I just watched the movie “The Road” so I don’t think I’d want an extinction even happening any time soon, thanks.
I have two cats. 
(But they’re neither fluffy nor white.)
Woops, sorry, I only thought of that after posting, (that the volcanic ash would of course spread to other parts of the world). I just pictured Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump jumping on private jets and fleeing the devastation for as long as possible. Sort of like in the 2012 movie, only a little slower.
My thoughts on this are that if any large animals survive the event that humans would survive. I think that it would take a near universal extinction type event to take humans out of the picture on this planet at this point. Either that or something that is so virulent to humans (like Captain Trips, but even more so) that there simply aren’t enough breeding pairs of humans left to continue on.
-XT
After a volcanic eruption 60k years ago humans were down to 1000-10000 breeding pairs. But we still survived.
I think it is impossible for the species as a whole to die from infectious diseases since you could kill 99.99% of humans, but that still leaves 700,000. And that 700,000 will have knowledge of agriculture, medicine and germ theory that allows them to repopulate quickly.
A meteor that sets the entire planet’s surface on fire might kill us off. But even that, I really don’t know. Some pockets way above sea level might survive.
Is this something we could set up after the event has already happened? Should we hurry up and do so now, before it’s too late? Or have our benevolent government overlords already secretly set something like this up?
The difference between 99.99% and 100% is minuscule. Why must a Stand-style supervirus necessarily leave any survivors?
Well, if it doesn’t, it make the thread question moot. I assume humanity can’t survive a total extinction event.
Humans would survive all but the most extreme extinction event. It would have to be several orders bigger than any impact event since there’s been life on earth to wipe us out. It would have to be a huge asteroid the impact of which literally blows or burns our atmosphere off.
If you’re interested in some of these possibilities (well, the solar flare and nearby supernova, at least), I’ll recommend Phil Plait’s book Death from the Skies. Yes, the same Phil Plait as the Bad Astronomer.
I’m surprised you’ve not recommended anything by Matheson on the subject of human extinction.
(I kid, I kid! Don’t eat me.)
700,000 spread across the entire surface of the earth is pretty damned thin; we’re talking about one person left alive in each city, perhaps. Unless all 700,000 are on Madagascar.
In a city of 10 million, a 99.99% loss still leaves 1000 people alive - enough for a breeding population - and finding others in a large city is going to be easier than in the country, simply because it’s easier to communicate.
I suspect the biggest problem in a disaster situation is not what the survivors could achieve if they acted collectively, but rather getting them to act collectively in the first place. Even if the survivors were geographically concentrated, I suspect most would focus on grabbing what they could for themselves rather than worrying about long-term social objectives. Add to this the lack of cohesive law enforcement, and survivors would be largely reduced to scavengers wary of other human contact.
As a side note, the early parts of Stephen King’s The Stand paint an interesting and IMHO realistic picture of what the world would be like if a large percentage of the human population (say 99%) died of a plague.
I just finished reading “On The Beach”, novel by Neville Shute for some cheery holiday reading. Radiation poisoning from nuclear bombs spreads over the whole earth except the lower part of Australia.
:(:(
And they’re retelling Day of the Triffids on the BBC.
This is the one area in which the much-maligned Postman with Kevin Costner is extremely prescient and wise, in my opinion - that movie removes all of the glamor of the “lone wolf” Mad Max-style post-apocalyptic hero and shows that the only way to really survive in the collapse of society is to form large groups. And communicate. Communication between pockets of survivors could be essential; without it, isolated people might think they were the only ones left in the whole world, not knowing that just a few miles away there were other survivors. The will to live on and survive would be greater with the knowledge that there were others out there.
In The Road, which I am assuming is one of the things that has lead to all these threads about apocalyptic events lately, all plant and animal life is dead, so there is no possibility of agriculture and no hunting or fishing. This is a grim scenario indeed. The only food options are canned or preserved stocks, or other people. In such a scenario, humans would be less likely to want to cooperate - the main advantage gained from cooperation and forming groups would be the ability to maintain a fixed and fortified position in one place, and try to grow food. With no sunlight and no plants and no good soil and water, farming is out, and the only way to eat is to forage.
Getting people to cooperatively forage would be tough.