A:   Because it is not another book on how to make more money, or be more beautiful, or retire at 50. Rather, Vanishing deals with one of the most important issues of the day—the prospects for the survival of our species, particularly over the next few critical decades.

Q:   Isn’t the species doing just fine?

A:   That depends on where you live on Earth and your particular circumstances. However, even for the most privileged, the issues raised in Vanishing are critical as they speak to the world our children and their children will live in. The assumption that we will continue to live as we presently do, without any major adjustments, is unrealistic.

Q:   What is this Book about?

A:   Vanishing explores man’s past evolution, current predicament, and possible future extinction.

Q:   Why is man’s past evolution relevant today?

A:   Man’s evolution is examined by studying how nature (heredity) and nurture (environment) have worked to shape man into what he is today. Only by understanding what “drives” Homo sapiens will it be possible to explore what changes may be required to preserve the species.

Q:   What is modern man’s predicament?

A:   Modern man’s predicament refers broadly to man’s collision course with nature—his attitude of ruthless exploitation leading to depletion of non-renewable resources, pollution of the environment, overpopulation, with its accompanying increase in human aggression, and other effects. Modern man’s predicament is not as obvious as being at war, though the consequences are far more serious.

Q:   Isn’t the fundamental problem climate change?

A:   History tells us that climate is not a constant. Warm and cold periods alternate. In each case habitable regions are opened and closed, which leads to mass migrations. In an overpopulated world, such migrations are difficult to accommodate. The core problem is not the climate but overpopulation.

Q:   Why is the species at risk?

A:   Man has developed extraordinarily quickly on the technological front. He is by far the most advanced toolmaker this planet has ever seen. His technical progress, however, has outpaced his social progress. This imbalance in development, with the humanists trailing the scientists, has created the current predicament. If the term Homo sapiens remains the designation for a mechanical genius and a spiritual imbecile, the fate of the species is sealed.

Q:   How does man’s ego factor into the equation?

A:   At its current inflated level (our ego, that is), it is not helpful. Where man himself is involved, and we look essentially at ourselves, we are apt to become emotional and our unbiased scientific minds tend to be shrouded in the smoke that rises from our burnt egos.

Q:   How does your background shape your outlook on mankind and its future prospects?

A:   As I geologist, I deal in geological time—that is the time this planet has been around and not just that brief period of time in which we, the newcomer Homo sapiens, have been in existence. Does it make sense to explore the short span of modern man’s history without ever measuring it against the background of the history of our planet, or at least the history of life as we know it today? I submit that such an approach might induce historians to take a somewhat humbler view of our species, much to the advantage of us all.

Q:   Will the future allow for us all to live at the standard of living currently enjoyed in the western developed countries, such as the U.S. and Canada?

A:   No. We come to realize today that in the western world we are presently enjoying a standard of living which we do not deserve; in fact, we have mortgaged the future with our behaviour.

Q:   Does that mean that our quality of life will deteriorate?

A:   Not necessarily. The quality of life is not directly tied to the standard of living. It is customary today in affluent societies to subscribe to a waste of material goods that is absolutely unnecessary. For example, in fighting boredom we blow away more resources between Friday night and Monday morning than during the entire working week. Conclusion: the enormous resource appetite (and concomitant pollution) of the overdeveloped countries is largely fuelled by our desire for entertainment and is not required for a basic, comfortable existence.

Mental and spiritual freedom, the most important aspects of a dignified life, can be maintained without the presently associated high level of material consumption. On the contrary, the material consumption, and the energies directed in the production and consumption of these material goods, detracts from enjoying the more leisurely aspects of life.

Q:   Are we talking about the survival of planet Earth?

A:   No, just the species Homo sapiens. It is mankind’s overblown ego that often equates the two. Green movements are hell bent on saving the planet. Well, let’s just be realistic. The planet is doing just fine. True, it has a little skin cancer, deadly to the human race, but hardly of any consequence to the planet.

Q:   Is there hope for the species?

A:   Yes, but we must act relatively quickly. After the agricultural and industrial-scientific revolutions, it is now time for the Human Revolution.

Q:   What exactly is this Human Revolution?

A:   The term Human Revolution refers to a change of attitude in man for which there is no precedent in his recent history. It is called a revolution as any calculations make it clear that it has to occur very quickly in order to be effective. The change required is one that turns away from self-centredness and personal greed. The modern predicament as we observe it today is caused by the large human population, but equally by the insatiable human appetite for material goods.

Q:   What is the alternative to the Human Revolution?

A:   Very simple and straightforward—Homo sapiens have had it.