digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Graphic: The World Without Us

worldwithoutus.com — Alan Weisman theorizes what would happen to the planet if humans suddenly disappeared. Roll over each block to see more details.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • inghamb87, on 10/10/2007, -43/+7EEEEEEEEEEP
    • animalmuther76, on 07/30/2008, -9/+16after a 100,000 years all the hard work we putting into destroying the planet would be washed away ;) however the planet will be destroyed by the sun in 5 billion years so why do we care about doing it ourselfs? Think global warming is bad now....
    • 4815162342, on 10/10/2007, -39/+8total DUPE but i guess it's ok because msaleem submitted it??? morons.
      • crushfan, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14As far as I know, nobody likes msaleem. That's not the reason. People just don't give a ***** if it's duplicate.. They just click and go.
        • VanillaStarfish, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8What about me? Do people like me?
          • therightclique, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8meh. you're okay. you should wash your feet now and then.
      • OneLess, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Congratulations, I dugg this simply because of your comment, 4815162342.
      • floorman56, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1Once again where did everybody go? The Rapture? UFOs? ANYTHING that will make humans go away will also be VERY BAD FOR THE ANIMALS AND COMPLETELY MESS UP THE ENVIRONMENT doesn't say anything about bodies what would the effect on the environment be with 5 BILLION ROTTING BODIES !!!!
        • browwiw, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6You've never heard the word "hypothetical", have you?
          • floorman56, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1hypothetical As In fantasy? A wish?

            I could say "hypothetically" all atheist will sorry when Jesus comes back. I would be TOTALITY scoffed here for saying that.
            But put up a gaia wet dream ...TWICE..and get dugg up. Even if both have the same chance of happening.
          • browwiw, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I guess you haven't heard of the word 'hypothetical', then. You've certainly mastered the meaning of 'ass-hat', though.
        • sabach, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2For a pretty good examination of just that read Stephen King's "The Stand".
    • kalkin, on 10/10/2007, -5/+21great page although i find it a little odd that the most significant thing he seems to have thought of at the 10 year mark is that all barn roofs have gone
      • wattznext, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Maybe he was raised in a barn
      • mojibake, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6I hope he shut the door.
      • OneLess, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3He wrote a whole book on the subject, so it's possible that the barn was an attempt in the book to introduce a plot element into a non-fiction book. In fact, looking at the table of contents, chapter 11 is called "The World Without Farms".
    • 5urr3al5am, on 10/10/2007, -13/+2maybe you could tell us another story.. another fantasy made up about an elf or something... bottom line mostly speculation in the authors mind.
      • KnytFyre, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6You can take the known half-lives of many of our man made compounds and extrapolate a reasonable facsimile of what the future would hold if humans were not around to A) mess things up further, or B) make the repairs needed to keep the wild world at bay. It's not fantasy, it's an informed speculation.
        • crmypotato, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0"mess things up further" like building the house you are in? Or powering the computer you are using?
      • sabach, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Maybe you could STFU
    • kingfoot, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9i like the ending. i got some chills after reading it all, and the ending made it almost like a good book for me, from just a few pictures and paragraphs.
      • Aleister76, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2It actually is a book. If you liked this, go read the book, you might enjoy it.
        • RexMaxus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Book you say? That sounds like something I would like, let me just click on the link you provid... oh, never mind.
    • p0s3r, on 10/10/2007, -10/+6Buried as inaccurate. Al Gore says the world is going to end next year.
      • VanillaStarfish, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4But first, he's going to take his Internet and go home.
  • lkmbrd, on 10/10/2007, -21/+137Can't wait to see it.
    • SuperCUBE, on 10/10/2007, -29/+9But see, that's the thing: You won't.
      • echinda, on 10/10/2007, -3/+52But see, that's the thing: he was being funny.
        • moskaudancer, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0But, see, that's the thing: CUBE didn't get that.
        • TrueXtremeIcon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6But C...C...C...COMBO BREAKER
    • Shade00a00, on 10/10/2007, -3/+126I'm not sre that the world wold be that different withot 's. It is jst a minor vowel anyways.
    • DavidBGie, on 10/10/2007, -2/+21Just what the universe needs! Another planet full of trees & rats with no intelligent life! Boring!
      • didd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13For all we know, Penguins all over the planet could return to their secret society underground at any minute.
      • shinynew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1yea
        wait where did it say the dolphins and mice left?
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2Just so everyone knows, humans will NEVER be wiped from the Earth.We all know that following the Cold War Era, we bagan to construct a series of underground super bunkers and super cities that currently house at minimum 5 million. Their ability to withstand the only real threat to them: Nuetron bomb radiation, EMP's, makes it specifically a deterrent to the belief of sudden human extinction. It's just not going to happen.

      We've built a very secure place for ourselveso n this planet, and we have quite the future ahead of us. Us surface dwellers may not because of the policies of ouro Elites, but we as a species are definitely going to make it into eternity and to the stars.
      • h4mx0r, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Unless a scenario like Children of Men occurs! D:
        • monospaced, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You mean, where we are threatened with extinction and then prevail in the end?
        • shinynew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2yea, I mean what would happen if everyone stopped haveing babbies

          Then started again.
      • JTorquido, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Out of honest curiosity, can you point me to search terms that would lead me to more information about these "underground super bunkers and super cities"? Sounds really interesting.

        kthx
      • Skooma714, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6No muties allowed
    • h4mx0r, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Love the ending.
      "Out there messages linger. Ghosts of radio transmissions drifting forever, echoes of words preceding and lives gone before. Occasionally they're detected, picked up, transcribed. Sometimes they mean something to those who hear; other times not. Sometimes they're lengthy, other times brief. As in... "This is Ripley, last surviving member of the Nostromo, signing off.""
    • coit, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Yah, it must've been at least a week since this has been on digg, I had forgotten about it.
    • projectstartrek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Am I the only one who expected a gorilla uprising?
  • GunRunner, on 10/10/2007, -11/+111I love this stuff.
    • ladon86, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Take a look at the Manhattan art under the multimedia section - it's fantastic.
    • BlackJackJester, on 10/10/2007, -17/+15They forgot to mention at forever : The shock waves from a chuck norris roundhouse kick continue to carry enough energy to make stars supernova.
      • moskaudancer, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3I honestly don't understand how anyone would bury a comment that ***** awesome.
        Kudos, BlackJack.
      • monospaced, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Digg that comment up! I'm still laughing just thinking about it.
    • etruscan, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3Book ordered.
    • etruscan, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2Book ordered.
    • etruscan, on 10/10/2007, -9/+1Book ordered.
    • tehjarvis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1If you love this, then check out Exit Mundi, it'll be down your alley
      http://www.exitmundi.nl/
  • SillyRabbits, on 10/10/2007, -45/+234Oh please, reactors have fail-safe mechanisms built into them - and they would shut themselves down. It is VERY unlikely that even a single reactor would become dangerous - let alone "melt down". Along with other issues, the author really shows his lack of basic understanding. Of course his emphasis on New York is probably very telling about his lack of exposure to how infrastructure functions (hey, water comes from a faucet, electricity from a wall plug, and food comes from a corner grocery store).
    • plaincorgi, on 10/10/2007, -42/+6how would those fail safes work without any power to operate them? How would they work once the fail safes them selves deteriorate? Either way, in the book, there is only about one chapter on NY, so there is not that great of a emphasis on NY itself.
      • Dimah, on 10/10/2007, -2/+59The fail safes are designed to work when the power goes out. It's powered by gravity. Big control rods drop when there is no electricity to stop the nuclear reaction.
        • plaincorgi, on 10/10/2007, -23/+5oK, and how long until those control rods deteriorate? This is what the book covers. eventually everything will deteriorate
          • Dylan16807, on 10/10/2007, -1/+33The reactor will fall apart, losing the density to have a sustained reaction, well before the control rods stop working.
          • AnteChronos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13If left alone? Longer than several half-lives of the reactive material in the core, since the control rods are made of stable and corrosion-resistant materials. If the reactor itself is breached, then weathering might have some small effect, but it'll have the same effect or greater on the reactive material, making it a moot point.
          • wgroves, on 10/10/2007, -3/+19you're both missing the point somewhat
          • gypsynuke, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0With the rods inserted, the core is flooded with a substance to make the fuel useless. So whenever the rods do deteriorate, the fuel won't be able to do anything.
      • quetzatcoatl, on 10/10/2007, -1/+23A fail safe should not require any power, take a look at the word, fail safe, the point is that critical systems are designed so that when they fail they will do so in a planned way that minimizes the danger of any catastrophe.
      • deaconyermouf, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Who powers the powerplant?!
        • heypetray, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0humans on hamster wheels of course...
      • gypsynuke, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2The failsafe doesn't require any power. If the failsafe is powered, it doesn't work. If all electricity is lost then the failsafe can do it's thing. That's why it's called a failsafe; in case of failure, everything is safe.
        • Scaryclouds, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1No failsafe means, it (a mechanism) is safe from failure, that is a mechanism that can not fail.
        • gypsynuke, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0fail-safe /ˈfeɪlˌseɪf/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[feyl-seyf] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation adjective, noun, verb, -safed, -saf·ing. –adjective
          1. Electronics. pertaining to or noting a mechanism built into a system, as in an early warning system or a nuclear reactor, for insuring safety should the system fail to operate properly.

          Your definition is included, there are a few, but it places mine first. This is from dictionary.com
    • Ramble, on 10/10/2007, -4/+36Diesel generators and other power backups would operate failsafes within a few hours to a few days if left alone.
      • moskaudancer, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1You're stupid. There's a reason they call them 'fail safes'. Look at above posts.
    • ryangoff, on 10/10/2007, -5/+79You can't really accurately describe the destruction of mankind without taking a few liberties and simplifying a bit.
      • Tikkimann, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Tp be fair. this is the aftermath being described.
    • Angostura, on 10/10/2007, -11/+9And 100 years after the automated shutdown?
      • AnteChronos, on 10/10/2007, -2/+33It'll still be shut down. Control rods don't lose their potency over time, and they're designed to be resistant to corrosion. The fuel will decay to below a fissionable mass long before the control rods become ineffective.
      • danomagnum, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Either 1) the controll rods will still be there, or 2) the water will not be in the reactor anymore, thus disabling it.
      • layron, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0But the water will eventually be gone and there will be no systems running to remove the decay heat so I guess the cores will relocate until they are cooled
      • chukd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Once the reactor is shut down, the water is no longer heated enough to cause boiling in the reactor. The reaction creates the heat. The water would stay in the reactor unless there was a fracture in the container holding the rods.
        • duffman5, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0My guess is that he's thinking of decay heat. When uranium fissions, it can split into radioactive isotopes (for example xenons and iodines). When these particles decay, there is heat released. I'm not sure about PWRs, but in CANDU reactors the coolant continues to flow over the fuel after the reactor is shut down, albeit at a lower flow rate. Spent fuel is kept under water for a period after its discharge both for shielding and cooling.
          Whether or not this decay heat is enough to melt the fuel/reactor, I'm not sure... but not all the heat comes from the fission reaction itself.
    • abaldet, on 10/10/2007, -6/+24He didn't "make the stuff up" - the book is a compilation of other experts' predictions.
      • MikeFromAmerica, on 10/10/2007, -3/+55I think us digg nerds know a little bit more about the operation of a nuclear reactor than these supposed "experts" you speak of.
        • krebcycle, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Thanks for the chuckle, I feel better now.
        • thugok, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3I dug you up for the laugh but in this case, the "digg nerds" are actually correct.
        • gypsynuke, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0The thing is, some of the digg nerds are actually experts.
      • MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3The same experts that said we'd be greeted as liberators!
      • chukd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19As both a digg nerd and someone that knows more than most people (being trianed in Nuclear Engineering), I can assure you that the safety protocols at least in the United States would prevent melt downs. I can not speak for the rest of the world.
        • moskaudancer, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Safety precautions everywhere except maybe Russia are just as stringent as ours. Hell, even Chernobyl occurred b/c they deliberately kept the reactors running after the fail safes would've stopped it (They thought it was a false alarm b/c one of their frozen coolant pipe indicators was broken. Even so, protocol dictated a full shutdown, just in case, which they refused to do for political reasons.). Same story with Three Mile Island.
        • chukd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2In the case of Three Mile Island, no radiation was released in the accient. Thus, the animals around the reactor would not die and they would continue to reside there. Russians run a different reactor than they do in most countries and the safety protocols there were poor. This is why there was release of radiation into the environment. In that case, the animals would die and have to come back.
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -19/+9Don't tell the enviro fruitcakes that. They still think global warming is manmade and humans should die if they slap their pets.
      • moskaudancer, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0"Hey, buddy, I *like* global warming!"
        -plagiarized from Jim Gaffigan
      • hmunkey, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1You dumbass. I'll be the first to laugh at you once the Earth is ***** in 50 years.
    • layron, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Well actually they would run several days to maybe even a couple weeks without auto shutdowns. Probably longer than the fossil plants. Then as the grid goes away the diesels come on. Then in about the next 7 days the diesels starve for fuel. Then... well you know. And then in 100 years the animals come back to visit. I wonder what happens at all of the chemical plants
  • Ju1c3, on 10/10/2007, -14/+5where's my popcorn
    • moskaudancer, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0Is that a George Carlin reference? Dugg up just in case.
      • moskaudancer, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0WTF, do Diggers not like George Carlin?! I'd have though he would be their favorite comedian, seeing as how he's an atheist, and so many people here seem to be, too.
        • Namaha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1How funny someone is isn't based on their religion.
        • Netrilix, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If it makes you feel better, I love George Carlin, and I've seen him live 3 years straight.
  • thomasprebble, on 10/10/2007, -3/+75Cities would be consumed by fire. No time to turn off the oven!
    • shinynew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I would hate to see all the burning concrete and steel that makes up so much of modern cities.

      And the sprinkler systems going up in flame.
  • SnapETom, on 10/10/2007, -18/+56Sounds great. When do we start?
  • flxfxp, on 10/10/2007, -17/+7Our radio signals will go on forever?
    • senatorpjt, on 10/10/2007, -3/+53Well, we won't continue broadcasting, obviously, but radio waves move at the speed of light. It's just like now, how most of the stars you see in the sky exploded a long time ago. If a star is 4.5 billion light years away, you see what it looked like 4.5 billion years ago, and where that star is, they'll be receiving new episodes of "America's Top Model" in 4.5 billion years.
      • TrainingName, on 10/10/2007, -1/+20Nice example.
        • bj1989, on 10/10/2007, -14/+4Um don't they die out after a while? I mean to broadcast a radio show over a few lightyears you would need all the power in the world. The elektro magnetic waves just die out as far as I know.
          • AnteChronos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+43Electromagnetic waves don't "die out". The strength is inversely proportional to the square of the distance, so they'll become more diffuse, and eventually be indistinguishable from background noise. That may be what you were thinking, and you just worded it poorly.
          • sgtbutterscotch, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Anybody remember that Pete and Pete episode?
      • AnteChronos, on 10/10/2007, -1/+52"This is an outrage! I demand to know what happened to the plucky lawyer and her compellingly short garments."
        • 80hd, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6haha Nice I was kinda having a downer moment from all this lifes over talk on that page till now
        • pifko123, on 10/10/2007, -7/+0*****' emo on digg.
        • LJRod82, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Single female lawyer, having lot's of sex.
      • rollem, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Most of the stars you see have not exploded. The only stars you can see with the naked eye are in our own galaxy and therefore are within 12,000 light years. The chance of a star going out within 12,000 years is very low. Of those galaxies that you can see with the naked eye, maybe some of them have stars that have burnt out.
  • Waterproof, on 10/10/2007, -10/+379This is wrong, the fort I built in my living room will last at LEAST 100,000 years.
    • willchenso, on 10/10/2007, -2/+16I'm not sure about the timescale on my pillow fort i think maybe.... 10,000 years
      • OsiVert, on 10/10/2007, -1/+28It depends if you made a roof with a blanket. If not, I give it 6,000 years.
        • dasdef, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5now i want to build a fort in my room.
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Unless you start thinking about girls that will never come to you. Then, the sweat erosion factor will decrease the forts lifespan to at least 30 minutes.
    • theoneskee, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Wait... You guys made living room pillow bunkers as well?
      I could never make a proper roof to the damn thing.
      • Gman1223, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Use two broom sticks and make an X, thats the best way.
      • texpundit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I used to make them in the back yard out of old doors, plywood, windows and other junk lying around. (I grew up in the sticks.) I was so young that I understood how to balance stuff to make it stay up, but I didn't know about fastening them together (nails, rope, whatever).

        After building countless forts and having about 5 fall on my head, I learned about rope.
    • DJPhoenix, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I lived in a fort made from couch cushions and futon matresses for a couple weeks in college. Seriously. Don't ask.
    • christoscamaro, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I just waned to say, this was one of the best, 100% on-target replies I have ever read on digg.
  • plaincorgi, on 10/10/2007, -12/+18Actually been reading this book for the past few weeks. Not as depressing as it sounds and the theories he proposes are very interesting. Sections on rubber and plastics i found particularly disturbing.
    • goeatsmsht, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Look out for the nurdles!
    • garble7, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I've also just read the book. It's very good. Could make a great discovery channel short movie.
    • floorman56, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Dose he say what happens when the well heads on the oil wells rust out and they begin to spew oil and/or burn for the next 10 years or so?
      • browwiw, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1He mentions that, actually. It's explained as your mother being a fat whore.
        • floorman56, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2So I ask a REAL question ....and your reply is to insult me? ......welcome to my block list
  • IsmaelZ, on 10/10/2007, -10/+48Ok that just made me feel bad... and the ivory trading!! leave the ***** elephants live!! :(
    • blakeage, on 10/10/2007, -7/+0Yea, who cares about ivory anyway. It's just like...ivory.
    • AoiTakuma, on 10/10/2007, -11/+1Actually if you read At The Hand of Man by Bonner you'll see that Ivory trade is necessary to keep illegal poaching down, and to keep populations in check (think of deer in the US). Without the millions of dollars that these African countries would receive from the Ivory trade they can not properly train or supply Wildlife park guides. Without the trade the only way to get the money is to take it from municipal funds that are given to the countries annually from larger more wealthy countries (the countries that told them they would receive aid if they banned the ivory trade--oops we lied!) And without culling elephant populations would be destroyed. Elephants are huge animals that need to drink tens of gallons of water a day and eat a large amount of food, keeping 200,000 elephants in a 10,000 kilometer square area doesn't work, they destroy trees, drink the land dry and make it unsuitable for any other animal to live. And proper culling would select only the oldest individuals that have already had a chance to pass on their genetics, keeping the species fitness alive. Due to the lack of Ivory trade, proper culling practices, the increase of poaching by poor farmers that cant feed their families and the lack of proper funding elephants in the wild of Africa now are being born without tusks, because only those adults that have small tusks or no tusks at all are not being shot by poachers.
      So before you say "leave the ***** elephants live" think about the whole situation. It took me a while to get around the fact that you have to kill some individuals to ensure the species survival.
      sorry for the rant, but housewives in the US are killing the elephants not the ivory trade
      • mtonak, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9So elephants become the new humans?
        • shinynew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1dugg for completely ignoring what he just said over like 20 lines and jumped to a completely ridiculous conclusion.
      • familynight, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4i think you left out some key steps in the logic of your argument.
    • MikeFromAmerica, on 10/10/2007, -0/+29Well if the elephants would just stand still while the poachers cut off their tusks with a chainsaw, maybe they wouldn't have to shoot them.
      • moskaudancer, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Stupid elephants. Don't they know what's good for them?

        /sarc
        • p0tent1al, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2use a full sarcasm tag next time
          • Feanor, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Yeah, for a second there I thought he meant sarcophagus. GEESH!
      • monospaced, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1incredible...I want to Digg your comment and have it front page
    • Tikkimann, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6in 6 months: The population of the common elephant would triple in size.
  • Dimah, on 10/10/2007, -27/+12This makes me hate humans so much.
    • AntBing, on 10/10/2007, -2/+29Autophobia is fairly unhealthy. You might want to get that checked out.
    • ScrumFritter, on 10/10/2007, -9/+6Humans > All. Suck on that, 'nature'.
      • moskaudancer, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1***** Yeah! And take some CO2 with that whup-ass, bitch!
        /sarc
      • blast_flame, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2correction
        sapient beings> All
        Think of the AIs and Aliens :)
      • ScrumFritter, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I really can't believe I got Dugg down. Our species sure has a self esteem problem... :(
  • Folklorefur, on 10/10/2007, -8/+152I just came back from 2500, and its nothing like he predicts. For starters, Ostrich riding Sea Otters now rule Manhatten, the only thing he was right about is the reforestation of NY.
    • AntBing, on 10/10/2007, -3/+43Where's manhatten?
    • jackal42, on 10/10/2007, -4/+77Uh its in such as like, the iraq.
      • shinynew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2and other countries like such as Africa
    • po43292, on 10/10/2007, -4/+27I, for one, welcome our Ostrich riding Sea Otter overlords.
    • stklaw, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Well, the article said IF humans disappeared.
    • izzybr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Did Digg ever get a new comment system Mr. Futureman?
  • jeremyduffy, on 10/10/2007, -21/+7Is it just me or does this post make no sense? this is supposed to be a graphic of the world without us? It's a bunch of lousy flash images! Buildings crumble and a few leaves come after? wtf?
  • nbhagwat, on 10/10/2007, -7/+180But where's the part where the apes take over?
    • blakeage, on 10/10/2007, -1/+43Yea, they evolve back into humans, only this time, they can fly.
      • shinynew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2when you put it that way...
        lets get this ***** started.
    • goeatsmsht, on 10/10/2007, -0/+20Actually, the author suppositions that the bonobos or chimpanzees may eventually evolve and fill in our place in the ecosystem
      I like to think that they will fight it out for world domination!
      • ChileanGoD, on 10/10/2007, -0/+21So apes that like to ***** around are going to replace us?... It will be like we never left.
      • noamsml, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I don't know what world war 3 will be fought with, but world war 4 will be fought with turd hurled towards the opponent.
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Silly human, no ape take over, human good, humanity safe, if my name is not Lovelock..... *scratches self and plans world domination*


      (It's the best I could come up with. Get over it)
  • seventhcrow, on 10/10/2007, -17/+2wow. that was almost interesting. color me underwhelemed.
    • pifko123, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2It's spelt "Colour"
    • eecrown, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0Dugg for using the word underwhelmed
      • Namaha, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0He didn't even spell it right.
        • seventhcrow, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0eh...thats what i get for posting before i have my first cup of coffee...did i spell that right? ;)
    • oojamaflip2006, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Couldn't I dip you in gravy and feed you to porcupines instead?
  • wassim2k, on 10/10/2007, -13/+5How many times does this have to get on the front page? It's been 3 or 4 times already.
  • kmb1794, on 10/10/2007, -11/+76Ok, the first thing is about the NY Subway? Give me a break.
    • solonGFX, on 10/10/2007, -23/+2And who the hell calls the English Channel Tunnel the "Chunnel"
      that's god damn bullcrap.
  • NidStyles, on 10/10/2007, -16/+10Wow, wasn't this just up here again last week?
    • Mysticum, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6Yeah, and it was Dugg to the front page back then, too...*shrug*
    • dukeochutney, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4duplicate story again. the story last week was a duplicate too.
  • Stevethegreat, on 10/10/2007, -32/+10The funny thing is that none of this stuff would ever happen, exactly because people would still be around, not even the burning by the sun stuff. Earth's biosphere was destined to give birth to a civilization and that's us, learn to love thyself cause alternatively not even nature would love you. We're part of this whole story that's why we much respect both our descendance AND our descendants
    • AnteChronos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+27"none of this stuff would ever happen . . . not even the burning by the sun stuff."

      Yeah, that part will happen whether we want it to or not. Entropy's a bitch.
      • Stevethegreat, on 10/10/2007, -11/+5Come on, I'm being dugg down without even a serious retort. It's not like I want you to agree with me, I only want to know why I'm wrong.

        I'm freaking scared of this anti-humanism movement of our era be it environmentalism or doom and gloom predictions for our future. From what I can tell we're going strong, just because your empire (America) starts crumbling doesn't mean that the whole world goes from the bad to worse, in fact we're doing fine, we're a lot better than our grandfathers and our kids would be even better. If anything goes awry would be because of those anti-humanists who believe that the world is sick, if anything we're moving towards a medieval with that kind of pathetic view of the world. Where is the love for the world, people and life itself, shown in the first years of free thought (during the Ancient Greek era), where's the "reawakening" of the renaissance the new found love for life and the person, where's the uberman of Nietzsche. If the future would all be doom and gloom and we would still not be able to conquer our star's appetite would be only because of you people who have lost interest to life and you love daily routine or your little peculiar geeky worlds, better kill yourselves and let the rest of us to thrive.
        • wphj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8It's not anti-human. The sun will burn us up eventually, it happens everywhere. I don't think anyone is suggesting we destroy the human race, it's just interesting to see our impact on the earth.
        • dclowd9901, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2When your country elects a president/prime minister/whatever as bad as Bush... TWICE... come back and tell me that you still have faith in humanity.
        • krebcycle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6You're being dugg down because of your baseless comment that the sun will not nova and the inference that the earth is forever.
          • unitedstatians, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Our Sol will not Supernovae it too small!
        • Stevethegreat, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1It's not like it won't blow by itself, of course it will be if we're not around, we have even calculated when. However what makes you believe that we won't interfere with our motherstar natural lifecycle. I'm not talking about the immediate future, I'm talking maybe, even millions of years in the future, however in principle it isn't something which can't be done.
        • est1979, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4your suggesting that we find a way to stop the sun from expanding and finishing its natural life cycle? I suppose it could happen 1000's of years from now, i mean just look at the advances that we have made in the past 200 years. But that doesn't mean it will happen, or that eventually we wont all die out. i mean christ 7 billion years? that's a long ***** time, anything could happen by then. The point of the book, and the page is to talk about how the things that we have made are temporary, and to have a little fun with the idea that the things we think will last forever, wont if we aren't here to keep them up; as well as to point out the things we try not to think about that we make (ie plastic and radioactive material) will be around forever. but do i think we can know the future? no. and does it bother me that you are dismissive of the idea that maybe people wont overcome the obstacles put in front of them? yes. also ***** you and your America hating, were not on the decline, were just going through a rough patch. it happens to everyone (i also don't like being called an empire, lets leave that to Britain, okay), its happened before, it'll happen again, so lets not blow it out of proportion. And i love it how a citizen of a country that follows our lead in every ***** thing in the world (and yes, i know, you didn't tell me where you are from, but its a reasonable guess) wants to talk ***** about us. it must be hard to be so damn jealous.
          • Stevethegreat, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1I don't hate America. I love the US, I have many friends there.

            It's only that your decline has become apparent to the rest of the world as well. You're not leaders in about anything nowadays and of course I'm talking about innovation, technology and science. Of course you have the greatest military in the world but that's obsolete to a most civilized world we're trying to head out for. Medicine is left to South Koreans, Israelis and Europeans. The internet to Japanese, Koreans and (some) Europeans. The Auto-mobile industry's head is Toyota (Japanese). Mobile technology is flourishing to Europe and Japan (cell phones are two or three generations in front of yours). Your cars are still stubbornly utilizing 70s technology. You're dying breed fastened to your own success. Go on and live your American dream now.

            Also I love America, at least everything it stood for.
      • 80hd, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Sure globally were doing pretty well but once our energy situation peaks (likely soon) all our science fiction dreams will go sleep and worldwide living standards will revert to how they were 300 years ago. Everybody is living it up because there is no common goal for the world so we all think for ourselves.
        • Stevethegreat, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Historically every time an energy source depletes or is deemed inadequate we find new energy sources. Our sun is largely unharnessed, we can very well build efficient solar collectors outside our atmosphere. If that will be done we'll solve all our energy problems, don't even get me started on the prospect of nuclear fusion. What makes you believe that energy resources will be depleted one day, we're already using a tiny friction of the existent energy we can harness. Also we don't have to think globally to push forward, it was always the private initiative what pushed the world forwards, if it wasn't for the crazy Wright bros we may now had no flight travel, it only takes for an obscure man finding a way to tap solar energy and this day may not be that far away.
        • 80hd, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Yeah I'll give you that. The little pessimist in me says that technology has allowed to us to look everywhere. though in reality I think we're stubbornly refusing to look up at the sun though just because the work to benefit ratio isn't as fun as digging for fuel.
    • Stevethegreat, on 10/10/2007, -13/+7And how much do you know about entropy in our system (our universe)? Do you really know we are a closed system? What if alternate universes are out there and we're just a white hole of another one. Where does the initial matter of the bing bang came from? See, we know so little to even know the future of our universe or even of our planet for that matter. I don't know why you have been dugg up while we have no information of how limited our universe is. I strongly believe that we only know glimpse of what there is out there and jackass explanation like yours, hold no candle to the "real" reality.

      About the sun's burning down: How much do you know of Type III civilizations abilities? I'm not saying this necessarily will be our future, but bet your ass that if by any chance we're around in 5 billion years from now, we would very well be able to control our motherstar's lifetime. It seems extremely far-fetched for us but it is as far-fetched as a flying human made device landing to the moon was for a caveman and he lived just 50000 years ago.....
      • AntiScurvyLg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3$30 says most of the people digging you down think a type III civilization is a reference to a video game.
      • est1979, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2you read a lot of sci-fi, huh?
      • Stevethegreat, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1"you read a lot of sci-fi"

        NOT, I actually hate them. I have never ever read a sci-fi book, I find sci-fi movies cheesy and I like historical movies and history in general a LOT. Actually I've read a lot historical books and the future I'm talking about is the most realistic I can think about. Human history is not linear as you may think, it has its bumps and its downs, but there is a distinct line of human societies and humanity as a whole which drives from simpler systems to more complex one, evolution in other words. You see natural selection does not only exists to the gene-world alone, in fact the whole universe seems to be flourished by it and human societies couldn't be an exception. Of course our civilization can die spectacularly but if not it would be as successful as human was in contrast to the other animals. I have also the greatest philosophers of our time to agree with me, it's our inevitable future. I can't get how you don't get it, have you ever thought how we would realistically be in the future if we have not annihilated ourselves by then.

        Forget science-fiction *****, it's only the projection of the era it was written with some gimmicky gadgets added.
    • sgtbutterscotch, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5You are wrong because that is not the point of the graphic and the book. This is just an answer to a hypothetical question. I think I might agree with you that humans will still be alive in 4.5 billion years, but we'd probably be on a different planet.
      • Stevethegreat, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1All I was saying was that, if we're around we'll most probably find a way to rejuvenate our star. Then of course we may not want to do so, since we'll be in another star systems by the time, but I think saving our ancestral home would be a worthwhile cause
      • trezegol, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0"I think I might agree with you that humans will still be alive in 4.5 billion years, but we'd probably be on a different planet." wow...take a second to think about that.... imagine children learning about how people viewed digg to inform themselves 4.5 billion years earlier... wonder if the comment system will be fixed by then..
  • Mier, on 10/10/2007, -17/+34This is a repeat but a graphical one. I just love the genocidal part of the envirowhacko movement. Their wetdream is to have humanity disappear from the Earth. They also need to look up the numbers on their half-life figures I think they're a bit skewed.
    • KMye, on 10/10/2007, -4/+11I'm glad I"m not the only one that this struck that way. This just reminded me of one of the main reasons why I give such poor odds for our current civilization making it through the next hundred years. If it's not some brilliant, completely antisocial and psychopathic biology student who engineers our destruction out of his parents' basement, it'll be some "environmental" extremist or group of them who decide the earth is better off with humanity, ala Rainbow 6 (the book) or Brin's Earth (to give original credit).
      • moskaudancer, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Dugg up for the reference to one of the few really 'good' Clancy novels.
        It's fun *because* it takes itself so seriously.
        Also, Ding is a badass.
      • Taciturn, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Didn't the environmental extremists in "Earth" decide the world would be better off without goats?
    • ElFredo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+25Half-life of U238: 4.5 billion years so they are spot on.
      Half-life of Pu239 (weapon grade): 24,110 years, but to reach the natural background radiation level it needs several half-life periods. 250,000 years is about 10 half-life periods.

      BTW humanity will disappear EVENTUALLY. It's not a matter of IF but of WHEN. It depends on our use of natural resources as well as on the occurrence of global disasters, either naturally occurring (volcanoes, comets, gamma ray bursts, pandemics) or man-made (nuclear holocaust, pollution). If we continue to treat our ecosystem like a cesspool, we may be extinct within a few centuries. But even if we make the most rational use of available resources, I doubt that humanity as we know it could last more that one million years.
      • kellymahan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17Once humans get to the point that traveling to another star is as difficult as getting into space at this point in time, the extinction of humans pretty much becomes an impossibility. Except for alien races with better technology bent on our extinction. For sure we will see humans visiting mars within 500 years. Probably within our lifetimes. So for you to say that humanity would only last a million years.. think about how much we would have evolved technologically in that time frame. We either die out way before then. Or we become masters of the stars.
        • zeusthemoose, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12The most important time for humanity is right now, while we are still in our technological infancy. We have engineered the means for our survival and our destruction. While humanity as a whole lacks understanding of its creations, we are at risk for bringing about our own destruction accidentally or through a primitive war fought with modern weaponry. If we survive the next several hundred years and avoid a mass extinction event, you can bet your ass that our extinction will become nearly impossible.
        • hansenite44, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Mars could, in theory, be terraformed and inhabited within 300 years. By this time we should have several space elevators and HUGE space stations on Mars and the Moon. Once a working space elevator is completed, space exploration will explode exponentially. A trip to the Alpha Centuri system could be underway within 500 years. It would probably fail but it could be attempted. There are also some very smart people who theorize that there will be a point in the next 100 years in which artificial intelligence becomes so powerful that it will lead to an chain reaction and 1000 years worth of discoveries will be made in 5.
        • mbonnin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The Singularity is near...
      • sgtbutterscotch, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7What if all the humans become extinct, then evolution kicks in and creates animals identical to humans? Could they be called humans?
        • krebcycle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Enter the singularity, and we last as long as we have energy from the stars unless we suicide.
        • p0tent1al, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6A human is a made up word by scientists and "humanity". They could call their selves whatever they wanted.
          • foxhoundadmin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"word" is a made up... word... in fact, ALL words are made up... OMG! what am i saying!? gafredd diggnot oodllmaraioqwtyppp )♀j« d5g╟○§╚{{ A321{ ◑ ◔ ╔═╗
            ║▓▒░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
            ╚═╝ ∢∰⊛⋈⋓➩➪✮✮✆ AAAAAA A!!! ‼‼¡‼¡¡¡
          • sgtbutterscotch, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What I meant to say is... "Would they actually be humans?"
        • xerexes1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Define what you mean by the word "human"? Unless they are of the hominid lineage, then no, they would not be "human". They would be a species with a similar form only.
      • shinynew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1ok lets see
        Global disasters:, the only one that could really destroy all of us would probably be a comet/asteriod, which we are constantly searching for, we have several plans for diverting any one bent on our destruction.
        Gamma rays would only hit one side of the planet
        Volcanoes them selves could simply not destroy all of mankind.
        Man-Made: We are still finding obscure tribes in the jungles of the worlds, how will the holocaust kill them?
        Pollution: If memory serves we still evolve, we can still control tempature to some degree, at least some part of humanity will be able to survive if the earth does increase in its heating, there will be massive collapses of the ecosystem, but the Ice age also ***** alot of ***** up, and most stuff survived that.
        Lets thrown in another one for good measure:
        Man made disease that kills 99.999% of infected, we will still evolve, and create cures to disease, the biggest factor in this will be if a resistant person is able to either meet a uninfected person or another resistant person.
        I personally dont think we are going anywhere.
      • ratexla, on 05/19/2008, -0/+1Hmm well I heard that the average "lifespan" of a species is 1000000 years.
    • Mier, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2I do not buy into the fact that we as a species are destroying our environment. There's no such thing as a "Northwest Passage" and no matter how much crying in the night is done by enviros the ice at the north pole remains impassable. It may be dirty but it's not destroyed or being destroyed. Instead of walking around moaning about everything you should be inventing something. DO NOT take from others for the "Good of the Earth" we don't like things taken from us. Instead show us an alternative that's better or as good as what we have now.

      I like the line in the first episode of the new Dr. Who. "You humans always so worried you won't make it that you never consider what it would be like when you do make it."
  • Bahimiron, on 10/10/2007, -7/+126At what point do the aliens show up and let Haley Joel Osment out of all that ice?
    • quamsta, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17They weren't aliens... They were advanced robots.
    • quamsta, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11They weren't aliens... They were advanced robots.
    • AbsurdParadox, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3LOL I have this argument atleast once a month. Its as simple as this: Doesn't it make MUCH MORE sense if they were future robots?

      Also, it SAYS SO in the making of the film. Pwnt.
    • firebhaal, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0I see batman has reappeared at 20 years.

      /look under building
  • cg06vx, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2Rerun!!!, just in a different flavor
    http://reference.aol.com/article/_a/a-world-without-humans-it-all-falls/20070814141809990001
  • chinesechef, on 10/10/2007, -17/+4It should have been 'The world with the U.S.'
    • Bahimiron, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5Because only the US has subways, bridges, nuclear power plants, radio transmissions, barns and buildings?

      Jesus, what kind of stone age do you people in the rest of the world live in?
    • afireinside13t, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I think what he meant was the "world without the US," meaning how the world would improve without the USA.
  • cg06vx, on 10/10/2007, -14/+5Rerun!!!!
    http://digg.com/environment/A_World_Without_Humans_It_All_Falls_Apart_2
    • foxhoundadmin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"rerun?" wtf kinda re-res run digg now!? it USED to be called "DUPE!!"
  • everlaster, on 10/10/2007, -12/+1693,943,000 years... the last digger dies of loneliness after posting:"...Digg FTW!!"
    • AbsurdParadox, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6[BREAKING]
    • yohnstoppable, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9more like 3,943,000 years... the last digger dies of loneliness after posting: "I for one, welcome our..."
  • StacysMom, on 10/10/2007, -2/+78Cats and Dogs living together! Mass hysteria!
    • p0tent1al, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Cats will become females, dogs will become males.
  • sportbikepilot, on 10/10/2007, -10/+2sounds good to me. we got a great start ending ourselves, let's finish the deed already
    • unitedstatians, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Dr. Pianka is that you?
      • unitedstatians, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Some suggest that the human population is becoming "too diverse", DR. Planka give me a break and put a sock in it! !
  • ElFredo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+227The only thing that will outlast humanity forever will be our crappy TV broadcasts. How depressing.
    • CatalystGhost, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16At least there'll be beings out there getting episodes of Doctor Who *shrug*
    • matude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+20The whole universe will know how lame shows we've got =(
    • Renton, on 10/10/2007, -1/+35I can just imagine some aliens a thousand light years away going, "*****! Another reality show..."
    • AntiScurvyLg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+19In the grim darkness of the future....

      there is an alien race who thinks Paris Hilton is hawt.
    • gumby05, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Eternal reruns!!
      • unitedstatians, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1In other words, mystical Hell.
    • elbergel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5"Single Female Lawyer" :)
    • Universal, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2But there will be no one there to enforce copyright protection for the TV shows/radio/music being broadcasted into infinity.

      lol.
  • Parkeway, on 10/10/2007, -16/+9hippies.
    • Vicujozobenaxod, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Totally. They must really hate being human.
  • LFAB, on 10/10/2007, -4/+28Bridges will be gone WAY before 300 years.
    • matude, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Nah, there are several bridges standing right now, that are older than 300 years or so.
      The only factor I see destroying them faster would be nature.. but in 300 it won't be that wild.
      • MikeFromAmerica, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Do you have any idea what kind of constant maintenance is required to keep a bridge standing? Metal rusts. Concrete and stone crack. Wood burns and gets eaten by bugs.
        • jacquesm, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2yes, but in Italy they still have some aquaducts / bridges that date back tothe romans. Maybe they didn't read that book ?
    • broeks, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5The 35W bridge lasted about 60 years. So yeah.
      • EuphopiaB, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Some will break, some may last 1000 years.
        Hard to know.
    • archlich, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6No one remembers the Romans and their aqueducts? Those are slightly more than 300 years old...
      • krebcycle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6They don't build them like they used to.
    • Wacer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Some of the bridges would still be standing. The reason that most bridges don't last that long is because the bending and flexing that traffic puts on a bridge. If we are all gone, then this will not be happening.
  • retske, on 10/10/2007, -0/+26So after 'hundreds of thousands of years' a microbe will spring up and and eat plastic? Even if we are on the planet then it could be bad news for my GI Joe's and Tupperware. What will become of that chili (I think it is chili at least) that is in the back of my frige?
    • AnteChronos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19Actually, this is already happening. From the Wikipedia article on plastic: "two types of nylon eating bacteria, Flavobacteria and Pseudomonas, were found in 1975 to possess enzymes (nylonase) capable of breaking down nylon."
    • tizz66, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Hey, it's your chili that will evolve into a plastic eating monster!
  • Osjpr, on 10/10/2007, -16/+5Buried as inaccurate
    • PaulBleidl, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Thank you, inaccurate yes but still interesting to think about.
  • yanivalfasy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+16Horrible, Weisman picks the least interesting fact from every period of time.
  • dupeduperson, on 10/10/2007, -1/+41They made a mistake. At 10,000,000 years, the cockroaches will have evolved and start making their own trash. They will have also made factories that put too much oxygen in the atmosphere.
    • Arkonnan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1And at 10,000,015, illegal cockroaches will begin stealing their jorbs.
  • SirTheGuy, on 10/10/2007, -11/+9Buried as duplicate. This is the 3rd time I've seen this in 2 months
  • insonh, on 10/10/2007, -13/+144This is total crap!

    Here’s the real future if we disappeared…

    Left in their cellophane cocoons uneaten “Twinkies” for more than 10 years would become “self aware” and after a brief larva phase would emerge as the dominant species on the planet.

    Knowing that they would needed large quantities of sugar to propagate the species the Twinkies would enslave “Devil Dogs” and “Hostess Cupcakes” to work the sugarcane farms and a booming slave trade would ensue with Twinkies in other parts of the world exporting their Devil Dogs and Hostess Cupcakes to the New World.

    The indigenous “Little Debbies” snacks would be over run by Twinkie armies in a quest for more sugar.

    Academic Moon Pies would stage protests at the Twinkie colonialism with chants of “NO SUGER FOR TWINKIES” while other Twinkies would advocate that teenage Twinkies injected with cream should be allowed to have free De-creaming available paid for by the Twinkie Government.

    Baklava will end up attacking the Twinkies and call them infidels because Twinkies have no nuts in them.

    Other Twinkies will blame it on the Twinkies because they aren’t diverse enough and don’t understand the way the pastry world works.

    In the end a Fat Cheese cake will try to convince the rest of the pastry world that making more pastries of any kind is giving the planet a cold.
    • satx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Mmmm... cheese cake...
      • trajomoreno, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Is it a cake? Or is it a pie?
        Think about it...
    • uptown, on 10/10/2007, -0/+16Imus wants to know where the HoHo's fit into the equation....
    • xxeyes, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Hungry?
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You forgot the part where the Fruitcakes claim that the attack on the Giant Sugarcane was an inside job. But years later it was discovered after the war with the Baklava that it was.
      • insonh, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Na i didnt forget about the fruitcakes but you're wrong on that count

        they will be too busy trying to marry each other and staging rallies and comparing themselves to the Devil Dogs and Hosstess Cupcakes civil rights movement
    • MistaWiggs, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1quite an imagination you've got there...
    • MarvinGalaxy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0His Noodly Appendage will come down from On High and crush them ALL.
    • EvilFerret, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That was quite possibly the best comment I've ever seen on Digg. I need more!!!
  • cloudyprison, on 10/10/2007, -11/+10Awe, what a wonderful world without us horrible humans to muck with it. Maybe Alan Weisman should help make that vision come true by putting himself out first. Inaccurate!
    • protohiro, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Very odd that several diggers seem to think he is advocating this. Its just interesting and cool, you know, what if?
      • ratexla, on 05/19/2008, -0/+1Yeah, people always confuse COULD with SHOULD.
  • GoatMonkey2112, on 10/10/2007, -0/+34The poor lice and roaches. Somebody THINK OF THE ROACHES!!!
    • po43292, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I thought they were supposed to survive til the end of time!
  • StillConfused, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0Two days after humans disappear - the subways become "impassably" flooded?
    • Orion682, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10The NYC subway system and the sewer system share very thin walls and have maintenance passages running between them. Pumps run constantly to maintain both system. If you've ever lived in NYC and commuted via subway (as I do), you wouldn't be surprised, since whenever we get a heavy rainstorm, it's not uncommon for a handful of subway lines to go down due to flooding. Hell, last time it happened was just about 3 weeks ago.
    • AbsurdParadox, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Do your quotes around impassably imply that you don't think its a word?

      im·pass·a·ble (ĭm-păs'ə-bəl) pronunciation
      adj.

      Impossible to pass, cross, or overcome: impassable roads; impassable problems.
      • foxhoundadmin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1i think he means without humans there'll be nobody to pass said subways.
      • StillConfused, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0What I meant was: if all the humans disappeared, what difference would it make if the subways were impassable?
  • antitab, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2Wow, very humbling. Awesome.
  • jjb123, on 10/10/2007, -0/+101It's nice to know our legacy will live on as radio waves in space, any one who intercepts them will be able to learn all about paris hilton.
    • ronaldinho, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4and whoever is listening would think the only thing we do is tape themselves while we are having sex
  • padro, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2reminds me of this: http://digg.com/environment/An_Earth_Without_People_2
  • redhat_redneck, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9during those millions of years there's no way another species could become dominant? The split from ape to man is about 10-20 million years back. If it happened once, it can happen again. That puts a new set of primitive humans back just in time to see our barely recognizable bronze sculpture with billions of years to spare. If you follow that line, if he could figure out a way to mysteriously exterminate them and they'd probably have time to evolve a couple of more times before the sun burns out. I am sure self-loathing is counter-productive to the survival of our species, so in the interest of fulfilling our Darwinian legacy, would all the human haters please schedule a time when you can blow your brains out and leave the rest of us alone.
    • tizz66, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I think cats are secretly planning to take over the world. Have you seen the way they look at us? They know what they're planning.
  • Orion682, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15Incidentally, if anyone liked this sort of thing, there's a short story by Ray Bradbury called "There Will Come Soft Rains..." about the dying gasp of an automated house which survived a nuclear holocaust, and is unaware of mankind's absence. It's very well written and among my favorite short stories.
  • catachip, on 10/10/2007, -0/+25Well, thank God I've got nothing to worry about, all the bad stuff happens in one American city. Whew!
    • DrLex, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Continuation of the policy: "Scare the stupid nation"
  • linksus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6You trying to tell me that the tree will still be there in 250,000+k years ?
  • magnusswede, on 10/10/2007, -1/+43All that is left is American idol, flying through the universe. Forever... What have we done??
    • ATHEISTinHELL, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7At least our 24 hour news networks are on cable and are not on broadcast. All I have to say to the aliens, enjoy the 90's we sure did(except for the macarena).
    • warcin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Why do you think all the people are gone to begin with. Aliens caught a few episodes of that and came to stop our attack on the universe.
      • krebcycle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1But they liked us when they saw Hitler promoting the Olympics, they sent us a space travel machine because of it.
    • oojamaflip2006, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I'm quite fond of the idea of sending American Idol into space, along with all its viewers, maybe we could use a giant rubber band?
  • bobbydiamondz, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Okay, the guy hates mankind. I understand. Maybe the disappearance of man should start with him. Wait... what? He's not the problem, it's all the other pesky people? Figures.
  • crowbarred, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5And to think... only this will happen in NY, amazing. For the rest of us its back to Wii & IPhone.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 139 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.