On the end of humans

Of late, there seems to have been a fair amount of concern regarding the changing climatic conditions on earth. There is a sizable opinion that these changes are the direct result of human actions, and that our climate would not be undergoing them if humans had been more environmentally considerate throughout our history and in our present. There is another sizable opinion that these changes are the result of regular climatic fluctuations that are inevitable regardless of human action. A middle-ground suggests that perhaps both scenarios are right: a regular environmental shift is upon us, and it is hastened and perpetuated by human actions. Arguments for all sides are both supported and refuted by scientific investigation. It would be far outside my realm of expertise to comment on the validity of any claims made by people who are invested in this issue. But surely it can be agreed that the climate is in fact changing, whatever the cause.

It is not, incidentally, a futile endeavor to discover the cause, because understanding the cause may (or may not) enhance our well-being for the time being. But despite attempts to explain our current observations, the fact remains that global temperatures are rising, the volume of liquid water on earth is increasing, and an enormous array of other environmental changes are occurring.

As mammals, humans are warm-blooded creatures. Biologically speaking, there is a limit to the amount of heat that we can tolerate. There is also a limit to the amount of land that we can occupy, particularly if the land becomes submerged, and especially in light of our rapidly increasing population. I do not know what these limits are, nor can I guess when we may be likely to reach them. But is my opinion that we will; and when we do, the great majority of us will die.

It strikes me as odd that few people realize the extremely short period of time that humans have inhabited the earth. Of the approximately 3 and a half billion years that biological life as we understand it has been around, only a measly million years have supported human life (remember that one billion is a thousand million). Humans evolved to our present state during the brief and recent stint of the past few hundred thousand years, and the earth’s climate for this period was no doubt crucial in our development.

Should we expect that a species of such miniscule worldly experience would be capable of surviving a drastic shift in the global environment? Perhaps we should expect this, considering the ingenuity and mental prowess that has allowed us to come as far as we have. But it is my opinion that such an expectation is a naive and boastful one, and not at all reasonable in light of our short history. (I am not inclined to exclude the possibility of planetary relocation, but such an event would not constitute surviving climatic change; it would be avoiding it altogether.)

I wish also to iterate that lament for our future demise is only appropriate if one restricts oneself to an anthropocentric perspective; that is, a view that values the human above other forms of life. It is reasonable that most humans have this perspective, as the majority of interactions that humans have are with other humans. With our brief past in mind, perhaps it would be healthy for more people to disregard this perspective and realize that even if the shifting environment no longer supports human life, a huge sum of life on earth will still be supported. Insects, amphibians, and fish, for example, have lived more than 3 times as long as humans, and endured several drastic changes in climate. Multicellular animals in general have been around for more than 600 million years, and I consider it unlikely that the current climatic changes could destroy them altogether. Not only will successful species continue to succeed, but new species will evolve in the emerging conditions of a new environment.