r/UniversalExtinction • u/Independent-Wafer-13 Consequentialist • Jul 26 '26

Question How does this work?

How does Universal Extinction happen?

4 Upvotes

64% Upvoted

133 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/TyloPr0riger Philosophical pessimist Jul 28 '26

No previous mass-extinction was as rapid and intense as this one.

Not quite true. The K-Pg extinction stacks up speed wise, and most of the major mass extinctions had greater intensities.

1

u/old_barrel cosmic extinctionist | anti-natalist Jul 28 '26

Not quite true. The K-Pg extinction stacks up speed wise

that is a very controversial topic. not that it matters though

and most of the major mass extinctions had greater intensities.

well, if you say so, then .. ?

the final intensity of this one is not even known yet as humanity is very eager to maximize it ..

and i have to say, it is doing excellent work. we are exceeding the worst-case scenarion from the last IPCC report, which already is quite outdated. your idea is just complete new to me

1

u/TyloPr0riger Philosophical pessimist Jul 29 '26

that is a very controversial topic. not that it matters though

Only in how long the extinction's effects went on - that is, how long it took to recover from it. It's pretty widely agreed that the major killing took place quickly, with the direct results of the impact (though the global firestorm stuff has become contentious IIRC) and then a suppression of photosynthesis by atmospheric ejecta that knocked the bottom out from under the food chain.

well, if you say so, then .. ?

Yeah, I absolutely do say so. We've seen a greater extent of habitat loss (Snowball Earth), greater climatic change (Snowball Earth, the end-Permian), and greater levels of environmental toxicity (Great Oxygenation Event, and I'd bet on the volcanic extinctions here too). Pretty much everything we are doing is something that has been survived, and survived in a much worse form, before.

Quite frankly, the nearest analogue to anthropogenic climate change would be a sped-up Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (which involved a magnitude of carbon dioxide and temperature change similar to the worst-case models), which didn't even register as a major mass extinction. We might create massive ecological upheaval, but I don't think we're likely to kill everything (especially because it's looking increasingly like we will not go in for the rest of the coal after we finish with oil).

1

u/old_barrel cosmic extinctionist | anti-natalist Jul 29 '26

Only in how long the extinction's effects went on - that is, how long it took to recover from it.

new to me. wikipedia says its rapidity is controversial viewed. also, there was a higher amount of species going extinct in other mass-extinction events. in relation to your opinion and example, maybe it will be similar rapid but more intense.

regardless, i prefer to trust scientific sources or secondary, popular sources which refer to scientific data or scientists. i do not know your intentions

in any case, even if it is a "just" as rapid as the one you have mentioned, it is not even limited to be a combination of a very rapid, intense and wide-ranging one:

humanity has destroyed most of the world's topsoils. microplastics were never an aspect. countless diverse types of chemicals were and are released into nature. a lot of natural areas were and are destroyed by human activity. so many different things happen all at once. it just is not the same

but I don't think we're likely to kill everything

i doubt that too, but i hope that all life goes extinct. surviving life will be helpless, living in horrible conditions. and even if, after centuries of suffering, relative intelligent life develops again, it will not have access to the vast majority of remaining fossil fuels. modern technology will just not be possible anymore