Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Which humanity ending global catastrophe are you most concerned about? Which humanity ending global catastrophe are you most concerned about?
View Poll Results: What will destroy us first?
Global Warming
18 26.87%
The destruction of objective reality
11 16.42%
The genetic divergence of the haves from the have nots
0 0%
AI takeover
11 16.42%
Robotic killing machines
1 1.49%
Anti-Biotic failure/Pandemic
6 8.96%
Nuclear War
14 20.90%
Other (see my post)
6 8.96%

04-25-2018 , 05:25 PM
omg, you whiny ****, stfu and go away

Just endless, incessant whining. Like a ****ing petulant 3 year old.
04-25-2018 , 05:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by preki
here is how the oh so tolerant left deals with people who dispute man made global warming.
Someone needs a safe space, lol. btw, what do you think about man made global warming?
04-25-2018 , 05:34 PM
By the way, it's impressive to look at that hate mail and look at how on-topic it is. The right-wing version of those responses would include a bunch of ethnic slurs just because his name ends in a vowel; by comparison, the hateful intolerant lefties keep it pretty substantive. The only super out of bounds part is the suggestion his kids should die too, come on, they're innocent in this.

But all in all, pretty tame. Any female or nonwhite or gay person who expresses opinions unpopular with the right has this stuff crushed in vileness.
04-25-2018 , 05:37 PM
Preki do you think the "tolerant left" moniker is for everyone in the US that is left? How far left? What about the people that are in the US who are left and wouldn't be considered left in other countries, how to you know if they are part of the "tolerant left"? Also how do you know all of those responses are from people that are from the "tolerant left"?
04-25-2018 , 05:41 PM
doesn't seem likely that global warming could really destroy humanity. Even a catastrophic 4 degree C increase in temperature wouldn't kill everyone. Hell it would probably be good for Canada, we'll just go there.
04-25-2018 , 06:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorKeeed
doesn't seem likely that global warming could really destroy humanity. Even a catastrophic 4 degree C increase in temperature wouldn't kill everyone. Hell it would probably be good for Canada, we'll just go there.
it's only wiping out humanity if it's runaway global warming.

Overall people are far too pessimistic when it comes to wiping out humanity (and most things, come to that). Extinction is a really hard thing to do even with a massive nuclear war. Decimation and worse are trivially easy by comparison.
04-25-2018 , 09:00 PM
especially since decimation is only a 10% reduction
04-25-2018 , 09:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw
it's only wiping out humanity if it's runaway global warming.

Overall people are far too pessimistic when it comes to wiping out humanity (and most things, come to that). Extinction is a really hard thing to do even with a massive nuclear war. Decimation and worse are trivially easy by comparison.
nuclear war is far and away the best option on the poll, looking back, I probably should have chosen that option. Did anyone see this news headline/article today? https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/95...-bad-on-planet It says that scientists are back tracking on their warnings about gw.
04-25-2018 , 11:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorKeeed
especially since decimation is only a 10% reduction
Exactly and even 75% is trivially easy compared to 100%.

Decimation+ would be such a horrific thing for everyone alive at the time that people tend to conflate it with extinction of the species.
04-25-2018 , 11:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by preki
nuclear war is far and away the best option on the poll, looking back, I probably should have chosen that option. Did anyone see this news headline/article today? https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/95...-bad-on-planet It says that scientists are back tracking on their warnings about gw.
I'm not keen on the Daily Expres as a source of news but even that story only says it might be a bit slower than others have said.

When it comes to runaway global warning, it's pretty much impossible to know when or if we might hit this point until after it's happened. The reality of climate change that will be very damaging but doesn't mean anythign like extinction, remains clear.
04-26-2018 , 12:47 AM
Word "destroy" needs to be defined.

If we mean extinction of species, then well, a catastrophic collision with a moon sized meteorite and maybe a run away AI created by a mad scientist designed to wipe us out.

If we mean destruction of civilization as we know it, nuclear war and some version of benevolent AI pushing us to something close to a post-scarcity Star Trek world.

Global Warming is loltastic. Even the worst projections have it as a slow moving disaster that causes massive property damage. Yeah, people will die but it's nothing close to wiping us out. Dutch engineers will get really rich exporting their flood control technologies.
04-26-2018 , 12:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw
I'm not keen on the Daily Expres as a source of news but even that story only says it might be a bit slower than others have said.

When it comes to runaway global warning, it's pretty much impossible to know when or if we might hit this point until after it's happened. The reality of climate change that will be very damaging but doesn't mean anythign like extinction, remains clear.
True, yet gw is still leading the poll. Are people in this forum brainwashed or just stupid? I am leading more towards brainwashed.
04-26-2018 , 12:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by preki
True, yet gw is still leading the poll. Are people in this forum brainwashed or just stupid? I am leading more towards brainwashed.
You said asteroids

LOL
04-26-2018 , 12:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizy
Word "destroy" needs to be defined.

If we mean extinction of species, then well, a catastrophic collision with a moon sized meteorite and maybe a run away AI created by a mad scientist designed to wipe us out.

If we mean destruction of civilization as we know it, nuclear war and some version of benevolent AI pushing us to something close to a post-scarcity Star Trek world.

Global Warming is loltastic. Even the worst projections have it as a slow moving disaster that causes massive property damage. Yeah, people will die but it's nothing close to wiping us out. Dutch engineers will get really rich exporting their flood control technologies.
They're just going to have trillions of Bangladeshi takas pouring in.
04-26-2018 , 04:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizy
Global Warming is loltastic. Even the worst projections have it as a slow moving disaster that causes massive property damage. Yeah, people will die but it's nothing close to wiping us out. Dutch engineers will get really rich exporting their flood control technologies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by preki
True, yet gw is still leading the poll. Are people in this forum brainwashed or just stupid? I am leading more towards brainwashed.
I still assume they are considering runaway global warming. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaway_climate_change
If we enter into a positive feedback loop on warming then we're seriously ****ed.

The bizzare idea is "The destruction of objective reality" as an extinction threat.
04-26-2018 , 05:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
You said asteroids

LOL
asteroids are like 1000% more likely to wipe out humanity than a few degrees hotter weather. do you think david skalansky is a smart man?
04-26-2018 , 07:25 AM
I'd never previously considered how pushing the refugee angle could lead to deplorables ceding ground on climate change legislation. If there is one thing these people hate more than egghead liberal scientists...
04-26-2018 , 02:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizy
Global Warming is loltastic. Even the worst projections have it as a slow moving disaster that causes massive property damage.
Due to a broken reverse on his auto transmission, Archduke Franz Ferdinand got cornered and it touched off World War I.

Geez, I wonder if heat might create millions and billions of fragile moments.

You suppose rising seas could create refugees that could stress something? Does Gaza have oceans I wonder?

But at least we don't have to worry about famines 'cuz that's not drowning.

Or am I missing Grizy irony?

Quote:
decimation is only a 10% reduction
I guess we'll need to put "novenation" into usage.
04-26-2018 , 02:27 PM
I'd go with superbug. Estimates for death from the Black Plague are as high as 200mil. (out of a population of 450mil). Wiped out half of Europe in 4 years, and that was before the world was interconnected like it is today. A new, deadly, drug-resistant virus could easily wipe out most of the human species in a very short time I'd imagine.

Add to that equation bioterrorism, where fanatics create or get hold of a superbug and purposely spread it, and you have an existential threat.
04-26-2018 , 04:48 PM
Superbug carried here on an asteroid, that mutates into an even more virulent form in the radioactive wastes of the former middle east.
04-26-2018 , 05:57 PM
May be a long shot but direct hit gamma ray burst from a neutron star collision would come at the speed of light with no warning. Goodbye atmosphere if you survive the initial ionizing radiation somehow
04-26-2018 , 07:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by O.A.F.K.1.1
Superbug carried here on an asteroid, that mutates into an even more virulent form in the radioactive wastes of the former middle east.
That Fox News blames on Obama.
04-26-2018 , 07:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gadgetguru
May be a long shot but direct hit gamma ray burst from a neutron star collision would come at the speed of light with no warning. Goodbye atmosphere if you survive the initial ionizing radiation somehow
Yeah, you say no warning, but whatever we see out there already happened long in the past, in which case we'd already know about it and we would've already been planning to avoid it.

No? Doesn't work that way? I guess not.

Hey, remember the mini black hole threat scare from CERN?
04-26-2018 , 07:26 PM
Nuclear war - because it has the biggest human element in it.

People having their fingers on the button from this moment to the eternity might end up wiping out most of the human race.

I think if the world tensions rise up again (and they will someday), in something like 500 years of cold war it's very likely that someone ****s up. bad. It doesn't need to be coordinated strike, just massive pileup of communication errors, technical errors and failed checks.
04-26-2018 , 07:52 PM
Grunching: solar flares

      
m