A question.

Pages

AuthorTopic: A question.
Councilor
Member # 6600
Profile Homepage #25
Surviving the impact is really more of an issue than surviving the atmosphere. But don't worry--Dikiyoba has heard from authoritative sources that the raptors intend to build a really strong bunker on the asteroid to protect against both atmospheric friction and the impact.

--------------------
Episode 4: Spiderweb ReloadedEpisode 5: Spiderweb Resistance
Posts: 4346 | Registered: Friday, December 23 2005 08:00
Infiltrator
Member # 7298
Profile #26
I read an article a week or so ago about how a 15 megaton nuke was used on abandoned atoll and left a 1.2 mile wide crater that was over 200 feet deep. Now to main question I doubt nukes could destroy humanity at most it would cause society to collapse.

I think most likely cause of our destruction will be our exponentially increasing demand for resources. Even if we where to replace fossil fuels (which I agree needs to be done) we would out grow that source of fuel in couple of generations at most. The only real way to solve is to for us to stop/reverse the growth in the demand for resources.

--------------------
A rock has weight whether you admit it or not
Posts: 479 | Registered: Wednesday, July 12 2006 07:00
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
Profile #27
The only way to curb growth is to decrease population. With increasing demand for limited resources it is very likely that there will be a corrective reduction in world population.

--------------------
Synergy, et al - "I don't get it."

Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..."
Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00
Warrior
Member # 15187
Profile Homepage #28
Dikiyoba: Recently some scientists were considering the viability of attacking an incoming asteroid with a nuclear weapon. Their conclusion was that the sort of nuclear force needed to obliterate a large asteroid (assuming the asteroid wasn't clastic, meaning we'd end up with not just one large but a whole bunch of small asteroids heading straight for us) would require a nuclear bomb so extraordinarily immense that -- regardless of the problems of getting it off the ground -- it would pose a far, far greater threat to the world than it was worth trying to build in case of an incoming asteroid. Needless to say, the idea was scrapped immediately.

Sometimes it actually pays to watch television.

[edited for irrelevant rambling]

[ Saturday, April 26, 2008 21:45: Message edited by: Clavicle ]
Posts: 178 | Registered: Saturday, March 8 2008 08:00
Infiltrator
Member # 7298
Profile #29
quote:
Originally written by Clavicle:

Dikiyoba: Recently some scientists were considering the viability of attacking an incoming asteroid with a nuclear weapon. Their conclusion was that the sort of nuclear force needed to obliterate a large asteroid (assuming the asteroid wasn't clastic, meaning we'd end up with not just one large but a whole bunch of small asteroids heading straight for us) would require a nuclear bomb so extraordinarily immense that -- regardless of the problems of getting it off the ground -- it would pose a far, far greater threat to the world than it was worth trying to build in case of an incoming asteroid. Needless to say, the idea was scrapped immediately.

Sometimes it actually pays to watch television.

[edited for irrelevant rambling]

Few ideas I head NASA passing around if something ever happen would involve knowing 20 years head of time.
One involves painting one side white effecting the way it asorbed and remitted radition.
Another involves putting a satillite in orbit of it and use the satilites gravity to move pull the asteriod away.
The third I heard of is to put a drill which removes mass from the asteroid and throwing it into space. The force of the mass being thrown off would slowly change the asteroids trajectory.

However all these methods would require us knowing years ahead of time. If we found out a couple months from now we would be screwed.

--------------------
A rock has weight whether you admit it or not
Posts: 479 | Registered: Wednesday, July 12 2006 07:00
Shock Trooper
Member # 2123
Profile #30
quote:
Originally written by Jumpin Salmon:

The only way to curb growth is to decrease population. With increasing demand for limited resources it is very likely that there will be a corrective reduction in world population.
The book "A Planet for a President" is all about this idea. Kind of scary to think about.

--------------------
"The President finally had what he wanted. The President had a planet. All to himself." -A Planet For The President
Posts: 228 | Registered: Monday, October 21 2002 07:00
Law Bringer
Member # 6785
Profile #31
quote:
Originally written by Jumpin Salmon:

The only way to curb growth is to decrease population. With increasing demand for limited resources it is very likely that there will be a corrective reduction in world population.
We already have a process for population reduction in place. It's called limited wars. This produces minor reductions in population in third world countries where we don't care about them. Look at Iraq, Africa, revolutions in small Asian countries and see how we are decreasing those areas. Starvation from food supply disruptions are a bonus.
Posts: 4643 | Registered: Friday, February 10 2006 08:00
Agent
Member # 4574
Profile #32
quote:
Originally written by Randomizer:

We already have a process for population reduction in place. It's called limited wars. This produces minor reductions in population in third world countries where we don't care about them. Look at Iraq, Africa, revolutions in small Asian countries and see how we are decreasing those areas. Starvation from food supply disruptions are a bonus.
Agreed, and disagreed. The United States and a few European Powers may still be losing a few, relatively, in their wars in the Third World to establish their own Corporate Empires, but when was the last time China got into a war big enough to get rid of that many people? And what about India?

More and more, the First World Imperialists are being not defined by the standards of living and Capitalistic Imperialism, but by who has nuclear weaponry, and thus to immune to overthrow by the Imperialist.

--------------------
"I'm happy I'm the mentally disturbed person I am." -Nioca
"Yes, Iffy is a demon." -Iffy
"All (Spiderweb) servers should be taken down, erased, and then subjected to dissolution by alkahest." -Alorael
Posts: 1186 | Registered: Friday, June 18 2004 07:00
Infiltrator
Member # 7298
Profile #33
quote:
Originally written by Randomizer:

quote:
Originally written by Jumpin Salmon:

The only way to curb growth is to decrease population. With increasing demand for limited resources it is very likely that there will be a corrective reduction in world population.
We already have a process for population reduction in place. It's called limited wars. This produces minor reductions in population in third world countries where we don't care about them. Look at Iraq, Africa, revolutions in small Asian countries and see how we are decreasing those areas. Starvation from food supply disruptions are a bonus.

I'm not so sure that wars are sufficient to curb our population (conventional ones anyway). If you chart WW 1 and WW 2, the two bloodiest wars in recent times, barely dented human population growth at best.

world population

US Census Bureau

--------------------
A rock has weight whether you admit it or not
Posts: 479 | Registered: Wednesday, July 12 2006 07:00
Agent
Member # 4574
Profile #34
quote:
Originally written by Safey:

I'm not so sure that wars are sufficient to curb our population (conventional ones anyway). If you chart WW 1 and WW 2, the two bloodiest wars in recent times, barely dented human population growth at best.

world population

US Census Bureau

They aren't. The two World Wars killed millions of soldiers and civilians, and that was between major powers like the USA, USSR, UK, et cetera. Today's wars aren't between those kinds of powers, they're either between Third World dirt countries, or extremely lopsided conflicts between the First World and the Third World, usually for Corporate interest. War and famine simply aren't going to do it anymore, especially with the First World paralyzed in fear of attacking one another because of MAD.

It's reasons like this that I secretly don't mind it when some old person dies. As long as I don't know them, that is.

--------------------
"I'm happy I'm the mentally disturbed person I am." -Nioca
"Yes, Iffy is a demon." -Iffy
"All (Spiderweb) servers should be taken down, erased, and then subjected to dissolution by alkahest." -Alorael
Posts: 1186 | Registered: Friday, June 18 2004 07:00
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
Profile #35
quote:
Originally written by Goldenking:

War and famine simply aren't going to do it anymore
Don't forget, China has pollution, and with that comes famine. Interesting times. At some point, one of the predictive scripts will be accurate.

--------------------
Synergy, et al - "I don't get it."

Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..."
Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00
Warrior
Member # 15187
Profile Homepage #36
Oh, don't worry about it. If global warming doesn't do it, the Yellowstone caldera will... or a killer asteroid.

...And then there's the next plague to worry about. These viruses don't vanish permanently, they mutate and return. The Black Plague literally did kill off a huge percentage of the human population. Those with innate immunity survived.

...which is where genetic engineering comes in. If I were in high school today and considering going into the sciences: I'd choose the field of genetic engineering. That's where the future is, I think.

Safey: The proposal that I'm familiar with is the 'tractor satellite' you mentioned. I think that was the proposal they felt most satisfied with. (Another proposal, more problematic: a huge explosion just beside the asteroid... I think that would require the previously mentioned nuclear bomb, and an assurance that the asteroid is solid and not just a loose pile of rubble.)
Posts: 178 | Registered: Saturday, March 8 2008 08:00
Agent
Member # 8030
Profile Homepage #37
I don't think anyone would really want to expend the funds to research a doomsday bomb, which in itself would probably start a very messy war.

--------------------
Decca Records - "We don't like their sound. Groups of guitars are on the way out."
Posts: 1384 | Registered: Tuesday, February 6 2007 08:00

Pages