Any Nibiru and Mayan calendars concern only those who are unfamiliar with astronomy and history, but the scholars to focus more on, is it really so wrong one computer program from forty years ago, predicted the social and economic collapse and mass extinction of humanity in the XXI century.
Forty years ago, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (USA) was created a computer model World3, which conducted the calculations, which brought amazing results. None of the critical resources (including, for example, iron ore is of decent quality), human civilization has no reserves, which would enable it to survive the XXI century. Notorious work "Limits to Growth" (1972) reflects the results of this model, and attempts to "feel" to it within the changing global industrial system, which would not end horribly, showed that the inertia, typed it, too large for the operational impact of the events .
The only way to a longer (alas, not infinite) to maintain the status quo, the researchers found an immediate halt economic growth. Otherwise, they noted, the society goes too far, to avoid self-destruction and the death of billions of famine and the collapse of the economic institutions that provide them with a comprehensive life today.
Most importantly, it threatens the global development — is, according to the researchers, the desire of some countries of the Third World (then it was about Korea, Japan, etc.) to pull up to the level of per capita consumption figures of the world first: the resources are not enough for the latter, they complained.
Genre loved scientists. The new study "in 2052: a global prediction for the next 40 years", undertaken by one of the creators of the original World3 Jorgen Randers analysis of Norwegian Business School in Oslo, claims that global apocalypse in the second half of the XXI century will still take place and will be exacerbated over with the predictions of 1972 because of global warming. Dennis Meadows, head of labor over World3 MIT-team, believes his former colleague too optimistic. The situation is worse because the steps that Mr. Randers said at least postpones the end (the Kyoto Protocol, the spread of renewable energy, etc.), ineffective — primarily due to the fact that mankind acts uncoordinated, and as Europe struggles with carbon dioxide, the PRC, for example, doubling the GDP time in 8 years, which is inconsistent even with the existing level of emissions. And that's not to mention the enormous growth of the resource consumption of the country.
Settlements for improved World3, carried out in 1994 and especially in 2004, show this clearly believes Dennis Meadows.
"I see a collapse now, — said Professor Meadows. — The amount of food per capita [worldwide] drops, energy is becoming more inaccessible, artesian water depleted." When, in 1972, humanity, according to the model produces less carbon dioxide that it was equal to 85% of consumption of the earth's biosphere, but now it is about 150% — and that figure is growing. "
Jorgen Randers in the book is really optimistic. In the coming decades, the appearance being preserved: the rich economies continue to grow, the production of food in them will increase as global warming and the excess CO2 will stimulate the growth of plants and open to agriculture huge tracts of new land — for example, in Siberia. Population and the economy will grow, albeit slowly, for a lot of money will be spent on more costly extraction of mineral resources, which will be less. Scientists expect 8 billion people by 2040.
Then floods and desertification will reduce the amount of agricultural land. Attempts to mitigate the effects of human warming, with little success now will be useless: the warming will increase due to the positive feedback. For example, forest fires become widespread and transform forests from a net consumer of carbon dioxide into net producers. "It is very likely that long before the middle of the century we will have war," — said the scientist. This refers to the numerous local slaughterhouse between countries, still has suitable for agriculture land, and those who can barely has them.
By 2100, the population, according to the scenario, could be reduced to 4 billion together for 60 years.
You can make fun of the model described in its framework the situation of the Stone Age, when decent flint was so rare and valuable that they traded for thousands of kilometers (seen uses of flint French origin in North America.) Like, if you could also plot the population of mastodons and stocks flint and concluded inevitable catastrophe because extinction of the first and second deficit.
But you can remember that climate warming at the end of the last glaciation has led to a number of consequences, which resulted in major disasters occurred Europe and the food crisis of this magnitude, which in reality was not only able to thin out the human population, but also "to bestow" a number of found skeletons of the time natural rickets — a feature not indicative of wealth and prosperity of the then Homo Sapience.