an interpretation of the Mayan Calendar suggesting that mother Earth is destined for doom in December of 2012. So even if the 2011 rapture-cum-apocalypse is a no-show this weekend (presumably the case, if you're reading this cynical screed), you can always regroup for planetary calamity 18 months down the road.
Of course, that won't happen either.
It's easy to be flippant about all this, not simply because the rationale is suspect (the cycles of a Mesoamerican calendar or the crummy moral behavior of naked apes), or even because the mechanisms of worldly destruction are goofy (the Sun lining up with the center of the Galaxy). No, the motivation for my disbelief is something else. Precedent.
The Earth has been lawned with life for something over 3.5 billion years. That's a span of time great enough to encompass some honest-to-goodness catastrophe. For example, 700 million years ago Earth underwent a planet-wide deep freeze, with ice covering the oceans from the poles to the equator. Snowball Earth, as this chilly episode is termed, lasted for millions of years. It wasn't pleasant, and it wasn't brief. But it also wasn't fatal to life, which recovered and thrived.
And, of course, 65 million years ago, a rock the size of Philadelphia slammed into the Yucatan Peninsula, and annihilated the dinosaurs and many of their beastly brethren.
In both cases, habitats changed, and species were shuffled. But life recovered and thrived. Indeed, our planet and its DNA-based biology have survived every catastrophe. So how credible is it to suggest that disaster on the scale predicted by the doomsayers should occur now? It's like living in a house for decades, without ever having an errant airplane crash through the roof. Now suddenly your neighbor tells you that you'll be picking pieces of fuselage from the carpet next week. Sure, it's possible, but historical precedent suggests he's likely to be disappointed.
In other words, unless there are special circumstances in play, something that hasn't happened for a long time is unlikely to happen in the very near future. But according to Harold Camping, it seems there are special circumstances in play, namely clues to the Apocalypse he gleans from biblical text. Humankind has reached some sort of moral crisis, and God is taking action.
The egocentrism of this point of view chafes, however. Homo sapiens has been around for 200,000 years. Is it only now, during the last few percent of our species' existence, that we've become sufficiently dissolute to justify obliterating the planet? Were the inhabitants of Olduvai Gorge, or for that matter, the Neanderthals, all sweetness and light -- charitable to their neighbors and respectful of their environment? Or does modern man hold a very special claim to brutish behavior? Yes, it's fashionable to argue that today's evil is of a caliber unmatched by any of our predecessors. I suggest that those who believe this should consider what their lives would be like in the time of the Roman Empire.
Of course, as any astronomer can tell you, there really will be an end to the Earth, or at least the life upon it. But if this is any comfort, we won't cause it. Today's voguish threats, including climate change, population growth, massive war, and resource depletion, are all amenable to a fix if we act prudently. And even if we don't, these problems are incapable of obliterating all of humanity, let alone destroying the Earth.
No, the real End of Days will happen slowly, as the Sun ages. Every day, the temperature of Sol's surface increases by five billionths of a degree, a change of no consequence for thousands of millennia to come. But a few hundred million years from now, barring a fix by our descendants, this relentless heating will substantially change Earth's biosphere in ways that might not be survivable for us. In five billion years, the Sun's swan song begins in earnest, causing it to swell up into a huge, ruddy parody of its present self, boiling away our oceans, and changing our planet's orbit.
That's the end of Earth-as-we-know-it.
But even this far-off fate -- the final chapter for life on Earth -- need not conclude the narrative of all its inhabitants. In this distant, dystopian future, any intelligent beings still strutting the planet would have the incentive, the time, and (presumably) the technical capability to move to other worlds, and continue their existence.
Frankly, circling a calendar entry as the final date for planet Earth is about as sensible as insisting that pigs will soon be airborne. My recommendation? Don't quit your day job.
Seth Shostak: Life: Miraculous or Mundane?
to compare with. Are we? Do we really know? I think not. Humans are peons in the vast scale of things.
We are not special, and we will never know all the answers! Live life to the fullest and treat others how you want to be treated. I claim Agnostic to be the way to live, open minded and freedom of choice.
Modern agriculture is entirely dependent on fossil fuels and there is no evidence of any progress being made to change that. If fact most policy makers and people don't even realize the problem.
One example, we need 120 million tons of ammonia annually for fertilizer in order to grow enough food for all of us. When fossil fuels are extinguished, where can enough hydrogen and energy be obtained for ammonia synthesis? If a cost-effective alternative is not available then agricultural productivity will go down and starvation will become a major problem worldwide.
"Abraham was commanded by God to offer his son up as a sacrifice in the land of Moriah."
This is the root of your religious believes! Wow! Sounds like a pretty sadistic god to me.
You can't just pull what you want from the bible. This is part of the bible too. One word, dogmatic!
Go ahead keep believing psychos!
This clearly shows what the biblical God wants from humans: FEAR. Even more troubling, Abraham was motivated by fear to kill his son, not love, not trust in or respect for God, but FEAR.
God wants fear and righteous humans are motivated by fear. In fact, the core idea of most Christian sects is that of the Savior. We need saving from some fearful consequence. Again, one is motivated by fear to come to God.
This is not obtuse thinking about hidden meanings at all. It is the "illusive" obvious that most prefer to deny.
A healthy fear of God is beneficial for humans. When humans get out of hand they will eat even their own children.
The "Something Amazing Will Happen in 2012" stuff largely started with Terrence and Dennis McKenna, the ethnobotanists who've taught the West a lot about ayahuasca and other traditional psychedelics. It's the newagey folks who've commercialised this as "The End Of The World".
Or in other words, you have it backwards. What used to be misleadingly called the "dark ages" were a period of population growth, not decline. By about 800 A.D., European population had gotten back up to its previous peak, and continued growing, faster and faster, until the 14th century.
See the _Atlas of World Population History_ for details.
Fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Wisdom is the ability to put the knowledge you have learned into practice in a way that is pleasing to the Lord.
To have knowledge and not put it to use in this way is very foolish, for it won't profit you or anyone else. It is as good as having nothing. In fact, it might even be worse than having nothing, for we are responsible for what we know. Note what we are told in Ezekiel 33:30-33.
30. "But as for you, son of man, your fellow citizens who talk about you by the walls and in the doorways of the houses, speak to one another, each to his brother, saying, 'Come now, and hear what the message is which comes forth from the Lord.'
31. "And they come to you as people come, and sit before you as My people, and hear your words, but they do not do them, for they do the lustful desires expressed by their mouth, and their heart goes after their gain.
32. "And behold, you are to them like a sensual song by one who has a beautiful voice and plays well on an instrument; for they hear your words, but they do not practice them.
Doesn’t this sound familiar? The dust that is on your books you can clean but the dust that is on your mind only Jesus can Cleanse!
The answer is that the 'end' is an *estimate*, based on what little we know about stellar evolution (a lot of info, but there's far more to learn in this field).
Science assumes human fallibility, so all evidence must be collected, solid data analysis by multiple labs should be performed, published peer-reviewed studies and constant consistent checking and re-checking is also always required.
Our star's predicted lifespan, based on it's mass and luminosity and other observed physical characteristics, is about 5-6 billion years, but as we learn more and more about this subject I'm sure we'll refine our conclusions appropriately (look up 'Main Sequence Stars' in Wikipedia, to give you a starting point, if you're interested... check out astronomy, physics and cosmology too)
Also, by looking out into the sky we're seeing light from the past only now reaching us here on the earth; once we determine the estimated distance of an object, we can predict how far we are seeing into the past - this gives us insight into the nature of the history of our local group of galaxies (all with billions of stars and stellar phenomenon observable to us), and the universe in general.
It's really big. There's alot more to do. Places to go, things to see (and learn). We're just getting started.
Depending on emotional outlook, it could be depressing to consider how distant we are from one another in terms of what we believe to be true, particularly in areas where there is history or complexity involved.
Personally, I'd suggest focusing on empirical data and reducing complementary theories to the least required to explain the evidence at hand.
The point is, that fits PERFECTLY with Chronologies by Ussher and Sir Isaac Newton for the age of the earth as 6,000 years in the year 2000. And with Newton inventing Calculus, he is undeniably one of the greatest minds of all times. So why are we treated to evolutionary drivel at every turn? Are we afraid to admit that God might be behind all this Intelligent Design (such as DNA which converted Anthony Flew from being a renown atheist.)
Too many men think we came from apes and they are beginning to act like them. The Bible is still the best seller and is great reading for those who are humble enough to admit they don't know everything. Richard Ruhling, MD, MPH, BA in Chemistry, which teaches us that the energy systems of the universe tend to run downhill (2nd Law of Thermodynamics, so how do things get more complex? and if we evolved, why can't we eat cholesterol? etc. http://Atheist.netfirms.com
Believe as you will, but I'm not buying what you're selling.
You may be evil, but I am not. You may think you're a prisoner of the devil, but I am not. I feel badly for you that you carry all this in your sad little mind. But on the other hand, leave me out of your delusions.