Talk:Timeline of the far future: Difference between revisions
→Evolutionary biology: new section |
|||
Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
:::No, I mean when I broke up the "Future of the Earth, the Solar System and the Universe" section into separate lists. Was a good idea (the list was getting too long) but it seems to have killed off a lot of interest. The fact that the BBC made a [http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140105-timeline-of-the-far-future barely credited infographic] out of it hasn't helped either. Still, it remains as popular as it always has been, if the viewing stats are anything to go by. It's just not as oft-mentioned as it used to be. <b>[[User:Serendipodous|<font color="#00b">Serendi</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Serendipodous|<sup><font color="#b00">pod</font></sup>]]<font color="#00b">[[User talk: Serendipodous|ous]]</font></b> 00:14, 18 February 2015 (UTC) |
:::No, I mean when I broke up the "Future of the Earth, the Solar System and the Universe" section into separate lists. Was a good idea (the list was getting too long) but it seems to have killed off a lot of interest. The fact that the BBC made a [http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140105-timeline-of-the-far-future barely credited infographic] out of it hasn't helped either. Still, it remains as popular as it always has been, if the viewing stats are anything to go by. It's just not as oft-mentioned as it used to be. <b>[[User:Serendipodous|<font color="#00b">Serendi</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Serendipodous|<sup><font color="#b00">pod</font></sup>]]<font color="#00b">[[User talk: Serendipodous|ous]]</font></b> 00:14, 18 February 2015 (UTC) |
||
::::I put it back. I really think it's OK, and I think readers prefer it that way. <b>[[User:Serendipodous|<font color="#00b">Serendi</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Serendipodous|<sup><font color="#b00">pod</font></sup>]]<font color="#00b">[[User talk: Serendipodous|ous]]</font></b> 18:01, 14 March 2015 (UTC) |
::::I put it back. I really think it's OK, and I think readers prefer it that way. <b>[[User:Serendipodous|<font color="#00b">Serendi</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Serendipodous|<sup><font color="#b00">pod</font></sup>]]<font color="#00b">[[User talk: Serendipodous|ous]]</font></b> 18:01, 14 March 2015 (UTC) |
||
== Evolutionary biology == |
|||
In the first paragraph it is stated that evolutionary biology predicts how lifeforms will evolve over time. Is this true? Are there any peer-reviewed statements about the future evolution of life agreed upon by the scientific community in the same way, say, the future of the sun is agreed? We all know evolutionary biology explains how life on earth has evolved and which factors affect its evolution but, does it have long-term predictive value concerning the outcomes? |
Revision as of 18:07, 12 July 2015
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Timeline of the far future article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 90 days ![]() |
![]() | To anyone who considers this article depressing or disturbing; please do not say so on the talk page. Wikpedia is not an internet discussion forum. As an antidote, you might try reading this short story. |
![]() | Timeline of the far future is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured list on November 10, 2014. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Information on this page was text-merged from the now redirected pages Exasecond and longer and 11th millennium and beyond. Please see here and here for full editor credit. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Timeline of the far future article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 90 days ![]() |
Congratulations
Just a note of congratulations to the editors who put this article together. In Elmo Keep's All Dressed Up For Mars and Nowhere to Go, she describes the effect this article had on her: "By the time I got through to the end I suffered a panic attack of such intensity the walls of the room appeared distended in my vision, and I momentarily lost the ability to hear. Then I lay on the floor of my office and cried for a very long time." Can there be higher praise? -- ToE 03:06, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you :) It does seem to have an effect on people, though I've noticed that effect has lessened since I introduced the new format. I think the narrative kinda lost its potency. Serendipodous 09:55, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
- Do you mean the reformatting from a bulleted list to the current table? -- ToE 19:51, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
- No, I mean when I broke up the "Future of the Earth, the Solar System and the Universe" section into separate lists. Was a good idea (the list was getting too long) but it seems to have killed off a lot of interest. The fact that the BBC made a barely credited infographic out of it hasn't helped either. Still, it remains as popular as it always has been, if the viewing stats are anything to go by. It's just not as oft-mentioned as it used to be. Serendipodous 00:14, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
- I put it back. I really think it's OK, and I think readers prefer it that way. Serendipodous 18:01, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- No, I mean when I broke up the "Future of the Earth, the Solar System and the Universe" section into separate lists. Was a good idea (the list was getting too long) but it seems to have killed off a lot of interest. The fact that the BBC made a barely credited infographic out of it hasn't helped either. Still, it remains as popular as it always has been, if the viewing stats are anything to go by. It's just not as oft-mentioned as it used to be. Serendipodous 00:14, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
- Do you mean the reformatting from a bulleted list to the current table? -- ToE 19:51, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Evolutionary biology
In the first paragraph it is stated that evolutionary biology predicts how lifeforms will evolve over time. Is this true? Are there any peer-reviewed statements about the future evolution of life agreed upon by the scientific community in the same way, say, the future of the sun is agreed? We all know evolutionary biology explains how life on earth has evolved and which factors affect its evolution but, does it have long-term predictive value concerning the outcomes?
- Featured lists that have appeared on the main page
- Featured lists that have appeared on the main page once
- Old requests for peer review
- FL-Class Astronomy articles
- Low-importance Astronomy articles
- FL-Class Astronomy articles of Low-importance
- FL-Class physics articles
- Mid-importance physics articles
- FL-Class physics articles of Mid-importance
- FL-Class Time articles
- Mid-importance Time articles
- FL-Class Geology articles
- Mid-importance Geology articles
- Mid-importance FL-Class Geology articles
- WikiProject Geology articles
- Unassessed Astronomy articles
- Unknown-importance Astronomy articles
- Unassessed Astronomy articles of Unknown-importance
- Unassessed Solar System articles
- Unknown-importance Solar System articles
- Solar System task force
- FL-Class Statistics articles
- Low-importance Statistics articles
- WikiProject Statistics articles
- Pages using WikiProject banner shell with duplicate banner templates