By Robert A. Vella
About 75,000 years ago, a supervolcano erupted at what is now Lake Toba on the Indonesian island of Sumatra. This was a catastrophic explosion so massive that it plunged the world into a prolonged period of darkness that quickly killed-off much of the Earth’s photosynthetic plant life and lowered global temperatures for hundreds of years. As their food sources disappeared, the decline of many animal species soon followed. The effects are similar to what has been predicted for a nuclear war, commonly known as a “nuclear winter.”
At that time, Homo sapiens were primitive hunter-gatherers in the midst of migrations out of Africa. DNA evidence indicates that our species nearly went extinct after the eruption. A “genetic bottleneck” occurred which may have reduced the human population to as few as 2,000 individuals. But, we managed to survive; and, that remnant population was sufficient to restart our evolution.
Now, humanity appears to be facing another extinction threat within this century which author Elizabeth Kolbert detailed as the sixth mass extinction event in Earth’s history. From: Reducing the Risk of Human Extinction
In their catalogs of extinction risks, Britain’s Astronomer Royal, Sir Martin Rees (2003), gives humanity 50-50 odds on surviving the 21st century; philosopher Nick Bostrom argues that it would be “misguided” to assume that the probability of extinction is less than 25%; and philosopher John Leslie (1996) assigns a 30% probability to extinction during the next five centuries. The “Stern Review” for the U.K. Treasury (2006) assumes that the probability of human extinction during the next century is 10%.
So, if this threat is realized, how many of us would need to survive to continue our species? From: Catastrophe, Social Collapse, and Human Extinction
It seems that groups of about seventy people colonized both Polynesia and the New World (Murray-McIntosh, Scrimshaw, Hatfield, & Penny, 1998; Hey, 2005). So let us assume, as a reference point for analysis, that the survival of humanity requires that one hundred humans remain, relatively close to one another, after a disruption and its resulting social collapse. With a healthy enough environment, one hundred connected humans might successfully adopt a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. If they were in close enough contact, and had enough resources to help them through a transition period, they might maintain a sufficiently diverse gene pool, and slowly increase their capabilities until they could support farming.
This analysis focuses entirely upon organic human survival on Earth’s surface. While it is at least possible that isolated enclaves could support small tribes of hunter-gatherers, there is no certainty that would happen. The unknown variable at this point is how catastrophic will climate change become. In the event that wiped-out the dinosaurs 66 million years ago, about 75% of all species went extinct including all four-limbed vertebrates (i.e. tetrapods) over 55 lbs. except for a very few number of species (e.g. crocodiles, sea turtles). In the event known as the Great Dying around 252 million years ago, 96% of all marine species disappeared and the only known mass extinction of insects occurred. Therefore, the possibility of organic human survival is conditional upon the severity of climate change impacts as well as upon the exact nature of those impacts.
However, what did not happen during the Toba supereruption 75,000 years ago which would undoubtedly happen in the 21st century is artificial human survival underground and in remote sanctuaries. During the Cold War, the U.S. government and other governments around the world began building underground shelters to protect some public officials and private citizens in case of nuclear war. One such secret installation which was later exposed is the Greenbrier Resort in West Virginia. It is reasonable to assume that this government-sponsored underground survival strategy has continued and has likely escalated as the existential dangers posed by climate change have become clearer. Additionally, it is widely known now that very rich people around the world have been making sophisticated doomsday preparations such as purchasing land in remote areas and taking other extreme measures to ensure their personal survival. Depending on the circumstances, some of their efforts might be successful.
In conclusion, despite the great uncertainty for the century ahead, some humans will probably survive the currently developing extinction event at least for a while. For them, the inevitable question might become whether or not survival under those conditions was a good idea.
So we put pockets of groups is 200 or so individuals around the world in spots picked to provide adequate food and shelter. The last bottleneck was in caves on the coast of East Africa. Humans had shelter in the caves and food from the sea. Sounds like a good project. I expect the survivors will be in the mountains in South America and Asia. Maybe some on the coasts in Alaska or Canada. And some in jungle settings where hunter gatherer groups still survive. Whether or when they would develope past hunter gatherer groups is a good question. Maybe in 50,000 years or so. Would be a slow journey.
Is it worth it. I think so but you would have to talk to the survivors.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That all makes sense. If organic human survival as hunter-gatherers occurs, would they have any contact with the artificial survivors (i.e. those in underground government sanctuaries, etc.)? If so, what would be the nature of such interactions?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Good question. I think any encounters would likely be by chance. I don’t see how we could tell what organic groups would survive and where they would be located. Some studies could be made of that likelihood and plans for search and contact. Nature and purpose of concont is interesting. Organic groups might not be interested in contact and change. Question is who would change and in what direction.
Omega Man was a good movie that death somewhat with this issue. Probably were a lot of others.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Omega Man was a good movie. Another good story that dealt with this issue was H. G. Wells’ The Time Machine.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on sdbast.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Of course, the storms, floods, fires, and heatwaves of climate change will be unlike a single catastrophe; they will escalate over centuries. Hunting and gathering might not be possible, there might not be much to hunt or gather. Perhaps the bunker folk will perform the role of the Morlocks and feed their surface kin . . . and vice versa.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Yes, a social and evolutionary split as depicted by H. G. Wells could happen. Before such an occurrence, and before humanity falls back into the problematic existence of hunting/gathering, our current civilization will face the crises of food shortages (from climate-induced agricultural decline) and fresh water shortages (also due to climatic changes) both of which will trigger great social instability later in this century.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Cannibalism? Eat the fat people to save the species! 😬
LikeLiked by 1 person
There won’t be many fat people left, I’m afraid. All the survivors will go on a diet.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hahahaha! A diet of WHAT exactly? 😛
LikeLike
Good question.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Therefore, the possibility of organic human survival is conditional upon the severity of climate change impacts as well as upon the exact nature of those impacts.”
~ This is a critical consideration.
Survival of any enclave would depend upon cooperation and survival skills of its members. I cannot imagine any elitist group, accustomed to being served by others, surviving for any length of time.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Indeed, those elites who couldn’t otherwise find sanctuary would be ill-suited for a hunter-gatherer existence; although, that would be a rude awakening for most people I suspect.
Yes, the severity and nature of this climate change catastrophe absolutely is the critical consideration for our survival.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Then there is the movie Soyent Green. I think of that one often. Life in the oceans died followed by increase in temperatures.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Love that movie. “Soylent Green is people!”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ever read a book called The Last Gasp by Trevor Hoyle? An old book, but I recall it was quite good.
LikeLiked by 1 person
No. Is it similar to Soylent Green?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Not really…but you can see by the comments here…you might like it
The Last Gasp https://www.amazon.com/dp/0517550849/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_tai_.d3FBbDDWQ2E3
LikeLiked by 1 person
Or whether or not our survival is good for the planet. I sometimes wonder. And it may all just repeat…this small group would multiply, begin agriculture again, bring back technology on a faster scale, build cities etc.
And one day you’d begin to have wars, religious strife, corrupt politics and the re invention of the nuclear bomb…
I’m afraid it would eventually be like it is now with minor changes.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Yes, that does seem to be our nature.
LikeLiked by 2 people
SF projections of this survival scenario would be interesting. I would anticipate an instant master/slave social structure. Just what the megalomaniac elites would want.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, for the bunker survivors; although, the social structure of hunter-gatherers is different.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agree – I was supposing that it would be impossible to survive on the earths surface. Of interest is the old E M Forster SF story The Machine Stops, written at the beginning of the 20th century and appears to predict the internet. The BBC did a brilliant dramatisation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hmm, I’ll have to check that out.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nuclear winter? Yellowstone park volcanic eruption? So many things going wrong we overlook that huge disasters although infrequent can happen. Also if we lose our pollinators, what will be left of the natural world able to support – and so on.
LikeLiked by 1 person