In the Year 3000

[DeeryTheDeer]

*cue La Bamba falsetto* In all seriousness, what do you guys think the world will really be like in exactly the year 3000? Will it be futuristic like Star Trek? Will it be entirely different? Will humanity or life on planet Earth even exist anymore? I'd like to hear your abstract thoughts.

[Techno]

[ClouD]

[ninja9578]

I agree with DD.

[Black_Eagle]

Edit: Except they'll be killing us over and over and over.

[Replicon]

"don't look at me, I voted for kodos"

[Invader]

Remember that scene at the end of the movie Artificial Intelligence: AI (2001) with the super-advanced machines that resembled aliens? Yeaaaaaa.

[tkdyo]

you guys are so pessimistic =_= I think our medical advances will be good enough to cure most cancers without kimo, and virtual reality will be nearly perfected.

[ChrissyMaria]

In my view, there won't be humans in 3000 We will kill each other off by then, or a meteor will kill us all, or a gamma ray event...or a nuclear war, or maybe AI machines take over and slaughter us like in terminator.... Yea, I don't have high hopes for the future, my own wish is to die before anything really really bad happens on earth. The reason for my pessimism is because of the direction the world is headed, a bad direction.

[Replicon]

Actually, our medical advances will ensure that no cures are there - only ways to conveniently "live with it"

[ChrissyMaria]

Yea, the good ol treat the symptoms not the cause medical profit industry lol, they would make the real cures so expensive only the wealthy could afford.

[ninja9578]

you guys are so pessimistic =_= I think our medical advances will be good enough to cure most cancers without kimo, and virtual reality will be nearly perfected. Medical advances mean nothing once the world is destroyed by war and global warming. When the oil starts to run dry, the USA, China, and Russia will go to war over the last few wells.

[ChrissyMaria]

I'm more worried about the war thing, not so much the global frauding.

[Universal Mind]

New energy sources, worldwide democracy, worldwide capitalism, major prosperity, no more international wars, a lot of people living in space, an excellent world.

[Descensus]

New energy sources, worldwide democracy, worldwide capitalism, major prosperity, no more international wars, a lot of people living in space, an excellent world. Sounds great, except for the Democracy part. I just hope our cities look like how science fiction writers/movie-makers envision them, because that would be badass.

[DeeryTheDeer]

New energy sources, worldwide democracy, worldwide capitalism, major prosperity, no more international wars, a lot of people living in space, an excellent world. Sounds great to me, especially about the new energy sources. Then the environment would be at least somewhat spared and we wouldn't have to wage wars over oil anymore.

[Photolysis]

I have no idea if we'll be around in 3000; most people are generally pretty short-sighted and ignorant (look at the way people deal with climate change, for example). And some are just plain psychos; imagine what would happen if some religious nut in the Middle East got a bunch of nukes. If we are around still then, I wouldn't be surprised if something like Idiocracy happens. Let's say we dodge that bullet as well though. In that case I would imagine improved medicine has rendered everyone biologically immortal. Fusion power will take care of all the world's energy demands, and we'll probably have quite a few colonies on terraformed planets. We'd also probably have a unified government by that stage, instead of arbitrarily defined states. I doubt we'll get far in to space, unless a dramatic discovery that revolutionises our ability to travel to something akin to science fiction. But you never know what might be possible once we learn more about the Universe's deepest workings.

[Jeff777]

Nic Fleming October 18, 2006 HUMANS will grow to an average of two metres, live to the age of 120 and all have brown skin by 3000, an evolutionary expert says. Oliver Curry, of the Darwin@LSE research centre at the London School of Economics, said on Monday racial differences would become less pronounced, thanks to trends in nutrition, medicine and migration. Dr Curry predicted humans would decline physically and lose key social and interactive skills because of an over-dependence on technology and medical interventions. By the year 102,000, humans will have split into two sub-species — the "genetic haves" and the "genetic have-nots". Dr Curry, who was commissioned to do the study of how humans would evolve over the next 1000, 10,000 and 100,000 years by TV channel Bravo, said: "The future of man will be a story of the good, the bad and the ugly. While science and technology have the potential to create an ideal habitat for humanity over the next millennium, there is a possibility of a monumental genetic hangover. "After that, things could get ugly, with the possible emergence of genetic 'haves' and 'have-nots'." Dr Curry said humans would reach physical peak about 3000, with improved nutrition and understanding of the human body. Men would reach average heights of between 1.83 and 2.13 metres. Physical features would evolve to emphasise features valued in the opposite sex by men and women looking for potential mates, such as health, youth and fertility. Men would have more symmetrical facial features, squarer jaws, deeper voices and be better endowed. Women would have large, clear eyes, pert breasts, glossy hair, more symmetrical features and hairless skin. Variations in skin colouring were expected to be smoothed out, with most humans moving towards a brown tone. "Race is only skin deep," Dr Curry told Britain's Sun newspaper. "There was a time when we were all the same colour. As we become more interconnected throughout the world, racial difference is likely to be diluted." By about the year 12,000, he said, communication skills and emotional capabilities such as love, sympathy, trust and respect would have diminished, eroding the abilities of humans to care for others or perform in teams. The increased eating of processed foods would mean humans did less chewing, leading to less developed jaws and shorter chins. Immune systems would deteriorate due to hygiene obsession and a heavy reliance on medicines. "If we are all popping pills, diseases such as cancer won't be weeded out of the gene pool," Dr Curry told The Sun. Infants would be larger at birth, forcing mothers to have caesarean sections. Humans would be able to replace faulty stretches of DNA thanks to advances in genetic engineering — potentially leading to more genetic uniformity and vulnerability to disease. "Our ideas of what we find attractive will evolve and as a result we will develop technologies that will enable us to upgrade ourselves," he said. He predicted that in 100,000 years the genetic elite would move in ever more exclusive circles. They would be increasingly tall, thin, clean, healthy and creative, while the genetic underclass would be short, stocky, asymmetrical, unhealthy, less intelligent and grubby. "We certainly can't predict definitely what is going to happen but we can make educated predictions based on our understanding of how evolution works," Dr Curry said. http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...850931574.html

[ChrissyMaria]

Who ever said evolution will just halt at the year 3000? evolution never stops. The little chart says year 3000, humans reach their peak? ...we continue to evolve

[Bearsy]

[Techno]

http://www.theage.com.au/news/nation...850931574.html That article reminds me of The Time Machine. Morlocks and Eloi anyone?

[ChrissyMaria]

Venus project = the best future possible.

[Descensus]

Venus project = the best future possible. How? Note: I just want you to explain it. I saw Zeitgeist and while the illustrations and models look cool, I don't think it's feasible at all. Especially the economics part. Seems pretty illogical.

[Jeff777]

The article didn't say anything about evolution ceasing.

[Bearsy]

How? Note: I just want you to explain it. I saw Zeitgeist and while the illustrations and models look cool, I don't think it's feasible at all. Especially the economics part. Seems pretty illogical. It's all technologically possible right now, the only stronghold is the lack of funds to get the project off of the drawing board.