Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
While I do realise you (Gaianne) haven't said this, but for what it's worth on the sidelines: from what I said, I follow that should civilisatio fall completely but humanity survive as hunter-gatherers, methinks memory would lapse, and civilisation would emerge again (maybe in 1000, maybe in 100,000 years), and the problems would begin anew.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 07:57:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Some primitivists say that should we go back to paleolithic civilisation, returning to civilisation would be harder than the first time around ; loss of topsoil and biodiversity means agriculture'd be harder ; no more easily accessible  iron or copper ores, as those have been harvested ; harder industrial revolution as we are out of cheap fossil fuel...

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères
by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 08:04:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I rather suspect that tells you more about them than anything else.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 08:12:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
If there is a "next time" it will be without the oil and coal, which should prevent us from getting back to the nuclear age. Still, we'd simply be right back to the regional overshoot and collapse cycle through unsustainable agriculture and deforestation. There is a small chance of mitigating that if we manage to send what we know forward.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Fri Jan 4th, 2008 at 03:31:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series