StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Recently, I've been doing some research for a sci-fi universe I am working on (or, at least, the timeline for it,) and I've run into a bit of a problem. In my history, there is supposed to be some sort of man-made calamity (read a third world war) that takes place, kills lots of people and generally makes a muck of things.

Today's world seems to be a pretty unfriendly place, but would it ever be unfriendly enough to spark off a third world war where nuclear weapons are exchanged? That's the question of the day.

Discuss!

The world has been through much worse before. But you can't tell anything about the future in this world. Do you think before Sept. 11th we would have predicted a terrorist attack? Do you think before we invented the A-Bomb we would have predicted Japan's swift defeat in a matter of days? Do you think before the Cold War ended we would have predicted peace with Russia before the year 2000? Do you think several years before the American Revolution we would have predicted the rise of a new nation? Do you think before event A happened we would have known event B happened? We will never know what the future holds. So why bother predict when most likely, your prediction will be worth jack shit in two years?

The world will end as soon as I declare ready my doomsday end of history machine. Buaaaahh ah ah [probally revealing this was a mistake]

It won't make your history more appealing, but my greatest fear for the end of the world is the actual "sustainable development" idea.
I don't see how a rising number in population and the belief that we always have to live better than before, more cars, more clothes, etc can be reconciliated with environmental protection.

The Earth environment continues to degrade, and the efforts opposing it seem too weak.

If something will prove our undoing, I put my money on that.

Colonel Olrik wrote: It won't make your history more appealing, but my greatest fear for the end of the world is the actual "sustainable development" idea.
I don't see how a rising number in population and the belief that we always have to live better than before, more cars, more clothes, etc can be reconciliated with environmental protection.

The Earth environment continues to degrade, and the efforts opposing it seem too weak.

If something will prove our undoing, I put my money on that.

Then we move manufacturing and mining offworld to the moon or the asteroid belt...BING! Problem solved!

MKSheppard wrote: Then we move manufacturing and mining offworld to the moon or the asteroid belt...BING! Problem solved!

Genius.. Pure Genius!!!

http://www.xs4all.nl/~mke/exitmundi.htm

^_^ I thought it would fit in this topic. Exit Mundi.

>.> It may scare you, but only if you're not thinking that much.

Colonel Olrik wrote:The world will end as soon as I declare ready my doomsday end of history machine. Buaaaahh ah ah [probally revealing this was a mistake]

It won't make your history more appealing, but my greatest fear for the end of the world is the actual "sustainable development" idea.
I don't see how a rising number in population and the belief that we always have to live better than before, more cars, more clothes, etc can be reconciliated with environmental protection.

The Earth environment continues to degrade, and the efforts opposing it seem too weak.

If something will prove our undoing, I put my money on that.

What's wrong with trying to live a better life? What is your definition of a better life?

I think we are slowly moving towards an equilibrium where the enviroment can co-exist with current affiars, and I think it's gaining momentum.

RayCav of ASVS wrote:[
What's wrong with trying to live a better life? What is your definition of a better life?

I think we are slowly moving towards an equilibrium where the enviroment can co-exist with current affiars, and I think it's gaining momentum.

There is nothing wrong. I like to consume. I like to have a good life. I want to get a better life.

But the pressure to get more rich and healthy [normal], combined with the increase of population, does not necessarly co-exists well with environment equilibrium, no matter how we try.

I'm not saying that a equilibrium cannot be reached. I'm saying that it is not assured to exist and that it seems we're not doing enough effort in that direction

Of course my solution to the enviroment is to destroy it. Mother Earth is a bitch and she deserves to fucking die! WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!

Unless she thinks we're her ungrateful bratty children and kills us first. LOL

IRG CommandoJoe wrote:Unless she thinks we're her ungrateful bratty children and kills us first. LOL

Hopefully, mother earth can distinguish between her childs and will only hit raycav

I'll say it once I'll say it agian

When Virutal Relaity becomes cheeper than dating, Mankind is doomed

Overpopulation might kill off a large part of the population, but only in ceratin areas. In places like America and Europe, and even some places in the third world, there won't be any effect. Still, I'm quite optimistic about the future, as biotech foods will allow more food to be grown, and better transportation allows places with surpluses of food to get food to where it is needed.

Nuking off a couple places , lowering the population. Possibly. But aninhlation you'd need some heavy duty nukes that fires the atmosphere. Once, I attain power after a convential WWIII, if the people rebel Earth is fucked.

Colonel Olrik wrote:

IRG CommandoJoe wrote:Unless she thinks we're her ungrateful bratty children and kills us first. LOL

Hopefully, mother earth can distinguish between her childs and will only hit raycav

Nah, just you

Colonel Olrik wrote:The world will end as soon as I declare ready my doomsday end of history machine. Buaaaahh ah ah [probally revealing this was a mistake]

It won't make your history more appealing, but my greatest fear for the end of the world is the actual "sustainable development" idea.
I don't see how a rising number in population and the belief that we always have to live better than before, more cars, more clothes, etc can be reconciliated with environmental protection.

The Earth environment continues to degrade, and the efforts opposing it seem too weak.

If something will prove our undoing, I put my money on that.

Ooops, I forgot the "natural causes" option. Darnit . . . ohh well.

*bump*

Mr Bean wrote:I'll say it once I'll say it agian

When Virutal Relaity becomes cheeper than dating, Mankind is doomed

Point taken.

On your next date, split the expenses 50:50. It's the only way to save Mankind.

mother earth beat man kind thousands of years with floods, vulcanos, huricanes and bunch of other natural desasters. now mankind will have it´s revenge.

let´s chop down the rainforest to build another disneyland there.