Has humanity experienced a reset?

[BearGrounds]

The question we need to ask ourselves.....if there is a major cleansing of the world. Could we all live without electricity and everyday comforts? Could we survive in a harsher social climate? The positives is the bullshit of work and politics is gone...the stresses of bills and the negative impacts of materialism....gone. I think some of us would still have homes, albeit, it is now more like a shelter from the weather without heat and AC. We may have our clothes...Food is an issue. Clean water can be figured out. Eventually we would have to wipe our asses with leaves. Women would need to use old newspaper for mentstrual issues. I might be ok with it.

Our accumulated knowledge base would be lost, and regressive evolution would likely occur. Humans would have to revert back to hunter gatherers until they could manage to successfully farm crops again.

What happened to our once high civilization would be just a story passed down through generations, eventually becoming myth.

The savages that still live tribal lives would stand the best chance at surviving. Meaning humanity would likely be sprouting again from those that do not even understand modern technology, mathematics, can't read or write, etc.

Square one.

 

[Phlog]

I think it's plausible and that there is some evidence that opens it up as a possibility.

I don't think advanced is the right word as to me that denotes more current civilisation. I would imagine they were pre industrial, probably stone age.

 

[Phlog]

I wonder if ancient chicks gave out ancient iPads.

 

[andnowweknow]

Our accumulated knowledge base would be lost, and regressive evolution would likely occur. Humans would have to revert back to hunter gatherers until they could manage to successfully farm crops again.

What happened to our once high civilization would be just a story passed down through generations, eventually becoming myth.

The savages that still live tribal lives would stand the best chance at surviving. Meaning humanity would likely be sprouting again from those that do not even understand modern technology, mathematics, can't read or write, etc.

Square one.

Most people don't give enough thought to the real impact of accumulated learning. It's the most defining characteristic separating us from the other intelligent animals on the planet.

We are standing on the shoulders of giants...

Its most familiar expression in English is by Isaac Newton in 1675 in reference to society's lauding of his intellectual prowess: "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."

The attribution to Bernard of Chartres is due to John of Salisbury. In 1159, John wrote in his Metalogicon: "Bernard of Chartres used to compare us to dwarfs perched on the shoulders of giants. He pointed out that we see more and farther than our predecessors, not because we have keener vision or greater height, but because we are lifted up and borne aloft on their gigantic stature."

 

[dog y]

I figure that we are currently at peak technology in human history.
We have materials that are much longer lasting than whatever we find around and below the earth and oceans. If plastic had been discovered/used back whenever, we surely would have found evidence by now.

 

[DoomPatrol]

Pretty sure this thread has been done before, but whatever, I'm running it back for anyone that wants to discuss it. Was there once a high civilization on Earth that was wiped out by cataclysm, war, or some other such calamity?



Age-old texts, such as the Mahabharata, talk of ancient cities, floods, and ancient wars. Multiple cultures have flood myths. Plato spoke of Atlantis in his dialogues. Etc. There are many written myths that describe or allude to a high civilization existing in our distant past.

Myths aside, there are also many mysterious ancient sites that seem to indicate a level of sophistication beyond what has been commonly accepted, such as Gobekli Tepe and the Great Pyramid/The Sphinx. Another example would be the ancient Mesoamerican site Teotihuacán, whose builders are still an unknown (the Aztecs merely stumbled upon its ruins and inhabited it).

So what do you think, is it possible that our historical progression has not been as linear as has been commonly asserted/accepted? Could we have, at one point, been significantly more advanced than current mainstream theories suggest, however got knocked back down to square one, only to have to rise up again to where we are now?

Also, what would happen to our civilization if we were to experience a global catastrophe today? How much would remain, and how would we recover if only small pockets survived?

The flood myths are directly tied to the fact that 80% of the world's population lives within a few miles of the ocean or major rivers. Shit just think about the last decade. How many huge hurricanes and tsunamis have hit major population centers? The 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami hit shores and killed just under 300,000 people. Think about that. In the age of communication and technology, we still got rocked by a major tsunami out of nowhere. That's with 21st century resources. Tsunamis have always been around the planet.

So go back into history and think about the experiences of ancient man. Living with no electricity and limited communication, these people lived right on top of the shore lines because they had to be close to water. So they had tons of huge floods and destructive weather patterns in their lives. Naturally the bad ones make it into their society as stories and myths.

Evolution isn't ever linear. At several points in human history, we've had some serious setbacks. So yes, I think there has been many times where entire societies were wiped from the map. I'm sure tons of history has been lost. I don't think there's been any major scientific losses or losses of basic technological knowledge. Maybe a few smaller losses here and there, but scientific discovery is hard to stifle. There's often many people working on similar ideas throughout globe simultaneously so if one person/country halts, another is still working on it.

I don't foresee any major worldwide catastrophe in our near future. I'm sure at some point, we'll have a few natural disasters that will set us back, but I don't think anything that's truly catastrophic will occur. Maybe I'm an optimist, but I think we'll make it past the lifespan of Earth. I think we'll eventually solve the space travel distance problem with some trippy physics, and we'll start expanding into the cosmos. Who knows what our future will bring. I just don't think it'll bring some destruction of society. Humans have had a pretty good run so far and we have the knowledge and technology to bring ourselves back from nearly any major disaster. We can already grow crops indoors without natural lighting and food. We can clean dirty air and water. We have the ability to regular temperatures of our environment. And we have the ability to look out into space and find any potential civilization ending objects heading our direction. I presume that we'll be able to solve that problem by the time one actually shows up.

My only regret is having been born before we are truly out among the stars. I would have loved to travel the cosmos (Who wouldnt?)

 

[andnowweknow]

The flood myths are directly tied to the fact that 80% of the world's population lives within a few miles of the ocean or major rivers. Shit just think about the last decade. How many huge hurricanes and tsunamis have hit major population centers? The 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami hit shores and killed just under 300,000 people. Think about that. In the age of communication and technology, we still got rocked by a major tsunami out of nowhere. That's with 21st century resources. Tsunamis have always been around the planet.

So go back into history and think about the experiences of ancient man. Living with no electricity and limited communication, these people lived right on top of the shore lines because they had to be close to water. So they had tons of huge floods and destructive weather patterns in their lives. Naturally the bad ones make it into their society as stories and myths.

Evolution isn't ever linear. At several points in human history, we've had some serious setbacks. So yes, I think there has been many times where entire societies were wiped from the map. I'm sure tons of history has been lost. I don't think there's been any major scientific losses or losses of basic technological knowledge. Maybe a few smaller losses here and there, but scientific discovery is hard to stifle. There's often many people working on similar ideas throughout globe simultaneously so if one person/country halts, another is still working on it.

I don't foresee any major worldwide catastrophe in our near future. I'm sure at some point, we'll have a few natural disasters that will set us back, but I don't think anything that's truly catastrophic will occur. Maybe I'm an optimist, but I think we'll make it past the lifespan of Earth. I think we'll eventually solve the space travel distance problem with some trippy physics, and we'll start expanding into the cosmos. Who knows what our future will bring. I just don't think it'll bring some destruction of society. Humans have had a pretty good run so far and we have the knowledge and technology to bring ourselves back from nearly any major disaster. We can already grow crops indoors without natural lighting and food. We can clean dirty air and water. We have the ability to regular temperatures of our environment. And we have the ability to look out into space and find any potential civilization ending objects heading our direction. I presume that we'll be able to solve that problem by the time one actually shows up.

My only regret is having been born before we are truly out among the stars. I would have loved to travel the cosmos (Who wouldnt?)

Nothing out in left field in your post, but...

If I were you, I'd spend a bit of time pondering the fact that the event, whatever you choose to believe it was, that brought on the Younger Dryas 12.8k years before present to 11.6k ybp was the single most extreme climate change event since modern humans arrived on the scene (by orders of magnitude) and probably the most extreme over the last 2 million years...responsible in large part (if not completely) for the extinction of half of the world's megafauna.

This event literally occurred in the backyard of what we call history. If that happened to the other megafauna, what do you think happened to us and any cultural advancement that may have possibly been under way for thousands of years prior?

We are at least 200k years old in modern form. Does it really make sense to you that there wouldn't have been significant advancement at multiple points within that time period given how far we have come since modern "history" began circa 7k years ago? There is about 95% of the human story missing, and not just a little, culturally literally all of it.

I have some reasons that might justify the idea it didn't happen, but I doubt they would mirror your own. The fact we haven't found anything shouldn't be surprising. We shouldn't expect to find much from 10k+ years ago.

 

[DoomPatrol]

Nothing out in left field in your post, but...

If I were you, I'd spend a bit of time pondering the fact that the event, whatever you choose to believe it was, that brought on the Younger Dryas 12.8k years before present to 11.6k ybp was the single most extreme climate change event since modern humans arrived on the scene (by orders of magnitude) and probably the most extreme over the last 2 million years...responsible in large part (if not completely) for the extinction of half of the world's megafauna.

This event literally occurred in the backyard of what we call history. If that happened to the other megafauna, what do you think happened to us and any cultural advancement that may have possibly been under way for thousands of years prior?

We are at least 200k years old in modern form. Does it really make sense to you that there wouldn't have been significant advancement at multiple points within that time period given how far we have come since modern "history" began circa 7k years ago? There is about 95% of the human story missing, and not just a little, culturally literally all of it.

I have some reasons that might justify the idea it didn't happen, but I doubt they would mirror your own. The fact we haven't found anything shouldn't be surprising. We shouldn't expect to find much from 10k+ years ago.

I think if it had happened to any special degree of variation, I think we would find evidence for it. We find fossils that see millions of years old all the time. Never have we found evidence of artifacts that don't match the commonly understood technology of the era.

It's possible I guess, but I don't think we lost out on too many things. The progression of technology requires many things to fall in line and they would leave a lot of evidence behind. For better technology you need better industry to create the technology.

 

[andnowweknow]

I think if it had happened to any special degree of variation, I think we would find evidence for it. We find fossils that see millions of years old all the time. Never have we found evidence of artifacts that don't match the commonly understood technology of the era.

It's possible I guess, but I don't think we lost out on too many things. The progression of technology requires many things to fall in line and they would leave a lot of evidence behind. For better technology you need better industry to create the technology.

Perhaps a lot of the evidence is well known and in plain sight...just mis-characterized, or better put misattributed.

The decay rates of metals simply doesn't allow for them to last hundreds of years in many instances let alone tens of thousands.

Your comments about coastal flooding brings up an important point. Between 17-7k years ago sea level rose roughly 400 feet (which is an almost unbelievable amount of freshwater being reintroduced into the ocean, see energy paradox for just how perplexing the event is even today for modern science), much of it taking place in bursts (see meltwater pulses 1a and 1b). That means much of the Continental shelves were exposed back during the last ice age. Most people then, as today, were likely living on the coasts...which as mentioned, are now 400 feet under the water and in many cases many dozens of miles off the current coasts.

 

[DoomPatrol]

Perhaps a lot of the evidence is well known and in plain sight...just mis-characterized, or better put misattributed.

What type of evidence could that possibly be though? A lot of the major technological advances were only possible because of large industrial buildings. Things like steel production and glass production caused great change, but those types of industries leave tons of proof.

The decay rates of metals simply doesn't allow for them to last hundreds of years in many instances let alone tens of thousands.

Yeah I mean it's possible, but I think we would find artifacts and other fossilized remains that indicate such a thing. I mean just what do you think could have been lost?

Your comments about coastal flooding brings up an important point. Between 17-7k years ago sea level rose roughly 400 feet (which is an almost unbelievable amount of freshwater being reintroduced into the ocean, see energy paradox for just how perplexing the event is even today for modern science), much of it taking place in bursts (see meltwater pulses 1a and 1b). That means much of the Continental shelves were exposed back during the last ice age. Most people then, as today, were likely living on the coasts...which as mentioned, are now 400 feet under the water and in many cases many dozens of miles off the current coasts.

That's pretty crazy if the math on that is correct. I can't imagine 400 feet of elevation in the seas. Any articles you recommend on that?

 

[andnowweknow]

What type of evidence could that possibly be though? A lot of the major technological advances were only possible because of large industrial buildings. Things like steel production and glass production caused great change, but those types of industries leave tons of proof.



Yeah I mean it's possible, but I think we would find artifacts and other fossilized remains that indicate such a thing. I mean just what do you think could have been lost?



That's pretty crazy if the math on that is correct. I can't imagine 400 feet of elevation in the seas. Any articles you recommend on that?

The things that are evidence are certain stone architecture throughout the world, some lesser known some more well known...I can rattle some off that are likely suspects if you want to get into it but the evidence is obviously more circumstantial than anything.

Here is a quick synopsis of the ice age meltdown. Specifics are difficult and averages are just that, but I think even the most conservative in the science community would admit even more rapid, extremely brief intervals of sea level rise (on the scales of 10s of years, not 100s) in the 5-10 meter range is conceivable...if that is true that is terrifying.

http://noc.ac.uk/news/global-sea-level-rise-end-last-ice-age

Southampton researchers have estimated that sea-level rose by an average of about 1 metre per century at the end of the last Ice Age, interrupted by rapid ‘jumps’ during which it rose by up to 2.5 metres per century.

The findings, published in Global and Planetary Change, will help unravel the responses of ocean circulation and climate to large inputs of ice-sheet meltwater to the world ocean.

Global sea level rose by a total of more than 120 metres as the vast ice sheets of the last Ice Age melted back. This melt-back lasted from about 19,000 to about 6,000 years ago, meaning that the average rate of sea-level rise was roughly 1 metre per century.

Previous studies of sea-level change at individual locations have suggested that the gradual rise may have been marked by abrupt ‘jumps’ of sea-level rise at rates that approached 5 metres per century. These estimates were based on analyses of the distribution of fossil corals around Barbados and coastal drowning along the Sunda Shelf, an extension of the continental shelf of East Asia.

However, uncertainties in fossil dating, scarcity of sea-level markers, and the specific characteristics of individual sites can make it difficult to reconstruct global sea level with a high degree of confidence using evidence from any one site.

“Rather than relying on individual sites that may not be representative, we have compared large amounts of data from many different sites, taking into account all potential sources of uncertainty,” said Professor Eelco Rohling of the University of Southampton’s School of Ocean and Earth Science (SOES) based at the National Oceanography Centre (NOC) in Southampton.

The researchers brought together about 400 high-quality sea-level markers from study sites around the globe, concentrating on locations far removed from the distorting effects of the past massive ice sheets.

Using an extensive series of sophisticated statistical tests, they then reconstructed sea-level history of the last 21 thousand years with a high degree of statistical confidence.

Their analyses indicate that the gradual rise at an average rate of 1 metre per century was interrupted by two periods with rates of rise up to 2.5 metres per century, between 15 and 13 thousand years ago, and between 11 and 9 thousand years ago.

The first of these jumps in the amount of ice-sheet meltwater entering the world ocean coincides with the beginning of a period of global climate warming called the Bølling-Allerød period. The second jump appears to have happened shortly after the end the ‘big freeze’ called the Younger Dryas that brought the Bølling-Allerød period to an abrupt end.

“Our estimates of rates of sea-level rise are lower than those estimated from individual study sites, but they are statistically robust and therefore greatly improve our understanding of loss of ice volume due to the melting of the ice sheets at the end of the last Ice Age,” said lead author Dr Jennifer Stanford of SOES.

“The new findings will be used to refine models of the Earth climate system, and will thus help to improve forecasts of future sea-level responses to global climate change,” added Rohling.

The researchers are Jenny Stanford, Rebecca Hemingway, Eelco Rohling and Martin Medina-Elizalde (SOES), Peter Challenor (NOC) and Adrian Lester (The Chamber of Shipping, London).

The research was supported by the United Kingdom’s Natural Environment Research Council.