Poll: It's the end of the world as we know it

Recommended Videos

Sewblon

New member
Nov 5, 2008
3,107
0
0
Trivun said:
Nukes. Because pretty soon some country is going to develop nuclear weapons that rather than stockpiling they actually fire (my guesses would be pre-Obama USA [not post-Obama, cause he's smart enough to restrain from it], China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea) on someone. Then we get a chain reaction and the Cold War will be but a distant memory (it's never really ended, you know), as we all end up in a world like Fallout 3 but without the vaults and survivors.
Obama is president now. Pre-Obama USA doesn't exist anymore, also he doesn't seem to be doing anything that different from what Bush was doing.(I am now burning as a heretic.)
 

Jamash

Top Todger
Jun 25, 2008
3,638
0
0
I voted other.

It would be naive to say the world will never end, because eventually the Sun will run out of hydrogen, collapse in on itself and go supernova, which would destroy Earth.

I'll be long dead by then so it doesn't really bother me, and any other apocalyptic ideas are just speculation and not worth worrying about, it's not like I could do anything to prevent it.
 

Jharry5

New member
Nov 1, 2008
2,160
0
0
hubertw47 said:
I will pour branston pickle on my no more heroes case.
And it would be awesome... :D

I think it'll probably be space related - a giant asteroid, most likely.
I was going to pick Nukes, but I hope humanity would pull back from the brink of self-destruction before it happens. Like I said, 'hope'... The asteroid should destroy us before someone gets hold of a Nuke that doesn't do restraint.
 

Trivun

Stabat mater dolorosa
Dec 13, 2008
9,831
0
0
Sewblon said:
Trivun said:
Nukes. Because pretty soon some country is going to develop nuclear weapons that rather than stockpiling they actually fire (my guesses would be pre-Obama USA [not post-Obama, cause he's smart enough to restrain from it], China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea) on someone. Then we get a chain reaction and the Cold War will be but a distant memory (it's never really ended, you know), as we all end up in a world like Fallout 3 but without the vaults and survivors.
Obama is president now. Pre-Obama USA doesn't exist anymore, also he doesn't seem to be doing anything that different from what Bush was doing.(I am now burning as a heretic.)
I am actually aware of all that. On all counts. Especially the heretic one, since I'm the one lighting the purifying flames...

(On that note, I'm actually British, but given our government I'd much rather live in the USA)
 

Sewblon

New member
Nov 5, 2008
3,107
0
0
Trivun said:
Sewblon said:
Trivun said:
Nukes. Because pretty soon some country is going to develop nuclear weapons that rather than stockpiling they actually fire (my guesses would be pre-Obama USA [not post-Obama, cause he's smart enough to restrain from it], China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea) on someone. Then we get a chain reaction and the Cold War will be but a distant memory (it's never really ended, you know), as we all end up in a world like Fallout 3 but without the vaults and survivors.
Obama is president now. Pre-Obama USA doesn't exist anymore, also he doesn't seem to be doing anything that different from what Bush was doing.(I am now burning as a heretic.)
I am actually aware of all that. On all counts. Especially the heretic one, since I'm the one lighting the purifying flames...

(On that note, I'm actually British, but given our government I'd much rather live in the USA)
Now your initial post makes even less sense, since we are in different countries how could that be you burning me.
 

Epicfail

New member
Sep 18, 2008
22
0
0
Trivun said:
Nukes. Because pretty soon some country is going to develop nuclear weapons that rather than stockpiling they actually fire (my guesses would be pre-Obama USA [not post-Obama, cause he's smart enough to restrain from it], China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea) on someone. Then we get a chain reaction and the Cold War will be but a distant memory (it's never really ended, you know), as we all end up in a world like Fallout 3 but without the vaults and survivors.
Ughhh Albert Einstein is rolling over in his grave. (technically his fault for atomic weapons even though he was against it). Stick vs. Stick. Gun vs. Gun. Whats the fun in having a stick or gun so big it ends the world?
 

Souplex

Souplex Killsplosion Awesomegasm
Jul 29, 2008
10,312
0
0
For those wondering, it can be the destruction of mankind, the ruination of earth or the total destruction of earth, just fill in that blank for yourself.

And to clarify the "It won't end" Option, our scientists could stop colliding hardons and save us from our coiytan doom.

Also to clarify "Something religion based, I don't mean religious people destroy the world, I mean something like Ragnarok, the rapture or something else from some religious source.
 

Xaositect

New member
Mar 6, 2008
452
0
0
Id probably say long after time has forgotten humans insignificant existance, it will be due to "astronomy related reasons". While Im fond of the sci-fi fantasy of humans becoming half decent and exploring and settling the galaxy, I know its just bullshit fantasy. Given our history and present state, I would say humanity will die out on this planet and it will happily go on without us until it explodes or meets some other end.

As for how we meet our end, I think the nuke eachother/some other form of war is actually pretty unlikely. Id say the one thing humanity can do as well as slaughter eachother is be unimaginably greedy, and it acts as a counterbalance for too much slaughter. I think all "world leaders", no matter how unstable other nations make eachothers leaders out to be, dont have the balls to risk burning everything they own. I think those greedy chicken shits are fully aware that nuclear annihilation is a no win-all lose scenario, and they dont want to burn all their chips with nukes. Of course, thats just my take, and Im fully aware and wouldnt be the least bit surprised if I turned out to be wrong. Unless I was dead already when it happens, in which case I wouldnt be aware of or surprised by anything.
 

Bertruam

New member
Feb 7, 2009
226
0
0
I would prefer an end that would be awesome to watch. Something like reality being torn a sunder. I'm pretty sure that would be pretty spectacular. I voted other because i was unsure how reality would shatter. Paradox that could not correct itself, machine misfires (like a teleport or something), or massive celestial cataclysm.
 

Souplex

Souplex Killsplosion Awesomegasm
Jul 29, 2008
10,312
0
0
Bertruam said:
I would prefer an end that would be awesome to watch. Something like reality being torn a sunder. I'm pretty sure that would be pretty spectacular. I voted other because i was unsure how reality would shatter. Paradox that could not correct itself, misfire machine (like a teleport or something), or massive celestial cataclysm.
First option dude, I destroy the world in a blaze of AWESOME.
 

Cool_Pat

New member
Aug 11, 2008
63
0
0
"the world as we know it" is constantly changing so it ends every other second or so when we change our minds or discover something we didn't know about.

If it's the destruction of the world that you mean then I don't think that will happen - it will just keep going on in one form or another.

Humanity on the other hand is doomed to die by it's own stupidity which although not one of the listed options does encompass several of them.
 

Souplex

Souplex Killsplosion Awesomegasm
Jul 29, 2008
10,312
0
0
Space is clearly out to get us, so I say we destroy space first!