A child born today may live to see humanity’s end, unless…

June 18, 2015
A couple hugs while standing on a hilly area overlooking Cairo on a dusty and hazy day where temperatures reached 46 Celsius (114 Fahrenheit)

A couple hugs while standing on a hilly area overlooking Cairo on a dusty and hazy day where temperatures reached 114 Fahrenheit, May 27, 2015. REUTERS/Asmaa Waguih

Humans will be extinct in 100 years because the planet will be uninhabitable, said the late Australian microbiologist Frank Fenner, one of the leaders in the effort to eradicate smallpox during the 1970s. He blamed overcrowding, denuded resources and climate change.

Fenner’s prediction, made in 2010, is not a sure bet, but he is correct that there is no way emissions reductions will be enough to save us from our trend toward doom. And there doesn’t seem to be any big global rush to reduce emissions, anyway. When the G7 called on Monday for all countries to reduce carbon emissions to zero in the next 85 years, the scientific reaction was unanimous: That’s far too late.

And no possible treaty that emerges from the current United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Bonn, Germany, in preparation for November’s United Nations climate conference in Paris, will be sufficient. At this point, lowering emissions is just half the story — the easy half. The harder half will be an aggressive effort to find the technologies needed to reverse the climate apocalypse that has already begun.

For years now, we have heard that we are at a tipping point. Al Gore warned us in An Inconvenient Truth that immediate action was required if we were to prevent global warming. In 2007, Sir David King, former chief scientific advisor to the British government, declared, “Avoiding dangerous climate change is impossible – dangerous climate change is already here. The question is, can we avoid catastrophic climate change?” In the years since, emissions have risen, as have global temperatures. Only two conclusions can be drawn: Either these old warnings were alarmist, or we are already in far bigger trouble than the U.N. claims. Unfortunately, the latter seems to be the case.

Lowering emissions and moving to cleaner energy sources is a necessary step to prevent catastrophic temperature rises. The general target is to keep global temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius. Higher increases — like the 5C increase currently projected by 2100 — run the risk of widespread flooding, famine, drought, sea-level rise, mass extinction and, worse, the potential of passing a tipping point (frequently set at 6C) that could render much of the planet uninhabitable and wipe out most species. Even the 2C figure predicts more than a meter’s rise in sea levels by 2100, enough to displace millions. It is no wonder that the Pentagon calls climate change a serious “threat multiplier” and is considering its potential disruptive impact across all its planning.

This is where the U.N. talks fall short — by a mile. The targets proffered by the United States (a 26 percent to 28 percent decrease from 2005 levels by 2025), the European Union (a 40 percent decrease from 1990 levels by 2030) and China (an unspecified emissions peak by 2030) are nowhere near enough to keep us under the 2C target. In 2012, journalist Bill McKibben, in a feature for Rolling Stone, explained much of the math behind the current thinking on global warming. He concluded that the United Nations’ figures were definitely on the rosy side. In particular, McKibben noted that the temperature has already increased 0.8C, and even if we were to stop all carbon-dioxide emissions today, it would increase another 0.8C simply due to the existing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. That leaves only a 0.4C buffer before hitting 2C. Even assuming the Paris conference implements everything that’s promised, we will be on track to use up the remaining “carbon budget” — the amount of carbon we can emit without blowing past the 2C threshold — within two to three decades, not even at mid-century.

These emissions-reduction frameworks, it is safe to say, are simply insufficient. By themselves, they only offer a small chance of preventing the earth from becoming mostly uninhabitable – for humans at least — over the next few centuries. For the talks to be more than just a placebo, they need to encompass aggressive plans for climate mitigation, with the assumption that current wishful targets won’t be met.

Apart from coordination to cope with climate-driven crises and associated instability, climate-change leadership needs to encourage and fund the development of technologies to reverse what we are unable to stop doing to our planet. Many of these technologies fall under the rubric of “carbon sequestration” — safely storing carbon rather than emitting it. Riskier strategies, like injecting sulfates into the air to reflect more of the sun’s heat into space and ocean iron fertilization to grow algae to suck in carbon, run a high risk of unintended consequences. Better and safer solutions to reduce CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere don’t yet exist; we need to discover them and regulate them, to avoid the chaos of what economists Gernot Wagner and Martin L. Weitzman term “rogue geoengineering” in their book Climate Shock.

None of these approaches are substitutes for emissions reductions. Achieving a carbon-neutral society is a necessary long-term goal regardless of other technological fixes. Technology could buy us the time to get there without our planet burning up. Ultimately, we need a Cold War-level of investment in research into new technologies to mitigate the coming effects of global warming. Without it, the United Nations’ work is a nice gesture, but hardly a meaningful one.

196 comments

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

Republicans disagree that there is even an environmental problem. Fox will probably run a story saying “Dems move to increase salary taxes to pay for those unemployed by new treehugger policies”. Until you build national political consensus on the issue any attempts to take specific measures are going to fail. Btw – ancient mystics have always said our age will end with ‘air’, just like the previous one ended with ‘water’ (Ice age, floods etc).

Posted by BidnisMan | Report as abusive

Well, at the very least we’ll have answered the Fermi paradox…

Posted by rmilcik | Report as abusive

Maybe a better species will take over…

Posted by Macedonian | Report as abusive

Why do all commentators of climate change ignore the leading cause. Put aside the focus on fossil fuels and address the biggest contributor, the animal agriculture industry (responsible for 30% – 51% of all greenhouse gas emissions, as well as the biggest driver of deforestation and the creator of dead sea zones). A global shift to a plant based diet right now, IS the ONLY answer. The choice is simple Go Vegan or keep consuming animals and there by-products and face extinction before the end of the century. (Changing from a money-based economy to a resource-based economy would also be beneficial to everyone).

Posted by NwxV | Report as abusive

And now the Pope offers his uneducated opinion, to what end? What does he know? The left will grab this and run while ignoring his anti-abortion philosophy. Tells you all you need to know about global warming … and the nut jobs on the left.

Posted by Miles2Go | Report as abusive

First we need to kill the capital market system if we want to save the environment.

Posted by Regular | Report as abusive

Yes, these warnings ring true because all scientific predictions of impending doom, ever, have been proven correct.

BTW, we’re living in an ice age.

Posted by amd65 | Report as abusive

Baloney!

Posted by jorge62 | Report as abusive

Pointless simple-minded apocalpticism – in effect arguing that whatever might be possible will never be enough.

We need to do everything possible.

Beyond that, resulting strife will likely lead to significant reduction of global population, which is the center of the problem.

Do you know anyone who *doesn’t* expect war and/or plagues to do the job?

In the meantime we need to take responsbile steps, slash consumption, and move rapidly to carbon neutral.

If not the culling by war and/or plague will be all the worse.

Either way, the problem will solve itself – either way the price will be high.

This is not a user-friendly planet :)

Posted by JeanPeregrine | Report as abusive

A 100 year timeline for extinction is optimistic–the climate scientists looking at the Arctic are talking decades at best. We’re on track to lose Arctic summer ice this year, and the the consequence will be catastrophic releases of undersea methane, a greenhouse gas far more powerful than c02. Hence the problem–as long as the journalists give us this ‘100 years before disaster’ bromide, we’re not going to take the steps necessary to save human habitat.

Posted by MRBadExample | Report as abusive

How many times do we have be subjected to these ridiculous doomsday predictions. What a load of rubbish, some people will believe anything!

Posted by muzza63 | Report as abusive

Either these old warnings were alarmist, or we are already in far bigger trouble than the U.N. claims.
And of course the author dismisses the first.

Posted by idanceusing | Report as abusive

I have one simple question. After years of asking for proof of Global Warming or man-caused climate change, advocates for those belief still have never produce proof using the Scientific Method – the only acceptable methodology to conclusively make their case.

When a Dallas federal judge declared CO2 to be a poisonous gas, and bad for the environment, I knew the Climate Change crowd was on thin ice. The truth is that the more CO2, the more the Rain Forests grow and produce oxygen and clean our air.

Put up or shut up.

Posted by furrpiece | Report as abusive

No one has ever made a reasonable case for why a few degrees warmer would be a bad thing! A thousand years ago the world was warmer. Proven to be warmer. So warm, Greenland was ice free, but the oceans did not rise and flood the shores.

There is no proof that warmer means shorelines will flood. Warmer would benefit many areas of Russian and Canada. Give them longer growing seasons, too. The head of NASA made this very same comment several years ago, but the doomsayers jumped on him and threatened his job unless he retracted the claims.

Just forcing the retraction doesn’t make his comments untrue!

Posted by cbrown90 | Report as abusive

As long as there are skeptics, our planet is safe.

If we would all agree that WE are in charge of the planet, then we may possibly embrace “solutions” that are worse than anything on the horizon. IOW, I do not trust “humans” to save the planet. I prefer to allow the planet to take care of itself while WE take care of other humans.

Posted by secateurs | Report as abusive

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid= 10152081292144237&set=t.100002923811056& type=3&theater

Posted by AlexisKlatt | Report as abusive

According to Al Gore, the earth is supposed to burn up by Jan 21st, 2016; and that we would be seeing evidence of such a burn up by now. However, the last few winters in my location have been really harsh, the Arctic and Antarctic ice caps have grown, and the temperature of the Earth has leveled off. Some have even said that we are heading towards a mini Ice-Age.

All this Global Warming stuff is is an attempt to create more Governmental control over people, as well as to increase taxes because they need more money to spend because their budgets are out of control.

Posted by sthund221 | Report as abusive

The greatest pollution is the craap that is put forth as NEWS

Posted by Apon | Report as abusive

Ummm…I call BS. This sort of fear mongering does not help the climate change cause.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/pinatubo/self/

Posted by ChazGee | Report as abusive

About damn time…..first guy to set a date January 2100. Good I got tired of hearing every 20 years we have only 20 years to save the planet. So can finally move on to some other topics more important???? Like the economy?

Posted by R.E.Lee | Report as abusive

This article says much more about the unbridled narcissism of the author than anything about humans as a species. Trust me bub, humans are like the rats, coyotes, and cockroaches… Real hard to wipe out. This feeling you have is just your fear of your own death, and you’re such a pathetic solipsist that you must think the entire species is going to end just because you are one day… you pathetic fool.

Posted by TheMule | Report as abusive

This article says much more about the unbridled narcissism of the author than anything about humans as a species. Trust me bub, humans are like the rats, coyotes, and cockroaches… Real hard to wipe out. This feeling you have is just your fear of your own death, and you’re such a pathetic solipsist that you must think the entire species is going to end just because you are one day… you pathetic fool.

Posted by TheMule | Report as abusive

This article says much more about the unbridled narcissism of the author than anything about humans as a species. Trust me bub, humans are like the rats, coyotes, and cockroaches… Real hard to wipe out. This feeling you have is just your fear of your own death, and you’re such a pathetic solipsist that you must think the entire species is going to end just because you are one day… you pathetic fool.

Posted by TheMule | Report as abusive

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!!!!!

(wheeze, breathe, breathe . . . . )

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Posted by Partridge | Report as abusive

What Total BullCrap

Posted by Happy1a | Report as abusive

Just another crazy liberal scientist who turns a blind eye to the facts and reality. BTW, watch out for the next ice age that is closer than these idiots realize.

Posted by PSPR | Report as abusive

I’m inclined to agree with TheMule that mankind will not (quite) be wiped out. However, mankind’s record already demonstrates that many if not most of the animal species mankind has demonstrated a liking for are the very species mankind has succeeded in wiping out. If mankind’s =favorite= species is mankind itself…

Posted by naughtmoses | Report as abusive

So tired of these doomsday projections that are declining in likelihood. We have a long way to go to make renewable energy feasible and farming in the oceans. But we’ll get there if some spillover disease doesn’t wipe us out.

Posted by GC… | Report as abusive

Our planet will be doomed by religious fanatics a lot sooner than by any unproven climate change. They will bring this about by nuclear or biological terrorism.

Posted by hoverlow | Report as abusive

Further, there’s no evidence of any sort that mankind is self-absorbed, stimulus-addicted and short-sighted. None whatsoever.

Posted by naughtmoses | Report as abusive

Humanity has a much bigger problem.
The rapid development of robots that are more and more capable of doing jobs
now performed by human from the basic hamburger flipper to manufacturing.
They will be able to replace bank tellers , truck drivers ,warehouse workers ,sales clerks ,secretarial etc
With the acceleration up of computer technology combined with advanced robots will eliminate the need of most human workers .

Posted by sirandrew | Report as abusive

We are the plague of this Earth, so we probably should die out&the Earth may yet survive!

Posted by JoKidd | Report as abusive

The sky is falling, the sky is falling, the sky is falling…

Posted by Bill1970 | Report as abusive

This help recognizing who is right about the End Times..http://onelordonebody.com/2015/03  /26/whos-right-about-the-end-times-10-r easons-why-they-are-convinced/

Posted by jbkrall | Report as abusive

At least they are getting smarter with the dire predictions. 100 years from now no one will remember or care. Is New York under water yet?

Posted by Skuzulupugus | Report as abusive

This is just more bad science. Whatever happened to the discipline of the scientific method? Apparently objective evidence is no longer relevant.

Posted by Waldofreud | Report as abusive

Frank Fenner is an idiot.

A child born today will almost certainly live under tyranny – if the world keeps following the Marxist leadership of those like Obama. They will NOT see the end of humanity. That claim is the product of a godless mind.

Mankind does NOT have the authority to destroy itself. The end has already been written and the delusions of Frank Fenner will have no effect whatsoever.

Posted by NutzNvise | Report as abusive

The human race is MUCH MORE LIkely to be wiped out by anarchy spawned by financial collapse resulting from the EXCESSIVE debt burden of world governments…why do you suppose POLITICIANS CAN NOT DO ANYTHING TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM? THAT WILL NOT MAKE ANYBODY RICH … that is the simple answer …

Posted by Dr.Jack | Report as abusive

What a load of BS. The end is near has been the mantra of crazies for many millennium. Its politicians that will kill us all.

Posted by DBCooperton | Report as abusive

what is all this…I have already solved the problem…I have metamoprhized my consciousness into the body of a cockroach…I will survive…okay people look at me funny…but soon they will join me…Franz Kafka

Posted by watcher8 | Report as abusive

LOL! Nonsense.

Posted by MickeyBitsko | Report as abusive

This nothing more that Paul Ehrlich redux. Nearly 50 years ago Ehrlich predicted an environmental catastrophe that never happened. He was wrong on every single one of his predictions, and this clown is just following in his footsteps.

However, he could be right for the wrong reason. If we continue to embrace socialism, our future is indeed bleak. It’s no coincidence that the most polluted places on the planet are in China, Russia, India, and the FSU — socialist workers’ paradises one and all. Conversely, not a single one of the 25 most polluted places on earth is in North America or Western Europe.

AGW is nothing more than a leftist hoax that they can use as a pretext to boss us around and take our stuff. History shows unequivocally that every time and every place leftists like these have ascended to power, the results have been the same –slavery, poverty, death, and destruction.

Posted by Old_Ollie | Report as abusive

Still waiting for:

Global thermonuclear war over a dwindling food supply by the year 2000 (predicted in the 1960s)

All of the Great Lakes becoming burning chemical pits of unquenchable fire that will blanket the earth with smoke causing a centuries long Ice Age (gospel truth in the 1970s)

Overpopulation relegating every American to a 6-foot by 6-foot living space (ditto)

You’re not trying hard enough, humanity!

Posted by Joe_E_in_the_IE | Report as abusive

Chicken little has spoken…again.

Posted by mark77 | Report as abusive

Your article references “An Inconvenient Truth,” which stated that the polar ice caps would be completely melted by 2015. (Only 6 more months to go!) You Malthusians have been making this silly argument since 1798. I guess you figure you’ll be right one of these centuries.

Posted by philster7656 | Report as abusive

Don’t worry… The NWO leader will make his appearance later this year. He and the pope will have all the answers to solve the worlds problems. He will be unlike anyone before him and will deceive billions of people. Those who are against him will be killed. This will be the start of the 70th Jubilee and the end of this age. Hope your ready!

Posted by kfor777 | Report as abusive

I won’t be here in 100 years to tell him he’s wrong, but he will be even in my absence.

Posted by oak1971 | Report as abusive

Oh the humanity! The dour sardonic pessimists are taking over! I am a civil engineer. My profession builds the quality of life. Environmentalism is steeped in pessimism. This article reminds me of the guy who used to stand on the milk carton at the corner of California and Montgomery in downtown San Francisco quietly holding the sign: “THE WORLD IS COMING TO AND END”. That was over 30 years ago.
Get a grip folks. The earth and humanity will carry on if we just remain optimistic and solve our problems logically instead of hysterically. Global warming is a hysterical hypothesis. Let’s work on the real problems that are confronting us first.

Posted by norcalguy101 | Report as abusive

A child born today stands a could chance of being eaten when the anti-Christ 0bama cuts the food off before the end of the year….

Posted by mayanah | Report as abusive

More global warming scam scare talk!

I’m bored of this crisis. Can I please have a different one?

Posted by MrSandlewould2U | Report as abusive

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMED!!!  !!!!!!!!!

Posted by robadude32 | Report as abusive

Overcrowding, denuded resources, and global climate change. Spoken by a true elitist. We’ve simply got to do something about ‘those’ people (who do not share his opinions). Try again, and this time try science and facts.

Posted by OneSolidOpinion | Report as abusive

hahahahhaha Any Article that even seriously mentions “Climate Change” ooooohhh
is less credible then The Onion……..

Posted by Bruce333 | Report as abusive

Pardon me for not giving up just yet on humanity. I’ll not base my thinking on an article by a guy who sources Rolling Stone, that bastion of truth, for the math and science.

Posted by AarontheCowboy | Report as abusive

OUR UNIVERSE IS DOOMED!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXU8w336 oGs

Posted by robadude32 | Report as abusive

Glad to be 75 and too old to worry or care.

Posted by StageCoachDrvr | Report as abusive

Unfortunately, “The only source of knowledge is experience.” (Albert Einstein)

Posted by UauS | Report as abusive

If anyone bothered to do a little research, they would see that this guy died in 2010. Well before all of the scams and temperature “adjusting” came to light. Besides, we all know that if you are an amazing expert in one field, that makes you one in every other……

Posted by thisguyisdead | Report as abusive

Oh no, were all going to die. Another doom and gloom global warming/climate change/climate disruption/climate chaos scenario that won’t come true.
Personally I’m more concerned about the end coming because Iran gets a bomb or something happen with russia.

Posted by Mike154415 | Report as abusive

Nice try. PLANT article!!!

Posted by johnnyleisure | Report as abusive

Ummm … why is a software engineer (David Auerbach) quoting a microbiologist who has been dead since 1995 (Frank Fenner) on climate science?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/26/world/ 26fenner.html?_r=0

I guess its because he could not find a living climate scientist to support his scare mongering (in fact the climate hasn’t warmed for the last couple decades) in spite of rising CO2 levels.

Posted by ActualScience | Report as abusive

And why would anyone listen to a microbiologist’s opinion about climate change?
That’s like going to your minister for legal advice.

Posted by ThommS | Report as abusive

this author sounds like another chicken little, the sky is falling

Posted by Happy216 | Report as abusive

Don’t know about all of humanity, but the USA will soon be nailed by a massive EMP attack that will thrust America into darkness and silence for many years….expect over 90% to perish.

Posted by ChainsawMcGerk | Report as abusive

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitl ock/2015/06/12/flashback-abcs-08-predict ion-nyc-under-water-climate-change-june# .VXt86jDkiBs.facebook

Posted by notyourson | Report as abusive

The bastards must REALLY want the tax revenue and control they would get from fighting fantom global warming.

Posted by AirFiero | Report as abusive

Yet another “the sky is falling” guy. I’ll bet him anything that the human race will survive another hundred years…just so we dont’ elect another disaster like o!

Posted by Bulgaricus | Report as abusive

Global Warming doesn’t exist. It’s just a big scam to raise revenue and close down industries the Left dislikes. Humanity has a greater chance of going down from an asteroid, pandemic, or WWIII.

Posted by GMPM | Report as abusive

Extremely irresponsible article. The Earth has warmed 1.2 degrees over the last 100 years, and the average lifespan doubled in that time. And never mind that they now have found that the Earth has been cooling the last 10 years. Where are all the hurricanes they predicted? Every prediction they have made has not happened. The Earth has been warmer than now, and we survived, and we will continue to survive.

Posted by MrReasonable1 | Report as abusive

I just noticed this whole article is based on one guy, Bill McKibben. HE IS NOT A SCIENTIST!!!!

Posted by MrReasonable1 | Report as abusive

Whistle blowers existed throughout history. From the ancient times until today, whistle blowers say that ‘misdeeds’ are what puts us at risk. Back in time, people were to avoid misdeeds to avoid the anger of God(s), and today for many there’s also a fear of various ‘scientific’ doom scenarios. In fact, however, throughout history the doom scenarios overwhelmingly did not come from God or nature. They came from our own, confused heads.

Posted by Radek.kow1 | Report as abusive

There was a time, not that long ago, when people prophesying the end of the world would be ignored and relegated to back alleys with their “The End Is Nigh” sandwich boards. Why are people giving these nuts any sort of credibility now?

Posted by IbSnooker | Report as abusive

Is this article a joke? How can anyone alive in 2015 possibly reference Bill Gore’s practically baseless documentary An Inconvenient Truth? REALLY?

For a better take on climate change, type scienceatcal_110319 into Google. Great lecture on the subject. ~13:30 for when he talks about Al Gore specifically.

This article should be killed with fire.

Posted by waat | Report as abusive

Oh no, the humanity. We will be doomed unless – more government. Hope for our very future rests with – more laws. If only we can – more taxes.

I’ll take one of the apocalypse options instead thanks.

Posted by Onyabike37 | Report as abusive

we have the technology to save the planet and turn the corner to a true renaissance,but with the crooks running the governments we have its pretty bleak

Posted by bitemeu | Report as abusive

using the data from the newest measurement units in the US, contained as a subset in their files, the NOAA data shows that temperatures over the past 10 years have actually COOLED slightly. Also analysis shows that humans account for between 2-3% of the total climate change impact. so even if we all stopped all industry and went back to an ISIS-like stone-age,97%+ of everything we are seeing would still be going on the same. finally, as has been pointed out on another comment, our rain-forests, grasslands, plants, and trees desperately need MORE C02, not less. The co-founder of Greenpeace-now a climate skeptic himself, says that our forests are on a starvation diet of C02, and that they need 2-3 times more C02 than what we have now. The trees produce oxygen so we can breath. so the picture is far more complex than what has been painted, and there is a bit of a Red Herring situation going on here…

Posted by UgandaDon | Report as abusive

Look… the US is in a 10 Year cooling trend. Scientist are having to cook their books to keep their Grant money and in the 1970’s we were going to all die from a new Ice Age. I do not know anything about Global Cooling or Global Warming what I do know is Money. There is a lot of money for people that position themselves in the new Green energy market and the only way for them to make their money is if we get rid of Fossil Fuels. Maybe their schemes work maybe not….Either way I put 25% of my 401K into Green Energy just in-case.

Posted by lgsbharv | Report as abusive

We cannot even find a cure for baldness. How can we predict the future?

Posted by cooldela | Report as abusive

Yes, Yes…and NYC will be under water by 2015.

Some HACK “scientist” must be waiting for his government grant now.

Posted by MidwestNorsk | Report as abusive

Any article that cites An Inconvenient Truth for its “facts” deserves to line the bottom of Tweety’s cage. Way to scare the kids!

Posted by NoKoolAid. | Report as abusive

Some needs to puts these doom Sayers in a mental hospital. None of their predictions have come true but that doesn’t stop them from making shriller and shriller pronouncements.

The global temps haven’t risen in 18 years, sea level rise is not accelerating, there is no tropospheric hot spot, the Arctic is not melting and the Antarctic has record high sea ice, yet we’ll all going die.

These are scientists they are advocates, worse they are advocates without evidence.

Posted by markmichaeels | Report as abusive

WOW ! What a genius?

“Humans will be extinct in 100 years”

You ignorant twit! A child born today will not see their 5th birthday. That is how little time “we” have left!

Posted by sothca | Report as abusive

Yawn. Every prediction by some type of “expert” is proved wrong. Sure, humanity may be extinct in 100 years, but not because of climate chamge. Study your geologic history. Cold tempertures and loss of CO2 result in more species extinctions than warm temps and CO2 abundance. Rather, Humanity will be extinct because intolerant, bigoted insane Islamofacists will nuke the planet!

Posted by MJ2020 | Report as abusive

WOW ! What a genius?

“Humans will be extinct in 100 years”

You ignorant twit! A child born today will not see their 5th birthday. That is how little time “we” have left!

Upon what do I base that?

500000 Coffins!

Posted by sothca | Report as abusive

I guess because I used the word “islamofacist” my comment needs approval, Reuters?

Posted by MJ2020 | Report as abusive

WOW ! What a genius?

“Humans will be extinct in 100 years”

You ignorant twit! A child born today will not see their 5th birthday. That is how little time “we” have left!

Upon what do I base that?

500000 Coffins!

Posted by sothca | Report as abusive

Oh, the author is a SOFTWARE engineer. For a moment I was worried he might actually know something about science and the physical world.

Nothing to see here, please move along.

Posted by JakeSpeed1986 | Report as abusive

The Earth will certainly survive humans so I do not see why Liberals or warmers care.

If our moral betters (Liberals and warmers) really cared about the Earth they would be driving SUVs continuously while eating beans and farting, growing cows, setting forests on fire, and doing any and all other activities that will speed of the global warming apocalypse.

Non-warmers care more about the Earth that warmers. LOL.

Posted by montysimmons | Report as abusive

It’s a “population bomb” No… wait… that was Erlich. He said in the 60’s we would all be dead by the 90’s. All these global alarmists die- but humanity lives on. Chicken Little’s have always been with us.

Posted by paganpink | Report as abusive

It’s a “population bomb” No… wait… that was Erlich. He said in the 60’s we would all be dead by the 90’s. All these global alarmists die- but humanity lives on. Chicken Little’s have always been with us.

Posted by paganpink | Report as abusive

It’s a “population bomb” No… wait… that was Erlich. He said in the 60’s we would all be dead by the 90’s. All these global alarmists die- but humanity lives on. Chicken Little’s have always been with us.

Posted by paganpink | Report as abusive

Who brought Malthus back from the dead? Oh well, he is wrong with this theory as he was with his last one.

Posted by PeterNOVA | Report as abusive

We’ll be wiped out due to climate change? Great! Since there is no climate change we should be around forever!

Posted by RLABruce | Report as abusive

Humanity ended some time ago. If you doubt, read the news.

Posted by Fredward | Report as abusive

“… for all countries to reduce carbon emissions to zero in the next 85 years…” Hmmmm. wouldn’t that involve killing all of the residents of those countries. After all, we exhale CO2 with every breath. Silly tree huggers.

Posted by Furp | Report as abusive

Dear David , You are writing a story based around fiction and you obviously believe that life resides in mater , since when could one find intelligence in matter so according to you we should live in fear , fear of disease fear of failure etc . There is a term called metaphysics this is the liberator for all mankind .

Posted by dstresen | Report as abusive

This is a central theme of Western Civilization. Every generation since Jesus thinks that they are the last.

Posted by rhwilhelm | Report as abusive

Another ‘scientist’ succumbs to the religion of Climate Change. The human race will have extinguished itself directly (via murders, disease, war, and/or terrorism) long before Climate Change effects are even measurable. But murders, disease, war and/or terrorism redistribute wealth and power to the strongest and/or most brutal. Climate Change moves wealth to the weakest – the ultimate progressive goal: Survival of the least fit. And there – exactly – is what will destroy humanity.

Posted by ounceoflogic | Report as abusive

“we need a Cold War-level of investment in research into new technologies to mitigate the coming effects of global warming.”

YES!!! That’s the answer! That’s always the answer. The bottom line is always that we need to spend more taxpayer dollars funding the “scientists” (read charlatans) who are pushing the global warming hoax, so that they can publish more junk science to prove that we need to spend more money funding their “research.”

Posted by Jeff_In_GA | Report as abusive

Another Chicken Little screaming that the world will end. But we will all be saved if we just tax people more.

Posted by Corning22 | Report as abusive

yes, “scientists” once all agreed that the earth was both flat and the center of the universe.
“scientist” once all agreed that traveling faster than 24 miles per hour (when trains were first introduced) everyone would suffocate as the air was pushed out of the way
“scientists” once all agreed that the atom was the smallest perticle
“scientists” once all agreed that because of man made pollution we were going to enter an ice age (the 70’s)
and now “scientists” all agree (except for those thousands of “fringe type” scientists) that we are responsible for and heading into unstoppable globull warming (and wasn’t the east coast already supposed to be underwater?)

Posted by VascoDeGama | Report as abusive

yes, “scientists” once all agreed that the earth was both flat and the center of the universe.
“scientist” once all agreed that traveling faster than 24 miles per hour (when trains were first introduced) everyone would suffocate as the air was pushed out of the way
“scientists” once all agreed that the atom was the smallest perticle
“scientists” once all agreed that because of man made pollution we were going to enter an ice age (the 70’s)
and now “scientists” all agree (except for those thousands of “fringe type” scientists) that we are responsible for and heading into unstoppable globull warming (and wasn’t the east coast already supposed to be underwater?)

Posted by VascoDeGama | Report as abusive

A child born today may witness the Rapture. Get ready thank Jesus for dying on the cross for your sins, invite Him in to your life and turn from your sins, ask forgiveness when you fall.

Posted by DashRiprock | Report as abusive

IMO, Global Warming has already been disproved by the scientific methods of local thermometers reading and real historical temperature databases. Many others already stated: the alarmist has yet to provide concrete proof to back up their claims. 2015 Feburary at Southern ontario was the coldest ever in 10 years, consistenly below 30 celsius.

Those who buy into the Global warming scare better start using their own brain and do their own scientific research, lest they become brainless lemmings.

Posted by MadnerT | Report as abusive

Headline true only if he/she is the last last person alive. Unless they are a bunch of the same sex, then you could predict the end of humanity sooner. Then again, he/she probably will not see the end of humanity.

Posted by twilliam12 | Report as abusive

A child born today may live to see the end to Chicken Little.

Posted by jackak | Report as abusive

Love the part about how because the predictions of global doom by now have not come true, that means we’re in worse shape than they ever thought. Talk about tortured logic.

Posted by DaveSMN | Report as abusive

You can always tell when a Reuters article gets linked to some right-wing echo chamber by the sheer volume of repeated comments that begin showing up. It’s kind of an interesting phenomenon that shines the light on a delusional sub-genre of the internet, a little silo crazy that normally goes unnoticed by the masses.

Posted by pyradius | Report as abusive

Given that the human race could have been wiped out at any time by a rogue asteroid or a massive caldera blowing its top, I believe that a child born at ANY time may live to see humanity’s end.

What an idiotic headline.

As for anthropogenic global warming, there has been enough evidence produced to demonstrate, without a doubt, that the data supporting AGW is a load of hogwash. Corruption, deception, political and personal agendas, and an absolute ignorance of the Scientific Method are all hallmarks of the AGW farce.

Posted by CK2 | Report as abusive

This is a very irresponsible article. All of the dire predictions in this article are based on one person, Bill McKibben. He is not a scientist!

Posted by MrReasonable1 | Report as abusive

If his assumptions are correct given the earths population the die off of humanity should have started already. The population is not going to disappear in one day or even one year if he is correct. Take this kind of doomsday prophecy with much skepticism.

Posted by TZAZ | Report as abusive

I clicked on this expecting a news story and instead got a commentary, and calling the primary climate activist in the world, Bill McKibben a reporter really insults your readers intelligence. This extreme blurring of the lines between reporting and commentary destroys Reuters credibility.

Posted by KBRM | Report as abusive

David Auerbach writes:

“When the G7 called on Monday for all countries to reduce carbon emissions to zero in the next 85 years, the scientific reaction was unanimous: That’s far too late.”

That’s an astonishing and unbelievable statement.

Who, specifically, in the scientific community was asked for their reaction, what are their credentials making them experts in atmospheric science, and what specifically did they say?

A unanimous response across a sample of those immediately available for questioning doesn’t mean the result is statistically significant (i.e. credible) with respect to overall scientific opinion within that field of research.

Was this ‘poll’ or ‘survey’ conducted in a cocktail lounge or at a street corner?

Or, was this a proper, scientific poll conducted with a random sample of qualified scientists from research institutes around the world?

Please provide a link to the polling report.

Posted by Rev_Dean_Drone | Report as abusive

What the author fails to mention is the elephant in the room. Right now globally we are expending the capital we need to address this problem. Right now that capital is being directed to military and military technology which is hastening the decline of our species. Until we stop working against each other, until we realize that destroying our enemies is destroying us, we will not be able to shift these precious resources to directly attack the problem. Mankind needs to grow up.

Posted by Waywuwei | Report as abusive

My much bigger fear is that there are very rich and very powerful people in this world sharing your rock certainty of hopeless doom. Someone, soon, will unleash death on a mass scale to wipe out millions/billions in order to “weed the garden”. The misanthropes who sincerely want the dumb people and useless eaters to disappear see this as justifiable.

The hopeless and Godless have been setting dates as much as the misguided Christians…with as much accuracy.

Posted by DenierDave | Report as abusive

This won’t happen. Civilization might fall and there might be a massive dye off of people but humans will not become extinct, there’s just too many of us for that to happen in 100 years.

Posted by saa001 | Report as abusive

The US has already achieved a significant REDUCTION in CO2 emission, through substitution of clean burning natural gas for coal, which generates twice the CO2 per KWh produced. This was done with no government spending. Meanwhile billions invested by taxpayers in renewable energy has had a negligible impact. So the environmental lobby does everything possible to prevent this conversion.

Four of the top US climate scientists publicly urged a major effort to convert directly to nuclear power. stating that a belief in solar energy was akin to a belief in the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy, and that risks with nuclear power were less than the risks of global warming. The response of the global warming advocates was to declare them heretics for contradicting orthodoxy.

Posted by RobS-R | Report as abusive

http://www.global-warming-forecasts.com/ 2015-climate-change-global-warming-2015. php

Here is a list of many of the crazy predictions made by the warmists over the years for 2015. It’s hilarious. Obviously, none of them have come true. The warmists are the modern day flat earth society. No amount of evidence will convince them that manmade GW does not exist because the goal is worldwide socialism. It has nothing to do with the environment.

Posted by PeeboTyson | Report as abusive

Is frank fenner a close freind of paul r. ehrlich stanford; who said in 2000 the population bomb will go off?!

Liberal fear mongering idoits!!!

Posted by Amadgenius | Report as abusive

Human intelligence is endlessly fascinating. There is good reason to believe that artistic talent is genetically associated with schizophrenia. Fenner demonstrates what I have long suspected: high intelligence is associated with megalomania. Fenner is an eminent virologist but seems utterly ignorant of the astoundingly poor record of scientists generally in the area of doomsday predictions. If the past is a guide to the future, rising global income will ameliorate population increase and global warming trends until technological advances generate permanent remedies that are also affordable. However, apocalyptic scenarios seem to satisfy a primitive psychological need among humans across all cultures so I suspect, like the poor, the Frank Fenners will be with us always.

Posted by Mo_Gravy | Report as abusive

The human appetite for apocalyptic claptrap is matched only by the human ability to not recall that every end of the world prediction has been phony, and typically cynically false. That we still accord any respect at all to purveyors of this sort of doom and gloom trash is astounding.

Posted by hunterson | Report as abusive

Just what we need, more propaganda from a Globullshevik.

Posted by SteveTobe | Report as abusive

When I read “For years now, we have heard that we are at a tipping point. Al Gore warned us in An Inconvenient Truth” that was enough for me to stop reading. When the inventor of the Internet talks, reasonable people change the channel.

Posted by ConvenientLie | Report as abusive

Indeed, according to ‘settled science’ glaciers should be in New York by now, per the 1970s. And, oh yes, according to settled science in 2005 NY should be under water by now.

Is the climate changing? Beats me.

But nobody can say how ‘carbon taxes’ are going to save the planet.

Posted by MrHunter123 | Report as abusive

to keep so2 levels in check…..the best way is to plant more n more trees & at the same time switch to clean energy rather then fossil fuels

Posted by Rishav20193 | Report as abusive

Instead of looking at carbon dioxide as a poison why not take a closer look at toxic herbicides and pesticides that degrade soil health.

This is one reason why our soils can’t pull in enough long-term carbon as humus and organic matter.

Posted by soilrestorer | Report as abusive

Total rubbish.

An article based on fantasy and full of lies.

Posted by Rourk77 | Report as abusive

Is this the 1970’s all over again? THE WORLD IS COMING TO AN END!!! At least this time the hysterical fool had the wherewithal to make his prediction far out enough to where time and reality won’t prove him wrong too quickly. What I love about pathetic rants like this is that they fail utterly to factor in humanity’s ability to adapt to almost any condition. Does he not realize that everyone knows humans can adapt and the ability to do so has been one of humanity’s evolutionary advantage over the past 400,000 years? The fact that he claims humanity will be EXTINCT irrespective of our long history of survival in almost any environment is something of a smoking gun revealing his true agenda. This is an intellectually vapid propaganda piece with very little redeeming value. Humanity will be just fine.

Posted by Rhadagastt | Report as abusive

By the way, McKibben is a self-confessed fraud, lying about being a Native American. H s not mat expert. He is an alarmist as well as an opportunist making a fortune off of climate fear.

Posted by hunterson | Report as abusive

humans will be extinct by great conflict (war) in trying to provide more out of already limited resources and possibilities, the existence may be postponed jest for a while, already is evident that humans are not capable to adopt standards of understanding even if having, accepting less, but looking always for solutions to win the next battle, and there is less and less space for any battle in out near future.
Meaning the end to all.

Posted by miro12 | Report as abusive

More global warming Chicken Littleism. Despite real science showing that the global warming models are wildly inaccurate, and that no warming has in fact been measured over the past 20 years, these fanatics persist in fear-mongering for the sake of instituting control over the global collective. The hive-mind thinking and hubris of the left never ceases to amaze me.

Posted by UncleSoros | Report as abusive

Mankind has survived much worse. The Toba super eruption 70,000 years ago. Research suggests as few as 2,000 humans were left alive by the eruption and its after effects. Not to mention the last Ice Age.

Posted by neb56 | Report as abusive

Messrs. Auerbach and Fenner: Don’t worry, we’ll never get to see your supposed CO2 induced climate disaster. Long before that we will have a world-wide nuclear holocaust thanks in large part to President Obumbler and his Iran/Radical Islam policies. And all your fretting over “climate change, CO2 emissions, warming, cooling, bla, bla, bla,” will all seem like pointless and trivial child’s talk compared to the nuclear winter we’ll suffer. When the nuclear dust finally settles, and if you survive, you won’t be worrying about over-population and CO2 levels. You’ll be scrounging for something to eat, and you’ll long for the good old days when the earth was 1 or 2 degrees “too hot,” but we had comfortable lives with plenty to eat.

Posted by tonyloaf | Report as abusive

Absolute utter nonsense.

Posted by IanFanafi | Report as abusive

This is a new low, even for Global Warming Alarmism.

Posted by StephenA | Report as abusive

Yes just give control over we the elitist left where we can decide on termination of the lives of the old , the unborn, the 15 year olds , the ill , those who resist our Fascist political goals of complete control of every facet of your existence if we allow you to exist.
We the Uber power mad Socialist fascist will decide where you live, what you eat , how much warmth or cold you must tolerate, what words you call utter and what thoughts you may have.
We the gods will make all there decision for the greater good a defined by we the gods and we at great sacrifice will have to carry the burden of living as royalty.
What claptrap bovine excrement this creek is spreading and to think that the crowned heads of European leadership and Obama and the Pope swallow this garbage can only be explained by their design that they shall be excluded from the totalitarian constraints as we mere mortals are saved from the exercise of free will.

Posted by marxengles1848 | Report as abusive

Where is the science ,the method of analysis , that can be reviewed.
Their models are fed with lies and politics and devoid of truth.
The newly elected Pope is as phony as the pretender on the United States throne. Communist all.

Posted by marxengles1848 | Report as abusive

Cue the next world war…

I’ve read before that the Bilderberg Group believes the ideal WORLD population is 100 million…

Posted by bobbybilly | Report as abusive

There is clearly interest in this topic by commenters who I have never seen on this site before. Macedonian is the only familiar name, and I am with him. Perhaps once we are gone an intelligent life form can develop.

Posted by brotherkenny4 | Report as abusive

Progressives will finally be extinct!

Posted by RexReed | Report as abusive

If a child should be so lucky.

Posted by jeffuehrer | Report as abusive

The reports of my demise have been greatly exaggerated. The sky is falling. It is the end of days. Going home and wait for the Rapture

Posted by MrReason | Report as abusive

People are like cockroaches, you will never get rid of them all. It is pretty clear that the Earth’s population is at an unsustainable level and we may suffer significant local die-offs or even a wide scale one but extinction-not gonna happen. Malthus was right!

Posted by dnarex1 | Report as abusive

I wonder which letter of the word ”Extinction” the most do not understand?! We have to reduce CO2 concentrations, that needs an enormous package of changes to be realized in a very short time, like this had to happen many years ago already ! The World’s industrial activities must drastically change, starting from Now Today! Stop all the unnecessary and destructive activities like, Causes and benefits, click on main article to see The Pro and Contras !
1 Causes
1.1 Technology
1.2 Agriculture
1.2.1 Fishing
1.2.2 Irrigation
1.2.3 Agricultural land loss and soil erosion
1.2.4 Meat production
1.2.5 Palm oil
1.3 Introductions and invasive species
1.4 Energy industry
1.4.1 Biodiesel
1.4.2 Coal mining and burning
1.4.3 Electricity generation
1.4.4 Nuclear power
1.4.5 Oil shale industry
1.4.6 Petroleum
1.4.7 Reservoirs
1.4.8 Wind power
1.5 Manufactured products
1.5.1 Cleaning agents
1.5.2 Nanotechnology
1.5.3 Leather
1.5.4 Paint
1.5.5 Paper
1.5.6 Pesticides
1.5.7 Pharmaceuticals and personal care products
1.6 Mining
1.7 Transport
1.7.1 Aviation
1.7.2 Roads
1.7.3 Shipping
1.8 War
2 Effects
2.1 Biodiversity
2.2 Coral reefs
2.3 Carbon cycle
2.4 Nitrogen cycle
2.5 Effects on human health
3 See also
4 References
4.1 Notes
4.2 Further reading
5 External links
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…/Human_imp act_on_the_environment

Posted by CescoYahoo | Report as abusive

Have you experienced reading about a big news item and then never hear about again and wondered what ever happened?

I feel the same way with Mr. Auerbach’s article. There are so many doomsday predictions, like this one here and I wonder, what happened to previous predictions:

1. On June 12, 2008, ABC asked “Are we living in the last century of our civilization?” with dire predictions to start in 2015… none of them materialized!
2. Starting on January 11, 1970, we were told that a new ice age was upon us (WP), LATimes (1/15/70). This continued with Time Magazine, who in 6/24/74 announced “Another Ice Age?. In 11/14/79, CSM announced “New Ice Age almost upon us?.
3. We also have Paul Erlich, who in 1968 forecasted that hundreds of millions will starve to death…
There were many other predictions, none materialized.
Perhps Mr. Auerbach, instead of adding to the scientific alarm bin, now about climate change, would like to explain to us the failed predictions, including the Himalaya’s glacier melting, which some have qualified as a fraud.
Please do not call me a denier… I am just confused. By the way, many of those involved in the “ice age” fiasco are now propagandist in the climate change movement.

Posted by rvmartinez | Report as abusive

What absolute bs.

Posted by TxVet | Report as abusive

The problem is OVERPOPULATION.
We need a Fertility rate of 1% or less. Two choices: 1) mandatory contraception and death with dignity. 2) Famine, drout, war, disease and economic ruin. Let’s get to work!

Posted by Oldiejjf | Report as abusive

Are these the same scientists who predicted the polar ice caps would be melted by now?

Posted by DarkStarAz | Report as abusive

Socialist Alarmist BS—Quick! Become Socialist, Make us your Dictators or we are all gonna DIE! Socialists using the Environment as a front—They get ALL the control over our lives they want. The environment be damned! CONTROL is the game.

Socializing is more harmful to the environment than Capitalism ever was. Look at the mess they made in east Europe.—-And they will put you in jail if you complain. Don’t fall this nonsense.

Posted by TomRay | Report as abusive

We have less than 100 years, judgement is at the foot of every nation; America is falling and wont be able to get back up; America was a blessed nation; this nation has rejected God ! Yes there is a remnant who still follow; I am your witness today that America is falling, a economic crash is coming soon, christian people will be hunted down and killed. AMERICA, wake up ! Look around outside of your small little world. You ALL are getting ready to loose everything you have worked so hard for. The enemies of America and God are in control of this nation; America was given a lawless leader because we including the church has rejected His laws in exchange for man’s law.

Posted by glousterlynn63 | Report as abusive

I took about ten minutes out of my life to compose a detailed rebuttal to this article, and viola! — My entire composition disappeared into oblivion!!
I was as polite as can be, yet my comment goes unpublished — WHY???

Posted by MyCatFooed | Report as abusive

This is like NY city would be underwater in 1984!

Posted by iamasian | Report as abusive

I would like to suggest these extremists read the book “Chicken Little”

Posted by RNN08 | Report as abusive

not to fret. nuclear holocaust is on the horizon. some chest thumper will back himself into a corner, and his only way out is to blow the s**t up. the united states has armed the world. end result, we get happy meals for less than three bucks. don’t worry, be happy….

Posted by octodad | Report as abusive

It is unfortunate that economist Dr. Julian Simon of the Univ of Illinois Champagne-Urbana is no longer alive. He did much research into this field of study. He was convinced, he convinced me that planet earth is not overpopulated. His books are more in concert with the Biblical idea that humanity has the Creator’s permission the fill the earth with children.
That the pursue resources to feed, house, clothe, and employ humanity is morally upright. Thomas R Malthus got his asinine ideas from the Italian Ortes who was telling Oligarchical lies to deceive and rob the human race of your God given right to inherit the earth from lying environmenalists.

Posted by denniswr | Report as abusive

Anyone ever read “Chicken Little”?

Posted by RNN08 | Report as abusive

Al Gore predicted north pole ice cap would be gone by 2013. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsioIw4b vzI

Posted by RobertFisher | Report as abusive

“Further, there’s no evidence of any sort that mankind is self-absorbed, stimulus-addicted and short-sighted. None whatsoever.” .. Ditto naughtmoses

Posted by takeapill | Report as abusive

A lot of people here have their heads up a small dark place.

Posted by takeapill | Report as abusive

Climate change is another liberal hoax. Not only do they want to take our guns, but now they want to take our cars.

Posted by cdherz | Report as abusive

Frank Fenner, the famous Australian virologist, has nothing to contribute with respect to predictions about the demise of man because
1) his expertise in virology is as relevant to this problem as the expertise of a petroleum engineer. I expect we would not take the opinions of a petroleum engineer very seriously.
2) Professor Fenner died 5 years ago, and is not present to validate any claims made by the reporter who made this claim.

I suspect that Reuters is victim of a hoax.

Posted by RobS-R | Report as abusive

Better chance at nuclear war ending us before we get that far. NATO keeps surrounding Russia, dabbling in destabilizing the Middle East, pushing China. Just a matter of time then the population will decline due to war. Pretty much making this article moot. Issac Asimov wrote a “Choice of Catastrophes” back I believe in the 1980’s.

Posted by americangrizzly | Report as abusive

Better chance at nuclear war ending us before we get that far. NATO keeps surrounding Russia, dabbling in destabilizing the Middle East, pushing China. Just a matter of time then the population will decline due to war. Pretty much making this article moot. Issac Asimov wrote a “Choice of Catastrophes” back I believe in the 1980’s.

Posted by americangrizzly | Report as abusive

Better chance at nuclear war ending us before we get that far. NATO keeps surrounding Russia, dabbling in destabilizing the Middle East, pushing China. Just a matter of time then the population will decline due to war. Pretty much making this article moot. Issac Asimov wrote a “Choice of Catastrophes” back I believe in the 1980’s.

Posted by americangrizzly | Report as abusive

Better chance at nuclear war ending us before we get that far. NATO keeps surrounding Russia, dabbling in destabilizing the Middle East, pushing China. Just a matter of time then the population will decline due to war. Pretty much making this article moot. Issac Asimov wrote a “Choice of Catastrophes” back I believe in the 1980’s.

Posted by americangrizzly | Report as abusive

Better chance at nuclear war ending us before we get that far. NATO keeps surrounding Russia, dabbling in destabilizing the Middle East, pushing China. Just a matter of time then the population will decline due to war. Pretty much making this article moot. Issac Asimov wrote a “Choice of Catastrophes” back I believe in the 1980’s.

Posted by americangrizzly | Report as abusive

Better chance at nuclear war ending us before we get that far. NATO keeps surrounding Russia, dabbling in destabilizing the Middle East, pushing China. Just a matter of time then the population will decline due to war. Pretty much making this article moot. Issac Asimov wrote a “Choice of Catastrophes” back I believe in the 1980’s.

Posted by americangrizzly | Report as abusive

Better chance at nuclear war ending us before we get that far. NATO keeps surrounding Russia, dabbling in destabilizing the Middle East, pushing China. Just a matter of time then the population will decline due to war. Pretty much making this article moot. Issac Asimov wrote a “Choice of Catastrophes” back I believe in the 1980’s.

Posted by americangrizzly | Report as abusive

Better chance at nuclear war ending us before we get that far. NATO keeps surrounding Russia, dabbling in destabilizing the Middle East, pushing China. Just a matter of time then the population will decline due to war. Pretty much making this article moot. Issac Asimov wrote a “Choice of Catastrophes” back I believe in the 1980’s.

Posted by americangrizzly | Report as abusive

Better chance at nuclear war ending us before we get that far. NATO keeps surrounding Russia, dabbling in destabilizing the Middle East, pushing China. Just a matter of time then the population will decline due to war. Pretty much making this article moot. Issac Asimov wrote a “Choice of Catastrophes” back I believe in the 1980’s.

Posted by americangrizzly | Report as abusive

First we need to kill off Communism, which is all this is about, if we want to save the planet. Only capitalism can save us, capitalism, freedom, innovation. Communism never works.

Posted by AverageJoe_MN | Report as abusive

An absolutely ridiculous article. Another Environmental Fear Mongering piece that simply distorts the science and factual data. The headline is ridiculous for claiming a child born today will see the end of humanity. The child is a human, so to end humanity would, by necessity, have that child dead. These people have been claiming the end of the world for centuries. It’s all BS.

Posted by HLEAHCIMH | Report as abusive

Fenner has been dead for FIVE YEARS! His comments were directed to overuse of resources, not global warming, and were made before he died. Auerbach and Reuters are a victim of a hoax.

Posted by RobS-R | Report as abusive

Well, I guess those of us already nearing the final phase of our lives can take some perverse pleasure in knowing that we won’t be missing much. It’s sad, however, that our grandchildren won’t have much to look forward to.

Posted by JamesRogersBush | Report as abusive

Plant more trees.

Posted by Huhulea | Report as abusive

Short form? “More Mush from the Wimps”

Posted by Vanderleun | Report as abusive

So Cairo never had a sand storm before?
I’m so glad a microbiologist is such an expert on global climate change. AKA Global warming AKA Global cooling.

Posted by Ghostmaker | Report as abusive

I’d like to know if Al Gore walks the walk. He is a multi-millionaire now. How many residences does he own and how big are they? Private jets?

Posted by MarkMulligan | Report as abusive

The idea that “climate change” is going to eradicate life from the planet is alarmist poppycock. If you totally eliminated fossil fuels you would see very little difference in the climate. People who believe in this theory should read a little history. Climate change is a given, and the planet has been much warmer at other times when there were no SUV’s around to blame. There are things which may eventually threaten survival, but that’s not one of them. Terrorists with nuclear weapons, the withdrawal of the U.S. from the world stage, Russia’s aggressive behavior, the rise of China, the population decline in western nations (and over-population in poor ones), increasing immorality and drug use–these are all things that are real threats. You’re not going to see the end of humanity unless you have something like an all-out nuclear war, but you could have a world you wouldn’t want to live in.

Posted by texaslass | Report as abusive

Well the dinosaurs were wiped out and they were even bigger and nastier than humans. The usual theory is that humans won’t be wiped out, because humans are “smart”.

But “smart” usually means that someone wants to sell you an overpriced product that will make your life more complicated.

Posted by nose2066 | Report as abusive

An idiotic claim. CO2 is not a pollutant, and the most like climate change that will give humanity trouble will be the next continental glaciation, which is overdue.

Posted by medb | Report as abusive

The timeline may be accurate but the chances are better for nuclear holocaust than climate change.

Posted by BillJax | Report as abusive

Like George Carlin said, the earth isn’t going anywhere…we are! Thanks so-called leaders and insatiable consumers

Posted by josep1950 | Report as abusive

Wait…did this guy really give credence to Al Gore’s ‘movie’? No, seriously, did he? Hahahahahahahaha!

Posted by yup12345 | Report as abusive

I don’t know about human extinction in 100 years. I suspect that time frame may be a bit alarmist. However, I do believe that we do need to reverse much of the destructive behaviors that are compromising our environment. Deforestation, pollution, large quantities of fossil fuels emitted into the atmosphere, over-fishing, illegal hunting and poaching, poor land use and water use planning, constant conflict-all of these need to be addresses if all living inhabitants of this planet are to have a sustainable future. Whether 100 years or 1,000 years, the sooner we reverse these man-made behaviors,the slower the doomsday clock will tick, at least from man-made causes.

Posted by itsjustmike | Report as abusive

What a sad precept in the headline. Where is the optimism we need to succeed? Not in the headline, apparently. Just propagate the myth of the end.

Posted by norcalguy101 | Report as abusive

A child born today may live to see humanity’s end? I doubt that very much. Deplorable doom-laden scaremongering alarmism – anything to sell a newspaper, or in this case sell the advertising on the page. Absolute twaddle.

Posted by Pablo_Picayune | Report as abusive

…but no mention of new nuclear energy. This is odd, since existing nuclear is our only source of grid-stable low-carbon energy.

Posted by Fordiman | Report as abusive

@UncleSoros

”…and that no warming has in fact been measured over the past 20 years…”

Not true. Educate yourself: http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-w arming-stopped-in-1998.htm

Posted by star-affinity | Report as abusive

Great photo, excellent article … but where is the mention of contraception? Oh, I forgot. Francis doesn’t approve it.

Posted by LolaHeavey | Report as abusive

At this point I think the climate denial funding group has won. They have discredited scientists and created the fiction that climate denial is a political, not a scientific problem. That it’s opinion, not math. Nothing we can do can prevent the 2 degree rise, and I don’t think we can do enough to prevent the 5 degree increase, so the 6 degree target, to me, is very likely. Our children will experience the truth at the end of their lives, their grandchildren, those that survive, will demonize our generation. I know in my heart that humanity will survive, but not before being collectively spanked by Mother Nature.

Posted by DennisMyers | Report as abusive

Um, how about we stop breeding like Tribbles in the quadrotriticale, or am I making too much sense?

Posted by tiggrrrsf | Report as abusive

It’s bigger than any of us. This life on earth is changing dramatically.
It’s already completely irreversible.

Posted by mark99 | Report as abusive

best quotes ever
And in the end, we were all just humans.. drunk on the idea that love, only love, could heal our brokenness.
F. Scott Fitzgerald

Posted by Mikij | Report as abusive

Reading the comments on this makes me think the end of humanity would be a good start. Maybe the Coleopterans will be better people.

Posted by bblackmoor | Report as abusive

I sure go miss the 80s, when at least we could *mention* population growth as a primary driver.

We are going to need to get the population below the carrying capacity. There are several ways to do that: 1) disaster-generated mass death followed by miserable subsistence level living (the end result of what we are doing now), 10 billion people living with such efficiency that we are still below the carrying capacity (a pipe dream), or voluntary reduction in population combined with increased carbon efficiency. That last option is the humane and achievable course of action, but requires global coordination, and universal education and rights over reproductive health care for women (the two keys to population reduction).

Posted by isaidhi | Report as abusive