The End of the World

[PurplePoot]

Y2K actually had some foundation, however crappy it was.

 

[The Reborn Devil]

We need to find ourselves some Prothean technology or else we'll end up like the Drell: Hanar's buttslaves!

_{(tag: Mass Effect)}

Nah, more like the Krogan homeworld.

Anyway, enough off-topic, we need to discuss the topic at hand.

 

[arafor]

The 2012 hype is like all of the other end of the world hypes that have ended up with simply nothing happening.

The 2012 hype is surrounding the year when the Mayan calendar ends. (Not the end of the world)

In fact this year (2012) is meant to be a year of good luck for the world, as the mayan calendar restarts this year.

As for the whole "World ending in 2012! OMGWTFBBQ?!" its complete malarky and is not going to happen. I mean sure, technically the world could end any day but its hard to set a date on it and base that claim off a complex and different culture than our own.

 

[Fussiler1]

99% of all the different species that have lived are EXTINCT. Not the sign of a good planet to live on imho.

Uh, weren't most of these causes either climate change or influence from space?
I'd say humans are quite adaptable to these situations.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Uh, weren't most of these causes either climate change or influence from space?
I'd say humans are quite adaptable to these situations.

If a large meteor crashes into Earth, I think we'd have a hard time adapting. We can't handle natural disasters well, why should we be better off versus space? Oh and as for whether or not we easily adapt to climate change - I've got one title for you, Global Warming.

 

[Fussiler1]

If a large meteor crashes into Earth, I think we'd have a hard time adapting. We can't handle natural disasters well, why should we be better off versus space? Oh and as for whether or not we easily adapt to climate change - I've got one title for you, Global Warming.

I'm not sure but I read that there was this Icarus-Project against meteors. Could be greatly mistaken though.

Humans not adaptable? There are humans all across the world that live in extremely different climates.

 

[Zombie]

This shit is just another stuff to keep the media alive with, just like the bird/swine flu or the global warming hype.

It'll be more and more enhanced and actual as 2012 approaches, then suddenly the calendar switches to 2013 and people will find some other bullshit to drama about.

 

[-Kobas-]

This shit is just another stuff to keep the media alive with, just like the bird/swine flu or the global warming hype.

It'll be more and more enhanced and actual as 2012 approaches, then suddenly the calendar switches to 2013 and people will find some other bullshit to drama about.

Can't agree more

 

[The Reborn Devil]

Humans not adaptable? There are humans all across the world that live in extremely different climates.

We're wearing clothes. Without them most of us would freeze to death. We also need medications for all kinds of crap, and whenever we take a flight to another continent we need vaccines so we don't die from foreign diseases (but many still die). We can survive increase in heat, but the world can't, so we'll die anyway, and volcanoes, earthquakes, diseases, lightning, etc, will kill us too.

 

[arafor]

We're wearing clothes. Without them most of us would freeze to death. We also need medications for all kinds of crap, and whenever we take a flight to another continent we need vaccines so we don't die from foreign diseases (but many still die). We can survive increase in heat, but the world can't, so we'll die anyway, and volcanoes, earthquakes, diseases, lightning, etc, will kill us too.

We are meant to adapt, its what is unique about human beings. I mean sure we may have to rely on clothes and medicine and stuff to function but theres nothing wrong with that. It simply means we are at a level where we could adapt to most circumstances, sudden or in the future. THat is not to say a large amount of people wouldn't die but I doubt we could not find a way to survive. As this relates to 2012 I am not sure because I don't think the WORLD will end. If anything, a natural disaster or otherwise we as a species will survive maybe not a lot but we could/can do it.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

We're wearing clothes. Without them most of us would freeze to death. We also need medications for all kinds of crap, and whenever we take a flight to another continent we need vaccines so we don't die from foreign diseases (but many still die). We can survive increase in heat, but the world can't, so we'll die anyway, and volcanoes, earthquakes, diseases, lightning, etc, will kill us too.

Well your kinda missing something with the whole without cloths we'd die. How many other species wear cloths (other then small dogs with spoiled girls)? How many other species develop medication specifically made to alleviate the specific illness you have?

Sure, Humans as animals running on nothing more then instinct wouldn't do too well with adapting - on the other hand, when humans start finding other ways to adapt other then natural selection (we limit this on ourselves as much as we can possibly can) they do pretty well.

 

[Dentothor]

absolute poppycock

 

[Disasterpiece512]

I think it's pure bullshit. So far, there have been about 13 apocalypses. Why would anybody believe this crap is beyond me. That Mayan calendar bit is the pure essence of bullcrap. The calendar just finished, then it starts over. It's not the end of the world each year, when the gregorian calendar ends! And all those "planets allining, solar flare, meteor strike" are pathetic theories in my oppinion. There would be a bigger chance of a fart causing the entire planet to burst into flames.

Pure bullshit.

 

[The Reborn Devil]

We are meant to adapt, its what is unique about human beings. I mean sure we may have to rely on clothes and medicine and stuff to function but theres nothing wrong with that. It simply means we are at a level where we could adapt to most circumstances, sudden or in the future. THat is not to say a large amount of people wouldn't die but I doubt we could not find a way to survive. As this relates to 2012 I am not sure because I don't think the WORLD will end. If anything, a natural disaster or otherwise we as a species will survive maybe not a lot but we could/can do it.

Well your kinda missing something with the whole without cloths we'd die. How many other species wear cloths (other then small dogs with spoiled girls)? How many other species develop medication specifically made to alleviate the specific illness you have?

Sure, Humans as animals running on nothing more then instinct wouldn't do too well with adapting - on the other hand, when humans start finding other ways to adapt other then natural selection (we limit this on ourselves as much as we can possibly can) they do pretty well.

What I mean is that we rely on clothes and medicine to survive. Humans as a species isn't really adaptable. We need vaccines before we can fly away to somewhere else. Dogs and cats are waaayy more adaptable. Humans are one of the least adaptable species and we got a really bad immune system. Monkeys are physically more advanced than us. The only thing we have is a slightly more advanced brain. The only places we actually could survive (without houses and clothes) is in Africa, some parts of Asia and some parts of USA, and even there we would be killed, not all, but many.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

What I mean is that we rely on clothes and medicine to survive. Humans as a species isn't really adaptable. We need vaccines before we can fly away to somewhere else. Dogs and cats are waaayy more adaptable. Humans are one of the least adaptable species and we got a really bad immune system. Monkeys are physically more advanced than us. The only thing we have is a slightly more advanced brain. The only places we actually could survive (without houses and clothes) is in Africa, some parts of Asia and some parts of USA, and even there we would be killed, not all, but many.

But still - your missing a huge point. If Humans just suddenly said "screw all this progress we made with cloths, medicine and technology" that would be valid. Humans are incredibly adaptable because they make up for physical ineptitude with other things like technology.

 

[HardOn]

People are just waiting for the world to end

When people see that the world doesn't end in 2012, they'll just push the year back something like 10 or 12 years and declare a new doomsday.

I'm sure the media will make it their effort to show how foolish these people are when its all said and done, a hype this large definitely deserves some ridicule.

true. but I think people would become paranoid when the date 21.12.2012 is coming near.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

true. but I think people would become paranoid when the date 21.12.2012 is coming near.

That's not even complete - I will accept nothing less of my doomsday date to be

21.12.2112

Someone call the mayans, they got the date wrong by about 100 years

 

[The Reborn Devil]

But still - your missing a huge point. If Humans just suddenly said "screw all this progress we made with cloths, medicine and technology" that would be valid. Humans are incredibly adaptable because they make up for physical ineptitude with other things like technology.

The human body is not adaptable. We wouldn't survive without clothes. We're cheating on nature in a way. Normally we wouldn't survive everywhere on the Earth.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

The human body is not adaptable. We wouldn't survive without clothes. We're cheating on nature in a way. Normally we wouldn't survive everywhere on the Earth.

Hey, as long as whales can stay under water for incredibly long periods of time, birds can fly and bacteria can survive in the harshest geysers under water then I think it's fair that humans can wear cloths.

 

[Mechanical Man]

When searching about Nibiru/Planet X I stumbled on interesting theory about Nemesis, a hypothetical Sun's companion about 1.5 light years ago. It would be responsible for mass extinctions which happen like every 26 millions years. It would be because this star would hurl comets from Oort cloud to the center of Solar system, where many of them would hit planets, including Earth. This could be one theory to explain the extreme eliptic orbit of planetoid Sedna.

However, if out there is such star, why isn't discovered yet? Even though brown dwarves are dim, they should be found much easier than these distant rocky objects. These stars don't emit much visible light, but at least they are visible well in infrared.

 

[Kwah]

This thread is now about conspiracies/apocalypses/mass hysteria in general.

Go.

 

[CookieFalcon]

2012 doomsday is a lie, but the year exists, but hey, so do years 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018. Doomsday was meant to be about 6 times before, but nope it hasn't come yet.

I'll rofl at those who believe in 2012 doomsday.

 

[Tleno]

We already have a whole bunch of threads, plus you already made one about The End some time ago. So this is stupid. Besides everyone knows that when apocalypse will start we won't care because we'll already be dead from the last apocalypse.
And those things you ssaid re not horrifying because:
-People allways blow up something from invention of gunpowder, this is not an exception.
-Bush was the best source of entertaiment and funny phrases for like 8 years.
-People allways test nukes from invention of nuclear energy, this is not an exception.
-Awesome people allways die, so what? even they can't cheat the death!
-read my previous statement
-previous statement again...
-Pffft, Ipads... you know, it seems you're just fooling around. Have a nice day with your ban/-rep

And if your theory would be truth, something terrible would (not) happen right in a week... can't wait to (not) see it.


By the way, shouldn't this thread already be closed or that another thread about the same 2012 year thing should be closed? Now it looks like our OT forum is kinda end-off-the-world-crazed.

 

[Kwah]

Continue any discussion in other thread.

 

[arafor]

The human body is not adaptable. We wouldn't survive without clothes. We're cheating on nature in a way. Normally we wouldn't survive everywhere on the Earth.

"Normally" we wouldn't survive on Earth? We evolve here and spread out and with that evolution came clothing which initially wasn't even needed as we first set out of Africa. Not to mention we were initially furrier and so we had to compensate as we evolved and so we took the need for clothing. That,s like criticizing a turtle laying an egg in a warm batch of mulch, it does it because the eggs need to stay warm or they freeze to death, like a human. I am not trying to disprove any valididty you have that we use clothes and medicine on a regular basis but we are not exactly dumb either.

 

[N1ghthawk]

Now lately everyone's been hearing more and more about 2012 being the year that the world ends via cataclysmic disasters worldwide, alignment of the planets causing some razzmatazz on Earth, or some other event of equal impact.

I must have missed the memo...

 

[Pyritie]

This thread is now about conspiracies/apocalypses/mass hysteria in general.

Go.

9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB

am I doing it right

 

[Hakeem]

It could happen that the Earth kills us before we can kill it though. 99% of all the different species that have lived are EXTINCT. Not the sign of a good planet to live on imho.

Statistic is highly misleading. Maybe we're the lucky one because that statistic isn't 100%. Forgetting the past, how many species are alive today?

Life returns to heavily radiated areas faster than we predict. Where there is a will, there is a way, and with an entire ecosystem with a will to survive... It does.

We can survive increase in heat, but the world can't, so we'll die anyway, and volcanoes, earthquakes, diseases, lightning, etc, will kill us too.

Yeah, I don't see it. Did the cyclic climate changes of the past also carry mass extinctions with them?

Sure, I accept that we might be causing a record heat surge, that has never happened before. If it has never happened before, then we cannot possibly know what will happen. "Everything is gonna die," doesn't sound all that plausible a hypothesis.

What I mean is that we rely on clothes and medicine to survive.

Not at all. We rely on clothes and medicine to stay in our comfort zone. Yes, there are millions that need medication, but there are billions more that do not.

Humans are one of the least adaptable species and we got a really bad immune system.

Speak for yourself. If you'd been drinking raw milk all your life instead of the "safe" stuff you buy in plastic, you wouldn't have had a problem with the e-coli in the latest batch. The people that have been drinking it all their lives didn't get sick. WHAT COULD BE THE DIFFERENCE?

And how does government react? NO MORE RAW MILK. Yeah, let's make everyone have a sissy immune system.

People need to realize that getting sick is what keeps you alive.

We would be killed, not all, but many.

If it doesn't kill us all, we have survived. You can go ahead and kill 99.99999% of all species that ever lived on Earth. All we need is that "insignificant" fraction that lives.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB

am I doing it right

George Bush never cared about Black people

(why yes you are)

 

[-Kobas-]

Omg it is the end of the world we are all going to die!!!


-.-

 

[Biggrouse]

yes, i'm sure half of these people also thought the world was flat. and god, they said the same stuff during WW II, the cold war, and WW I. but they at least had the actual threat of the world being horribly ravaged, and now with the 2012 we have nothing to say but "obama"

 

[N1ghthawk]

I really hate to break this to you guys, but you are going to die regardless.

 

[Crazed_seal2]

2012 is bull, i mean the mayans didn't predict their end...
Humans are not the best survivors in the world, although we are smart some things we just can't adapt to.
Bacteria are the no.1 survivors, they change and mutate like crazy.
We find a new antibiotics for bacteria! Bam bacteria adapts to counter! They mutate themselves to withstand against there environment

Zombie Apocolypse can't happen, we all watch zombie movies so we know how to survive. Plus virusses are 'things' that cause cells to produce more virus particles,
-: Virus
O: cell
- breaks O transfer DNA or RNA (-) Cell produces more virus, virus then breaks free and this happens again.

 

[Fussiler1]

I really hate to break this to you guys, but you are going to die regardless.

Err..

I'm immortal! I'm invincible and shall never die!

.. no but really, duh

 

[The Reborn Devil]

Statistic is highly misleading. Maybe we're the lucky one because that statistic isn't 100%. Forgetting the past, how many species are alive today?

Fairly many, but still 99% are gone. It's just a matter of time before another natural disaster wipes us out.

Life returns to heavily radiated areas faster than we predict. Where there is a will, there is a way, and with an entire ecosystem with a will to survive... It does.

Surely will isn't enough. You must be good to adapt to changes in climate, you must be able to survive even the harshest environments and above all, be able to hide from predators which try to kill you. This is all part of the natural "survival of the fittest", which we humans, have neatly escaped by building houses and using clothes which "removes" a few of our too many flaws.

Yeah, I don't see it. Did the cyclic climate changes of the past also carry mass extinctions with them?

Yes, climate changes triggered several volcanic eruptions which filled the atmosphere with dust, smoke and gases and rapidly caused an ice age which lasted a long time. It went so fast that many animals and plants were "saved", meaning their bodies remained perfectly intact and they were frozen alive. It didn't go from warm to cold over many years, but over a matter of minutes (Source: National Geographic Channel). This is only one of the many disasters that have killed many animals.

Sure, I accept that we might be causing a record heat surge, that has never happened before. If it has never happened before, then we cannot possibly know what will happen. "Everything is gonna die," doesn't sound all that plausible a hypothesis.

It has happened before, but not this fast. Because of our huge emissions of methane, CO2, and other gases have set in motion something that shouldn't happen yet. The volcanic eruption on Iceland was caused by increase in heat (Sources: National Geographic Channel and NRK (A Norwegian channel)).

Not at all. We rely on clothes and medicine to stay in our comfort zone. Yes, there are millions that need medication, but there are billions more that do not.

Many don't need medication, but most people get vaccinated. I didn't get it though. It's our clothes and houses that really make the difference. Trust me, you wouldn't survive in Norway at winter time without clothes or a house, probably not even summer because it rains a lot and it's not warm all the time during summer. The only places we can survive without clothes and houses are in Africa and other places which are very warm.

Speak for yourself. If you'd been drinking raw milk all your life instead of the "safe" stuff you buy in plastic, you wouldn't have had a problem with the e-coli in the latest batch. The people that have been drinking it all their lives didn't get sick. WHAT COULD BE THE DIFFERENCE?

And how does government react? NO MORE RAW MILK. Yeah, let's make everyone have a sissy immune system.

People need to realize that getting sick is what keeps you alive.

We do have a really bad immune system. Sure, we can make it better by being exposed to diseases, but many animals have an immune system which already is good. Cats, for example, can stick their noses in all kind of shit and don't get sick, if we try the same we'll be stuck in bed for a week, maybe longer. And even if we do get exposed to diseases and drink milk straight from the cow for many years, we are still more prone to becoming sick.

If it doesn't kill us all, we have survived. You can go ahead and kill 99.99999% of all species that ever lived on Earth. All we need is that "insignificant" fraction that lives.

My point is we wouldn't be nearly as many, and we wouldn't be spread out all over the world. We would be in certain areas only. We would also be a part of "natural selection", we are somewhat part of it, but not in the same way (some people are immune to aids. Again my sources are National Geographic Channel and NRK).

 

[Deleted member 157129]

I personally like the thought of wiping out eighty percent of humanity, the world would (eventually) become a better place for those who did survive. Either that or we need to start finding new plants or new technology that lets us live in places where we can't now, and let the nature grow.

 

[TwistedImage]

^

yesh. Destroy 99.9999% of humanity as far as I care; we'd still be in the thousands as far as I know (don't care to calculate) and the world will be a lot better for everyone, be they human, animal, insect or arachnoid. Oh, or fish.

 

[The Reborn Devil]

I doubt any of you would actually remove your clothes and live outside without medicines and all that. There a few who will even shower 5 minutes less just to save electricity. How will anyone voluntarily abandon their houses and clothes to live like the animals? Sorry, but words aren't enough.

Btw, I'm not saying we should live like the animals, I love clothes and houses and computers and all those things, I just wanted to point out that the human body isn't as adaptable and "perfect" as most people would want to believe. Oh, and that the Earth isn't perfect. The Earth is trying to kill us with every chance it got.


Edit: And now you're probably thinking "but I didn't say I would abandon my house", but you didn't care if many of us died, which is the result of living like the animals.

 

[TwistedImage]

I would love to abandon house, clothes and everything my life is about for a completely natural life. Hell, I'd do it right now, except civilization tends to get in the way.

I'd probably be dead within a month, but at least I'd die happy.

 

[Hakeem]

Fairly many, but still 99% are gone. It's just a matter of time before another natural disaster wipes us out.

How old are crocodiles as a species? Rats? Roaches?

There are lots of species that survive an apocalypse. Some even survive multiple ones.

You must be good to adapt to changes in climate.

Not in the tropics. Even so, we have been doing exactly that for thousands of years. It's nothing new.

You must be able to survive even the harshest environments.

Not really true of any species. Many many species would die in the harshest of environments. That life exists at all at the poles or at the bottom of the ocean is a testament to just how much will life has to live.

Be able to hide from predators which try to kill you.

We are the most dangerous game. Sure, the average person might have trouble taking down an elephant for the first time, but most of us could get a bear if we really tried.

Yes, climate changes triggered several volcanic eruptions.

I don't think that is physically possible. It's usually the exact opposite: Massive volcanic eruptions such as yellowstone release such a great amount of material into the upper atmosphere that it circles the globe and changes climate:

Which filled the atmosphere with dust, smoke and gases and rapidly caused an ice age.

There exists the hypothesis that the global cycles of hot and cold climates are actually an effect of the sun being more or less hot.

It went so fast that many animals and plants were "saved", meaning their bodies remained perfectly intact and they were frozen alive.

That can only be a localized phenomenon. It's possible that extremely severe weather might invoke feezing rain for long enough to have this effect, but it would take extreme order to cause this to happen to a hemisphere all at once.

Pyroclastic flows on the other hand can "freeze" the entire countryside under a massive layer ash.

Source: National Geographic Channel.

You can't just source the entire channel. What program specifically?

The volcanic eruption on Iceland was caused by increase in heat.

In the mantle, sure. Isn't Iceland right on top of a divergent fault line? It's basically a constant eruption. Saying that anything else is a definitive cause is kinda stretching the ability of researchers.

We can make it better by being exposed to diseases.

That is the only way to make it better. So why don't we do this?

Many animals have an immune system which already is good.

As far as I know, babies receive antibodies from their mother via her milk. Though I have not investigated early immunobiology extensively, this does seem to provide valuable insight.

Cats, for example, can stick their noses in all kind of shit and don't get sick, if we try the same we'll be stuck in bed for a week, maybe longer.

Kittens may be able to because they acquire the antibodies from their mother, and then they build them themselves from doing so. If we wanted to stick our noses in all kinds of shit we would likely have the same immunities.

If we want to be immune to something, there is only one way.

And even if we do get exposed to diseases and drink milk straight from the cow for many years, we are still more prone to becoming sick.

Than a cat? Maybe. Keep in mind that there are ailments that affect cats and dogs and other animals that do not affect humans. You'd really have to ask a vetrinarian if you want a less biased picture of immunity. Humans arguably care/know more about human diseases than for any other organism.

My point is we wouldn't be nearly as many.

Of course.

We wouldn't be spread out all over the world. We would be in certain areas only.

I wouldn't go that far. You really can't underestimate life.

Some people are immune to aids.

Then who should we be breeding?

 

[Deleted member 157129]

I would love to abandon house, clothes and everything my life is about for a completely natural life. Hell, I'd do it right now, except civilization tends to get in the way.

I'd probably be dead within a month, but at least I'd die happy.

I don't think I would abandon clothes, need something to cover myself in - at least until I start hunting deer (Erlend Loe - Doppler reference, awesome book) and make pelts for clothing. Would probably also bring some human tools just to get started.. I mean, it'd be rather tough to go from one day waking up in a bed, taking a shower, eating breakfast, checking the e-mail, reading news, taking the bus to University and greeting all the people you know, attend a lecture, eat lunch at a café and have a beer in the sun with your friends before going home to play computer games or something, to a day where you wake up on a strip of grass in the woods, discover you've had a rock beneath your head all night, go for a walk in the forest with no clothes or shoes on a quest for food (berries most likely), sit down along a lake and think about life until you get hungry again and need to find some more food. Of course, if you could survive the first few .. months, I suppose you'd be getting the hang of it. Bring some friends though, or at least a girl/boyfriend.. someone to do stuff with. I think being alone in nature, with no home, clothes or assurance of life (you don't know if you'll find food, you don't know if you'll get bitten by some poisonous insect or animal.. every day is a new challenge) would be exhausting, at least after a while. I personally love sleeping outside, in nature, just taking a walk through the terrain (I tend to avoid trails, at least the bigger ones where you're bound to meet somebody every ten minutes). I also like living on a day-to-day basis, I don't want to know what I have to do in the future, I'll deal with it when it's there - although it's always lurking in the subconsciousness, so everything I do is thoroughly weighed with consideration of the future.

Would love to discuss this further, but this isn't the appropriate thread.

 

[Tleno]

Pft, living like the animals would completely screw up our civilization.
If the end of the world would start, it would be more racional to try to save all our technological achievements so humanity wouldn't have to start all over. Brotherhood of The Steel, ftw!

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

Yes 2012 is nonsense. Although I liked the movie, I find it hilarious that they made a whole movie about that - just to bring money ofc.

The world will end either
a) slowly thx to the climate changes including volcanoes, disasters and such in hundreds of years
b) hit by an asteroid in 2028
http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/space/9803/11/asteroid/index.html
c) get destroyed by humanity such as world wars with use of atomic bombs. Little do those 'I hez Nuclear Weapon' countries realize what pressure is an atomic/nuclear putting on the Earth if used. It would just cause a wave that may trigger earthquakes, volcanoes and such.

It's like standing on an ice lake with a crack in the ice and dropping a boulder in the crack.

 

[Tleno]

Nah, all "I can haz a nuke" countries maybe except for North Korea realise the risk that they might create a chain reaction of all world countries nuking each other, devasating whole Earth, so this theory is not so possible as you think.
The theory with earth destroying us with volcanoes and other junk is not so possible too, humans can survive stuff like this because it won't happen on whole Earth, some places will be just slightly effected by disasters and people will survive there.
So technically the only racional end of the world is aliens or something like a meteorite that would cover the whole earth is dust ad not letting the sun rays to heat the surface and would make a titanical damage to our ecosystem.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

??

A meteorite just 500 km in diameter is enough to destroy the Earth or cause irreversible effects the least. You dont need a meteor as large as the Earth to destroy it. A 1000 km in diameter would be equal to thousands of atomic bombs and can destroy it with the velocity of impact.

I don't think you understand how it works. There are already earthquakes, volcanoes and such. Currently the Earth is unstable and a scientific article revealed in 2014 there may be more earthquakes. With the current instability just few nukes will bring a lot of pressure on the Earth bringing more earthquakes. It may not destroy the planet but can cause global destruction and literally like 1/3 of the population gone.

Extinction doesn't only come by planet explosion such as being hit.. it can happen by destroying lots and lots of life forms and deserting the planet. So im pretty sure my theories do make sense.

 

[Tleno]

Just like in that theory that even if the metheorite will be shrunken by athmosphere, it still might cause the earth magnetic pollies to change, destroying the magnetic field and sun rays blocking capabilities of Earth atmosphere, making everything on it die from sun radiation.

 

[Just_Spectating]

you guys sit around and research things like this?
pretty emo

 

[TheDivineBoss]

you guys sit around and research things like this?
pretty emo

Pretty emo? I find it common sense.

 

[The Reborn Devil]

How old are crocodiles as a species? Rats? Roaches?

There are lots of species that survive an apocalypse. Some even survive multiple ones.

Some animals survive, sure, but that doesn't disprove that 99% of all animals are extinct.

Not in the tropics. Even so, we have been doing exactly that for thousands of years. It's nothing new.

By using clothes and houses and ovens and fireplaces etc. The human body could only survive on hot areas. Normally (that would be if we have lived like animals) we wouldn't be spread out all over the world.

Not really true of any species. Many many species would die in the harshest of environments. That life exists at all at the poles or at the bottom of the ocean is a testament to just how much will life has to live.

Some animals have learned to live there through evolution and "survival of the fittest", we can only live in such places by using something to protect us, f.ex u-boats.

We are the most dangerous game. Sure, the average person might have trouble taking down an elephant for the first time, but most of us could get a bear if we really tried.

We would need weapons to take down elephants and last time I checked we don't have any kinds of naturally occurring weapons like claws or sharp teeth. We're not predators. There are many animals who could easily kill us if we had encountered them without guns or other weapons. Not too many years ago a dog called "Odin" killed several people and they had to put it down (with guns). He was, btw, over 2 meters tall when he stood on his feet.

I don't think that is physically possible. It's usually the exact opposite: Massive volcanic eruptions such as yellowstone release such a great amount of material into the upper atmosphere that it circles the globe and changes climate:

Well, according to experts the volcanic eruption on Iceland was a result of increase in global temperatures.

There exists the hypothesis that the global cycles of hot and cold climates are actually an effect of the sun being more or less hot.

That ice age I talked about was caused by all the dust and gases in the atmosphere.

That can only be a localized phenomenon. It's possible that extremely severe weather might invoke feezing rain for long enough to have this effect, but it would take extreme order to cause this to happen to a hemisphere all at once.

It happened over the whole Earth and there wasn't any freezing rain involved.

Pyroclastic flows on the other hand can "freeze" the entire countryside under a massive layer ash.

Ash didn't cause it. They found ash in a few layers (this is in the ice) above the frozen animals and plants (ash that had fallen down from the atmosphere after the ice age had occured). Oh, I almost forgot, the reason it seemed like it had frozen rapidly was that one of the animals they found there was eating of a bush. If it had frozen slowly that animal surely would have escaped and not just stood still thinking "my frozen body would look really awesome when someone finds me".

You can't just source the entire channel. What program specifically?

It was one of those special programs which only show up for a few days and then they're gone. It was actually a 2012 documentary. They also talked to real Mayans about the Mayan calendar and shit. And since this is "The End of the World" thread I guess I could just say a few things about this. According to these Mayans (and tons of drawings and figures they found on some pyramids) the whole calendar ending thing is because it's the end of "cycle 6". Yes, we are in "cycle 6" now, and according to the Mayans each cycle ends with a huge natural disaster which wipes out most of the animals. That ice age I talked about was the end of "cycle 5"
There is a site somewhere on the Earth where you can clearly see what happened (the rapid freezing and stuff) which they showed on that program.

In the mantle, sure. Isn't Iceland right on top of a divergent fault line? It's basically a constant eruption. Saying that anything else is a definitive cause is kinda stretching the ability of researchers.

Well, according to experts the volcanic eruption on Iceland was a result of increase in global temperatures.

That is the only way to make it better. So why don't we do this?

Because people are stupid and there is a risk of dying?

As far as I know, babies receive antibodies from their mother via her milk. Though I have not investigated early immunobiology extensively, this does seem to provide valuable insight.

I'm not an immunologist, but it doesn't seem like babies get much antibodies from their moms when it comes to us humans. Babies still get (many) diseases their mothers are immune against.

Kittens may be able to because they acquire the antibodies from their mother, and then they build them themselves from doing so. If we wanted to stick our noses in all kinds of shit we would likely have the same immunities.

If we want to be immune to something, there is only one way.

I'm not an immunologist, but it doesn't seem like babies get antibodies from their mom when it comes to us humans. Babies still get (many) diseases their mother is immune against.

Than a cat? Maybe. Keep in mind that there are ailments that affect cats and dogs and other animals that do not affect humans. You'd really have to ask a vetrinarian if you want a less biased picture of immunity. Humans arguably care/know more about human diseases than for any other organism.

And we also care enough about our cats/dogs to notice when they're sick. Also, cats rarely get any lethal diseases, but for us humans there are more lethal diseases than we could fathom. If we just step outside we have a high risk of getting skin cancer, and if we don't go outside we get other diseases as a result of not being out in the sun (xD).

I wouldn't go that far. You really can't underestimate life.

In a few thousands (or hundreds of thousands) years we will probably have different kinds of humans, some with hair over their body who can survive in the North, and some without who can survive where it's hot. As of right now we need clothes and houses.

Then who should we be breeding?

Obviously those who get those immunities, or else the whole "survival of the fittest" thing fails



Please ignore any typos or weird choices of words you grammar nazis out there. It's hard to find those small things when you know what you had in mind when writing and when there are so many lines.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

TheTerran, there's been natural disasters all the time on Earth, that's what I learned at least, so why should volcanoes and earthquakes destroy Earth now and not before?

tleno, yes, I couldn't care less about "our civilization" .. I wouldn't mind if it got ruined. I wouldn't mind if all our technology was lost. It's making the humans, as an animal, weaker. We rely too much on machines. Most people can't even live without electricity, but our planet would certainly be better off without it.