From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Sun Jun 01 2003 - 15:25:30 MDT
Darin Sunley wrote,
> As near as I
> can tell, the Doomsday Argument cannot predict the end of humanity without
> first postulating the end of humanity. It only follows if that assumption,
> plus the assumption that human birth rates will not decrease immediately
> before the last human is born, are postulated.
Agreed! The Doomsday Argument makes a lot of assumptions to prove its
point. There is no evidence for those assumptions, and the whole argument
falls apart if you try to find evidence for the assumptions.
Another interesting point is that the Doomsday Argument has been valid for
every era of humankind, even going back to Neanderthals and ancestral
monkeys. And it has always been wrong in its prediction every time. Why
should we suddenly assume that it will become accurate during our era? It
is like an ancient text carved in stone that says "The End is Near!"
Eventually, it may become accurate, but not because of any impeccable logic.
-- Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, IAM, GSEC, IBMCP <www.HarveyNewstrom.com> <www.Newstaff.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 01 2003 - 15:41:25 MDT