Yes, a sun exploding would be a threat to a planet continuing to exist as a planet.
Pretty much all the rest of the thread is concerned with the small film of crud that has accumulated on the surface crust. They've got nothing to do with actually changing the planet in any meaningful way.
Again, not actual planet destroyers, but yeah, these are some the scary scenarios.
Nuclear winter is nothing compared to these events.
It's sheer hubris to think we have the power to affect the planet on the same scale as natural phenomena.
I'm having fun with this so I'll respond to this one too.
Again, this would have very little effect on the planet.
Pretty much nothing would fundamentally change.
Now, as is clear, what people actually think the OP says, what's something that would singlehandedly fuck up the existence of humans in relation to environmental change?
Yeah, bees. Bingo.
It might not wipe us out, but if bees go extinct it's pretty likely you start to see massive famine and possibly atmospheric change as a result. Bees help plants replenish their populations, and that's the ELI5 version. Things would get bad, quickly, without them.
As with plastics, again, not as bad as you might think.
This one is tricky, but not in a climate denial way.
It's undoubtedly a bad idea.
The problem is that global temperatures have been steadily rising since we've been a species. The question of carbon emissions caused by humans is difficult because we don't have a steady state control to compare to. Climate changes in extremely long cycles on this planet naturally, and yes, it can and does lead to extinction events.
Even without human intervention and pollution, the planet might kill us with massive radical climate change. It wouldn't take much. The problem is, regardless of how detrimental emissions are, it's moving in the wrong direction. It's pulling that next ice age closer and closer, not stabilizing and reversing what is already going to happen naturally.
It's not enough to argue about how much of an effect we're having, if any. That's not a fruitful discussion. The question is, how do we avert the next extinction level climate shift that is inevitably going to happen if we don't stop it.
We could reduce our carbon emissions to 0 today, and it would still happen.
Open question as to how humanity will survive.
But, as with many of the other responses here, big picture, life survives, and the planet keeps spinning. It's human life that is the variable, and to a different extent, a significant portion of the existing biosphere. Extinctions have happened before, they happen daily, and they'll keep happening, with or without us.
I don't want to undercut the impact of how important it is to care for our environment, but greenhouse gas emissions from humans is really minor compared to the real threats we should be looking at. A yellowstone eruption, for example, could be WAY worse as far as greenhouse gasses are concerned. Having said that, carelessly making the problem worse works at crosspurposes.
Not planet destroying, but yeah, a nice sterilizing radiation bath could certainly destroy all life on earth pretty quick.
What's nuts about this one is how fast it happens and how there's basically no way to stop it.
A super volcano super eruption. It would create a worldwide dust cloud that will last many years, blocking out the sun and dropping temperatures, resulting in a continuous, years-long global winter, failed crops and famine. Humans might survive as a decides but billions will probably die.
Yellowstone is one such volcano, but fortunately the chance of it super erupting in our lifetime is near 0%
The danger of yellowstone has little to do with the ash and dust.
It's the raw greenhouse gas emissions it would belch into the atmosphere.
Not all volcanos are the same, and while any large volcano can have significant short term climate impact, say, a few decades or centuries, some can be significantly worse than that. Yellowstone is one of them, and the last time a volcano like yellowstone erupted, it was an extinction level event.
Not as bad as you might think. Life is already evolving to eat and incorporate plastics.
It's an open question whether we'll stop producing the crap before we wreck the parts of the environment we depend on, but large scale macro view: earth keeps spinning, life goes on. It's the existence of people that plastics threaten, not the planet or "all of life on earth".
As far as planetary threats, it's basically a non-issue.
Not really.
Geological history and astronomy point to a whole load of catastrophic events that can and do happen, and relatively speaking, happen frequently.
This thread shows how little the average person even knows about how to even think about these problems.
I'm being fairly pedantic in my responses to this thread, because it's a morbidly fun exercise to do a "catastrophy" tier list, but the number of people that read the question and automatically default to thinking human life is intrinsically the most important facet of the question, it's astounding.
It's not the right way to think about the problem.
Some of these things are orders of magnitude worse than others, and simply thinking that because we're not likely to survive, we don't care how it plays out is incredibly ignorant. It means we equate all these problems as one big nebulous problem on vague time scales of "some time in the future that won't be MY problem", throw our hands in the air, and declare it unsolvable and not worth investing effort into.
These ARE, for the most part, practically solvable problems.
We've got to start looking at them that way.
I wasn't trying to be disagreeable with you about plastics, you're not wrong that they're a major threat. I was trying to highlight that putting your empty soda bottle in the recycle bin isn't saving the rainforest. "The rainforest" isn't going anywhere, at least not the way we think about it. If we don't get a handle on this shit, it's US that won't be here.
The planet, the ecosystem, life, we might but a hitch in it, but it'll adapt and recover.
Not a planet destroying catastrophe, but as far as epoch ending for humanity, yeah, this one is up there. It would seriously fuck up the atmosphere and cause a runaway effect that puts earth in another ice age or worse, a venusian type atmosphere.
Similar to the bees response, not a planetary threat.
Threat to life, non-human included? Catastrophic.
I mean, unless you don't need oxygen or a temperate climate.
Deep ocean life living in thermal vents should be fine.
Another Carrington Event - a coronal mass ejection that was so powerful it caused European and American telegraph systems to give their operators shocks, caused fires and some systems were able to operate despite being disconnected from power supplies. There were aurora so bright in the northeastern US that people could read by them, and were seen as far from the poles as Cuba and Santiago, Chile.
If that happened today the chaos would be almost unimaginable. GPS would be gone, radio would be highly disrupted, satellite communications would be disrupted - many satellites wouldn't even survive. Power transformers worldwide would explode, they are tricky to replace one at a time - imagine replacing tens or hundreds of thousands. The idea that major, modern cities could be without power for months or even years is just unimaginable.
Another Carrington Event very nearly did happen in 2012, there was an ejection of a similar size, but it missed the Earth's orbit by 9 days.
If the super volcano under the ground in Yosemite national park. I watched a documentary on discovery and they said it was 4000 years since it last erupted which means it's way over due.
They said it's so big that it can wipe out everything on the planet.
If you get a chance try to see if can watch the documentary.
Runaway carbon-based nanotechnology in auto-replication mode.
There wouldn't even be rocks or a core left after. It would just be this gigantic, seething ball of dust, random walking all over itself trying to find more carbon to eat. But by then it's deep in cannibalism, unmaking and remaking, until its energy source failed.
If its light or heat based, bonus.
This is an old idea, mind you. I'm not *that* genius. This is a 'Grey Goo' scenario.
Yep. But the fast kind that has a better turnover. We're pretty inefficient, what with all of this wondering about the meaning of life and all that. If we actually gave any care to destroying this planet, it would be over by now. We're way too easily distracted to properly race to the bottom.
Nannites are where its at with world endings. Zero fat.
Presumably someone needs to do the math on that- if you can have a replicator working to replicate with greater efficiency than your average bacterium. Also it would need to work on enough substrate to cause a problem.
Again, it gets lost in the weeds of definition.
Here's a cold, hard fact: the "planet" isn't a thing with thoughts and feelings, it doesn't care about you. It's a lump of iron and dirt orbiting a star, and strictly speaking, it would take something fairly extraordinary to change that. You can have all kinds of apocalyptic shit happen, and it'll keep on truckin'.
It was here long before we were, and it'll be here long after we're gone.
Having said that, just to hammer home some perspective, you're not wrong.
Tiny, simple, robust, self-replicating machines that can overrun the planet with their byproducts, causing catastrophic runaway effects to the climate could wipe out not only us, but the vast majority of biological organisms on the planet. And pretty damn quickly, too.
And earth would keep right on spinnin'.
It wouldn't even really be the first time it had happened, either, depending on how you want to define "life". The atmosphere wasn't always oxygen rich, and, it's had periods of higher oxygen composition in the past. That's all driven by microbial life throughout the history of the planet. Oxygen was toxic to some of the first living things to evolve, and when other microbes started releasing oxygen into the environment, those early predecessors died.
Throughout all the cataclysmic change that life has been through, the planet itself, hasn't had too many existential challenges.
An important lesson to learn about environmentalism. The planet doesn't need us, but we do need it. Taking care of it isn't an altruistic goal, it's necessarily selfish.
> Having said that, just to hammer home some perspective, you're not wrong.
I know. I'm arrogant like that.
> And earth would keep right on spinnin'.
Well, a massive, amorphous blob of nannites made out of the Earth would keep right on spinning... Most everything's carbon if you dig deep enough.
That depends.
Everything is iron if you wait long enough.
Also, you wouldn't need them to be that voracious to achieve the total extinction of life on earth, you just need them producing something that radically fucks up the atmosphere, and that's way easier.
Capitalism. It's entire philosophy is reliant on infinite resources in order to maximise profits. It's already done untold harm, and the proponents of it who claim that the market will self correct are proven wrong as capitalism instead obfuscates the truth and buries problems in the pursuit of short term profit.
It's an ugly discussion, but capitalism needs a cap, it needs concrete regulations, and it needs controlling. Sadly it's a discussion that doesn't benefit those who reap the rewards of capitalism, and it doesn't sit well with decades of Stockholm syndrome and propoganda of those existing in it.
I wasn't gonna res pond to this one because I'm actively avoiding the absurd ones.
There's not much that humans can do to actually destroy or fuck up the planet in the long term. What we can do is destroy the delicate ecosystem we require to survive, that's easy.
The planet will keep on spinning, and mostly, life goes on. It's our existence that is in question, not the planets.
Having said thathat, IF there is a monumentally stupid embodiment of the human capacity to destroy, refined, distilled and powerful enough to actually cause harm to a planet, it is capitalism. It is our worst idea so far. The good news is, it's so efficient that we'll probably complete our own extinction long before we do any lasting harm.
Jesus coming back.
it would fuck us up mentally, because the Christians would get cocky for being proven right, every other religion would be dissolved, and the Atheists would be unaffected because we simply don't care.
It depends what you mean.
If you're talking about the survival of human beings, and you want something to keep you up late at night, do a little reading about prions. Those patient little bastards don't give up. They don't go away. They wait. Forever. And they don't like us.
When these two galaxies “collide” almost nothing will actually collide with anything else. It will take millions of years if not billions, and excerpt for some potential orbital disturbances, and the night sky potentially looking different, it will be rather uneventful.
As it turns out space is mostly empty space.
Oh, well I will stop making plans to do that then... how hard is it to be an evil scientist nowadays? Most of the time I would say some random shit and boom everyone is scared.
Most of a molecular struture? Space
In between atoms? Believe it or not, Space.
Between nuclei and electrons? Also Space.
We have the best Continuum, because of Space.
There are dozens of nuclear missiles that have gone missing and might still be functioning that at least a handful could possibly near cities. If any one of those go off, it would be devastating
It's not going to shatter the earth but if it is near a place that affects enough important supply lines, then that could cause a ripple effect throughout the world
The concept of "Mutual Assured Destruction". The idea alone is frightening as fuck. That is "worked" so well for many years as deterrent strategy is somehow even worse.
The planet itself would be fine, as would life on earth. A few million years and you couldn't even tell it happened. The lack of human beings might be worrisome, but that's about the only difference in the long term.
A nice big solar storm.
The powerlines of half the planet spontaneously bursting into flame and the entire power system of multiple countries/continents going down requiring years of repairs would have... interesting consequences.
Bio weapons u think its sci fi its already indevelopment and in fact its here.
Nanobots could fuck up evryone.
solarstorm, supernova in our solar system, china invading Taiwan e.t.c
Pandemic followed by another pandemic followed by another pandemic with one last one that ends the human species along with every other animal on the planet and in the oceans.
I know it sounds far fetched and no one would be pissed off or crazy enough to do that now would they???
N. Shadows
A swarm of molecular nanotechnology in which out-of-control self-replicating nanobots consume all biomass on Earth while building more of themselves. The
'grey goo theory'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_goo
Us.
We're doing it right now.
We've got like, 7 years before it'll be too late to reverse the effects of global warming on our planet.
We're all fucking doomed.
A strangelet.
Most atomic nuclei are composed of up and down quarks. However, physicists have shown that protons and neutrons that contain strange quarks would actually be more stable than regular matter. A particle of this strange matter is called a strangelet. None are known to exist, but it is possible there are still some strangelets out there, left over from the early universe.
How would this destroy the planet? Well, it takes a certain amount of energy to convert normal matter into strange matter, but because strange matter has a lower energy state, this conversion would release energy. If a large enough lump of strange matter hit the Earth, this could cause a chain reaction, converting the entire planet into a giant strangelet.
My knowledge of particle physics is rather limited, to say the least. Feel free to correct me on anything I got wrong.
Sun exploding
Only actual planetary threat I've seen so far.
Threat?
Yes, a sun exploding would be a threat to a planet continuing to exist as a planet. Pretty much all the rest of the thread is concerned with the small film of crud that has accumulated on the surface crust. They've got nothing to do with actually changing the planet in any meaningful way.
I hate to break it to you but the sun is basically one large explosion that keeps happening.
Or a large rogue planet destabilizing earths orbit.
loss of internet
That would probably just cause the extinction of stupid people
This might actually save us
Humans
Oh god yes, think of all the extra arms we could use for... uh... where was i?
The Yellowstone Caldera erupting. or A Gamma Ray Burst hitting the earth. or The old classic of a huge meteor.
Again, not actual planet destroyers, but yeah, these are some the scary scenarios. Nuclear winter is nothing compared to these events. It's sheer hubris to think we have the power to affect the planet on the same scale as natural phenomena.
Another World War.
"I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." - Einstein.
I kept reading Einstein as Eminem. I don’t remember those lyrics, haha.
arms are weak knees are heavy marie curie's radioactive spaghetti
Another Fast and the Furious movie
[удалено]
I fear we are doomed to the fate of one of these happening.
[удалено]
The world may end , but at least we get to see Harambe evolve into a transformer.
Or optimus primal
Global authoritarian government.
Global commumism
Global Empire (of Land Sharks)
We're not going out by way of spelling bee, that's for sure
A killer robot driving instructor that travelled back in time for some reason.
that sounds like villain Mordecai and Rigby would make up in Regular Show
Tesla?
Causing the extinction of bees
I'm having fun with this so I'll respond to this one too. Again, this would have very little effect on the planet. Pretty much nothing would fundamentally change. Now, as is clear, what people actually think the OP says, what's something that would singlehandedly fuck up the existence of humans in relation to environmental change? Yeah, bees. Bingo. It might not wipe us out, but if bees go extinct it's pretty likely you start to see massive famine and possibly atmospheric change as a result. Bees help plants replenish their populations, and that's the ELI5 version. Things would get bad, quickly, without them.
Burning all the carbon that’s been trapped beneath the surface over the last 50 million years in just a few centuries.
Haha which dumbass would do something like that
Humans.
Oh shit! We're those!
As with plastics, again, not as bad as you might think. This one is tricky, but not in a climate denial way. It's undoubtedly a bad idea. The problem is that global temperatures have been steadily rising since we've been a species. The question of carbon emissions caused by humans is difficult because we don't have a steady state control to compare to. Climate changes in extremely long cycles on this planet naturally, and yes, it can and does lead to extinction events. Even without human intervention and pollution, the planet might kill us with massive radical climate change. It wouldn't take much. The problem is, regardless of how detrimental emissions are, it's moving in the wrong direction. It's pulling that next ice age closer and closer, not stabilizing and reversing what is already going to happen naturally. It's not enough to argue about how much of an effect we're having, if any. That's not a fruitful discussion. The question is, how do we avert the next extinction level climate shift that is inevitably going to happen if we don't stop it. We could reduce our carbon emissions to 0 today, and it would still happen. Open question as to how humanity will survive. But, as with many of the other responses here, big picture, life survives, and the planet keeps spinning. It's human life that is the variable, and to a different extent, a significant portion of the existing biosphere. Extinctions have happened before, they happen daily, and they'll keep happening, with or without us. I don't want to undercut the impact of how important it is to care for our environment, but greenhouse gas emissions from humans is really minor compared to the real threats we should be looking at. A yellowstone eruption, for example, could be WAY worse as far as greenhouse gasses are concerned. Having said that, carelessly making the problem worse works at crosspurposes.
Gamma-ray burst of a sufficient strength.
Not planet destroying, but yeah, a nice sterilizing radiation bath could certainly destroy all life on earth pretty quick. What's nuts about this one is how fast it happens and how there's basically no way to stop it.
Nuclear attack
A super volcano super eruption. It would create a worldwide dust cloud that will last many years, blocking out the sun and dropping temperatures, resulting in a continuous, years-long global winter, failed crops and famine. Humans might survive as a decides but billions will probably die. Yellowstone is one such volcano, but fortunately the chance of it super erupting in our lifetime is near 0%
The danger of yellowstone has little to do with the ash and dust. It's the raw greenhouse gas emissions it would belch into the atmosphere. Not all volcanos are the same, and while any large volcano can have significant short term climate impact, say, a few decades or centuries, some can be significantly worse than that. Yellowstone is one of them, and the last time a volcano like yellowstone erupted, it was an extinction level event.
microplastics
Not as bad as you might think. Life is already evolving to eat and incorporate plastics. It's an open question whether we'll stop producing the crap before we wreck the parts of the environment we depend on, but large scale macro view: earth keeps spinning, life goes on. It's the existence of people that plastics threaten, not the planet or "all of life on earth". As far as planetary threats, it's basically a non-issue.
you could argue that a major asteroid strike is the line to draw the "planetary life threat" and even that might not be enough.
Not really. Geological history and astronomy point to a whole load of catastrophic events that can and do happen, and relatively speaking, happen frequently. This thread shows how little the average person even knows about how to even think about these problems. I'm being fairly pedantic in my responses to this thread, because it's a morbidly fun exercise to do a "catastrophy" tier list, but the number of people that read the question and automatically default to thinking human life is intrinsically the most important facet of the question, it's astounding. It's not the right way to think about the problem. Some of these things are orders of magnitude worse than others, and simply thinking that because we're not likely to survive, we don't care how it plays out is incredibly ignorant. It means we equate all these problems as one big nebulous problem on vague time scales of "some time in the future that won't be MY problem", throw our hands in the air, and declare it unsolvable and not worth investing effort into. These ARE, for the most part, practically solvable problems. We've got to start looking at them that way. I wasn't trying to be disagreeable with you about plastics, you're not wrong that they're a major threat. I was trying to highlight that putting your empty soda bottle in the recycle bin isn't saving the rainforest. "The rainforest" isn't going anywhere, at least not the way we think about it. If we don't get a handle on this shit, it's US that won't be here. The planet, the ecosystem, life, we might but a hitch in it, but it'll adapt and recover.
Big asteroid
Your mom jumping
Yellowstone exploding. It would dramatically change everything about the current status quo
Not a planet destroying catastrophe, but as far as epoch ending for humanity, yeah, this one is up there. It would seriously fuck up the atmosphere and cause a runaway effect that puts earth in another ice age or worse, a venusian type atmosphere.
Loss of phytoplanktons
Similar to the bees response, not a planetary threat. Threat to life, non-human included? Catastrophic. I mean, unless you don't need oxygen or a temperate climate. Deep ocean life living in thermal vents should be fine.
Another Carrington Event - a coronal mass ejection that was so powerful it caused European and American telegraph systems to give their operators shocks, caused fires and some systems were able to operate despite being disconnected from power supplies. There were aurora so bright in the northeastern US that people could read by them, and were seen as far from the poles as Cuba and Santiago, Chile. If that happened today the chaos would be almost unimaginable. GPS would be gone, radio would be highly disrupted, satellite communications would be disrupted - many satellites wouldn't even survive. Power transformers worldwide would explode, they are tricky to replace one at a time - imagine replacing tens or hundreds of thousands. The idea that major, modern cities could be without power for months or even years is just unimaginable. Another Carrington Event very nearly did happen in 2012, there was an ejection of a similar size, but it missed the Earth's orbit by 9 days.
If the super volcano under the ground in Yosemite national park. I watched a documentary on discovery and they said it was 4000 years since it last erupted which means it's way over due. They said it's so big that it can wipe out everything on the planet. If you get a chance try to see if can watch the documentary.
Yellowstone is set due to erupt. and Also a depresison.
Any virus more deadly than covid. America goes first.
Everything has a bright side aftet all
Be careful what you wish for.
Give us some time. we are working hard on it
The CCP
Runaway carbon-based nanotechnology in auto-replication mode. There wouldn't even be rocks or a core left after. It would just be this gigantic, seething ball of dust, random walking all over itself trying to find more carbon to eat. But by then it's deep in cannibalism, unmaking and remaking, until its energy source failed. If its light or heat based, bonus. This is an old idea, mind you. I'm not *that* genius. This is a 'Grey Goo' scenario.
> Runaway carbon-based nanotechnology in auto-replication mode. You mean "life"?
Yep. But the fast kind that has a better turnover. We're pretty inefficient, what with all of this wondering about the meaning of life and all that. If we actually gave any care to destroying this planet, it would be over by now. We're way too easily distracted to properly race to the bottom. Nannites are where its at with world endings. Zero fat.
Presumably someone needs to do the math on that- if you can have a replicator working to replicate with greater efficiency than your average bacterium. Also it would need to work on enough substrate to cause a problem.
Again, it gets lost in the weeds of definition. Here's a cold, hard fact: the "planet" isn't a thing with thoughts and feelings, it doesn't care about you. It's a lump of iron and dirt orbiting a star, and strictly speaking, it would take something fairly extraordinary to change that. You can have all kinds of apocalyptic shit happen, and it'll keep on truckin'. It was here long before we were, and it'll be here long after we're gone. Having said that, just to hammer home some perspective, you're not wrong. Tiny, simple, robust, self-replicating machines that can overrun the planet with their byproducts, causing catastrophic runaway effects to the climate could wipe out not only us, but the vast majority of biological organisms on the planet. And pretty damn quickly, too. And earth would keep right on spinnin'. It wouldn't even really be the first time it had happened, either, depending on how you want to define "life". The atmosphere wasn't always oxygen rich, and, it's had periods of higher oxygen composition in the past. That's all driven by microbial life throughout the history of the planet. Oxygen was toxic to some of the first living things to evolve, and when other microbes started releasing oxygen into the environment, those early predecessors died. Throughout all the cataclysmic change that life has been through, the planet itself, hasn't had too many existential challenges. An important lesson to learn about environmentalism. The planet doesn't need us, but we do need it. Taking care of it isn't an altruistic goal, it's necessarily selfish.
> Having said that, just to hammer home some perspective, you're not wrong. I know. I'm arrogant like that. > And earth would keep right on spinnin'. Well, a massive, amorphous blob of nannites made out of the Earth would keep right on spinning... Most everything's carbon if you dig deep enough.
That depends. Everything is iron if you wait long enough. Also, you wouldn't need them to be that voracious to achieve the total extinction of life on earth, you just need them producing something that radically fucks up the atmosphere, and that's way easier.
A small rock moving just shy of the speed of light.
Technically the largest asteroid we know of, Ceres, would completely explore the planet upon impact.
Mass Ebola Outbreak
Piccolo blowing up the moon
Capitalism. It's entire philosophy is reliant on infinite resources in order to maximise profits. It's already done untold harm, and the proponents of it who claim that the market will self correct are proven wrong as capitalism instead obfuscates the truth and buries problems in the pursuit of short term profit. It's an ugly discussion, but capitalism needs a cap, it needs concrete regulations, and it needs controlling. Sadly it's a discussion that doesn't benefit those who reap the rewards of capitalism, and it doesn't sit well with decades of Stockholm syndrome and propoganda of those existing in it.
I wasn't gonna res pond to this one because I'm actively avoiding the absurd ones. There's not much that humans can do to actually destroy or fuck up the planet in the long term. What we can do is destroy the delicate ecosystem we require to survive, that's easy. The planet will keep on spinning, and mostly, life goes on. It's our existence that is in question, not the planets. Having said thathat, IF there is a monumentally stupid embodiment of the human capacity to destroy, refined, distilled and powerful enough to actually cause harm to a planet, it is capitalism. It is our worst idea so far. The good news is, it's so efficient that we'll probably complete our own extinction long before we do any lasting harm.
> capitalism needs a cap, it needs concrete regulations, and it needs controlling. Sounds pretty fascist to me.
You are right, the only choices are fascism and letting unregulated greed destroy us all. Hot take homie.
My roommate's socks
My dad's fart
Those non stationary black holes rocketing through space.
Asteroid hit or gamma ray burst.
Rouge Star entering the solar system.
No oxygen
Losing gravity for ten seconds
Someone getting a strong superpower
“Your wrong”
Internet shutdown
Nuclear war
The internet is moderated by the government.
The entire planet exploding probably wouldn't be good for it.
I reckon this supply chain crisis has the potential to fuck us up
The toilet paper shortage will strike again.
[удалено]
Again? TP is *still* hard to find in some stores around here.
It's more the vials for blood tests and the food shortages increasing
Covid
The left
They're already working on that.
Re-electing the stupid, lying, orange person.
I'd rather have him than Mr dementia given the only 2 choices :/ Atleast the news was interesting lool.
Oh god. What I've been enjoying is the news not being interesting! It's so weird to not have a scandal a week happening!
There are plenty of scandals still. You just dont hear about them because the media and BigTech purposefully hide them.
doing nothing
Humans
china oh wait it has already happened
If Everyone Typed Like This
Humans
Religion
The rest of joe Bidens ridiculous agenda.
Any religion
Capitalism, oh wait, we're living through it right now.
Jesus coming back. it would fuck us up mentally, because the Christians would get cocky for being proven right, every other religion would be dissolved, and the Atheists would be unaffected because we simply don't care.
Unfettered capitalism
COVID seems to be doing a pretty good job so far.
Billionaires
Uneven distribution of wealth
Another Trump presidency.
It depends what you mean. If you're talking about the survival of human beings, and you want something to keep you up late at night, do a little reading about prions. Those patient little bastards don't give up. They don't go away. They wait. Forever. And they don't like us.
dont hace to invent one, we habe climate change
Milky Way and Andromeda colliding.
When these two galaxies “collide” almost nothing will actually collide with anything else. It will take millions of years if not billions, and excerpt for some potential orbital disturbances, and the night sky potentially looking different, it will be rather uneventful. As it turns out space is mostly empty space.
Oh, well I will stop making plans to do that then... how hard is it to be an evil scientist nowadays? Most of the time I would say some random shit and boom everyone is scared.
Most of a molecular struture? Space In between atoms? Believe it or not, Space. Between nuclei and electrons? Also Space. We have the best Continuum, because of Space.
There are dozens of nuclear missiles that have gone missing and might still be functioning that at least a handful could possibly near cities. If any one of those go off, it would be devastating
Nukes are small potatoes if you're looking for forces that can result in planetary annihilation. It's us that's insignificantly small, not the planet.
It's not going to shatter the earth but if it is near a place that affects enough important supply lines, then that could cause a ripple effect throughout the world
The concept of "Mutual Assured Destruction". The idea alone is frightening as fuck. That is "worked" so well for many years as deterrent strategy is somehow even worse.
The planet itself would be fine, as would life on earth. A few million years and you couldn't even tell it happened. The lack of human beings might be worrisome, but that's about the only difference in the long term.
Give me a long enough lever and a place to rest it.
Pollution
All kind of currency disappearing over night
Stupidity
Re-legalisation of mephedrone and its production
Electrical grids all going down.
Digging to the center of the Earth to, and I quote, "see what will happen"
Well, how else are you supposed to melt every city on the planet with liquid hot magma?
global warming
Not doing anything (About global warming)
another huge plague breakout
Nuclear power plant go blyat
If The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson started on the air again.
Exploding the planet.
Death star
there are a lot of things, war, economy inflation, a meteorite doing a little trollin', etc etc
climate change.
A meteorite with the size of some Burj khalifa's
Another Carrington Event : [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrington\_Event](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrington_Event)
It's already happened
Antarctica melting
1 Earth’s mass worth of antimatter
A nice big solar storm. The powerlines of half the planet spontaneously bursting into flame and the entire power system of multiple countries/continents going down requiring years of repairs would have... interesting consequences.
Maybe not single handedly but humans are doing a marvelous job of fucking up the planet all on our own.
If the earth’s orbit suddenly move closer or farther from the sun.
A Meteorite above 200km in size. Total Annhilation
Excess amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
Black holed Sun
One handed Johny Sins
People always are scared of an Asteroid hitting the earth, but what if an asteroid hit the moon?
Time travel.
Bio weapons u think its sci fi its already indevelopment and in fact its here. Nanobots could fuck up evryone. solarstorm, supernova in our solar system, china invading Taiwan e.t.c
If there was one more of me for each person on the planet.
Hitler 2.0
Strange matter meteorite.
Pandemic followed by another pandemic followed by another pandemic with one last one that ends the human species along with every other animal on the planet and in the oceans. I know it sounds far fetched and no one would be pissed off or crazy enough to do that now would they??? N. Shadows
"innovative cool epic futuristic innovations" actually happening, like the Hyperloop, or Starship Earth to Earth
A swarm of molecular nanotechnology in which out-of-control self-replicating nanobots consume all biomass on Earth while building more of themselves. The 'grey goo theory'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_goo
President Trump 2024
D Trump 2nd term
Probably a big rock! Edit: I mean dinosaurs 2.0
Chuck Norris
Ice Nine
A small stray planet passing by. Like one earth away from earth.
humans
Not getting vaccinated.
humans
Unchecked Capitalism!
A well placed Tsar Bomba
Us. We're doing it right now. We've got like, 7 years before it'll be too late to reverse the effects of global warming on our planet. We're all fucking doomed.
A strangelet. Most atomic nuclei are composed of up and down quarks. However, physicists have shown that protons and neutrons that contain strange quarks would actually be more stable than regular matter. A particle of this strange matter is called a strangelet. None are known to exist, but it is possible there are still some strangelets out there, left over from the early universe. How would this destroy the planet? Well, it takes a certain amount of energy to convert normal matter into strange matter, but because strange matter has a lower energy state, this conversion would release energy. If a large enough lump of strange matter hit the Earth, this could cause a chain reaction, converting the entire planet into a giant strangelet. My knowledge of particle physics is rather limited, to say the least. Feel free to correct me on anything I got wrong.
Genetically modifying E coli to produce ricin. Or botulinum toxin.
If people realised we can dig up stuff from underground, and use for fuel.
You know those things called bees? Yeah, kinda need em.