what will come first end of the world or world war three?
- Thread starter noagname
- Start date
In the case of another world war - will a lot of people die? Absolutely. Will it be the end of the world? Not possible.
Could the conflict destroy every living organism? Would our explosions rip apart the planet? Will some temporal/quantum weapons tear apart the very fabric of space and time? None of this is possible with current technology, or even 'realistic' sci-fi (an oxymoron, I know, but you get the idea) weapons conceivable within the near future.
Could the conflict destroy every living organism? Would our explosions rip apart the planet? Will some temporal/quantum weapons tear apart the very fabric of space and time? None of this is possible with current technology, or even 'realistic' sci-fi (an oxymoron, I know, but you get the idea) weapons conceivable within the near future.
Nah, it will just deteriorate until we get to a Mad Max or Waterworld landscape. Then it will be survival of the fittest.
In that scenario the younger people are in serious trouble since they can't do anything without the help of their electronic gizmos.
Inspector Jihad
Lifer
- Apr 17, 2005
- 13,465
- 3
- 81
"I don't know what World War III will be fought with, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones"
Not only that, they have no idea how to produce food or cook it. They think chicken comes in 'breast' and 'nugget' and would freak if they actually had to kill and cook their own food.
dude, we are already in the beginning of WW3.
Just look around at current events/posturing being done.
Just look around at current events/posturing being done.
Inspector Jihad
Lifer
- Apr 17, 2005
- 13,465
- 3
- 81
sygyzy
Lifer
- Oct 21, 2000
- 14,001
- 4
- 76
I don't understand your point. You don't think we have enough technology/weapons to destroy the world? By the way, when people talk about the end of the world, they are talking about total destruction, where most/all the people are dead. You think that because cockroaches and single celled organisms may survive that this is not the end? Sorry, you are mistaken. There are enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world many times over.
Way to generalise, grandma. I'll bet I've killed, skinned and cooked more fresh meat than you. Believe it or not, some young people have been brought up knowing how to survive.
Destroy the world - Sound an awful lot like wiping everything off the surface of this rock.
Total destruction implies all. Hence total.
And there's much more to this world than the current state of civilization. I think an "Age" would be brought to an end by the hypothetical WW3, but not the 'world'.
You're not sorry
I think we differ on what we believe the "end of the world" implies.
And to fit with the spirit of the other responses, I favor a Fallout (as in Vault 13) scenario.
Actually, I do believe it. My husband and I are raising our three children to know how to survive.
But what you don't seem to have are good communication skills. You didn't need to get defensive. You could have easily said, "There are some younger people who do have good survival skills" and given the example of yourself without sounding combative. I'm not in a competition with you. If you want to inspire people with your story, make it more compelling by stating it with intelligence and humor.
I am a school teacher and the majority of the students I come in contact with in the suburbs are simply not exposed to 'the old ways'. Sure, I generalized... but surely you realize that outiside of the rural community, you are the exception rather than the rule.
Nik
Lifer
- Jun 5, 2006
- 16,101
- 3
- 56
Come on now, stop being retarded. You don't live on a farm, you use a computer, and you don't "hunt" for your entire food source, so don't talk like you're better than everyone else because your daddy used to hunt when you were a kid or your husband does everything for you.
I'm young. I hunt. I don't NEED to live like a caveman because of the society I live in, but I would survive if I had to.
RaistlinZ
Diamond Member
- Oct 15, 2001
- 7,470
- 9
- 91
Originally posted by: diegoalcatraz
Destroy the world - Sound an awful lot like wiping everything off the surface of this rock.
Total destruction implies all. Hence total.
And there's much more to this world than the current state of civilization. I think an "Age" would be brought to an end by the hypothetical WW3, but not the 'world'.
You're not sorry
I think we differ on what we believe the "end of the world" implies.
And to fit with the spirit of the other responses, I favor a Fallout (as in Vault 13) scenario.
I agree. Something catastrophic wiped out all of the dinosaurs, but it obviously wasn't the "end of the world". If all the countries started engaging in nuclear warfare we may very well wipe out all human existance, but over time some other organisms would develop and life on this planet would continue.
Brainonska511
Lifer
- Dec 10, 2005
- 28,403
- 13,334
- 136
This reminds me of that thread a while back where the poster posted a link to a fake conversation between God and an atheist (couldn't find the link or the thread), but basically one of the ideas presented was that humanity would need to unite and stop trying to kill each other before we could really advance as a society.
oh come on. it's not an offensive, insulting comment by any stretch.
An overwhelmingly majority of youths couldn't put food on the table if it was delivered to them live or dead. I'm glad that you are the exception.
TRENDING THREADS
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 315
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter