Line 9: Line 9:
   
 
Why is there no category for human extinction by natural developements of the world? Only outlandish ideas seem to incorporate this very real inevitability. Are there really no one else who thinks this is scientifically acceptable mode of thought? It will happen eventually, but there seem to be no studies towards its probablity in the near future by natural processes (population growth, over-using of resources, and inevitable reduction of population, enviromental damage, inevitable extinction by not being able to cope in the new environment).
 
Why is there no category for human extinction by natural developements of the world? Only outlandish ideas seem to incorporate this very real inevitability. Are there really no one else who thinks this is scientifically acceptable mode of thought? It will happen eventually, but there seem to be no studies towards its probablity in the near future by natural processes (population growth, over-using of resources, and inevitable reduction of population, enviromental damage, inevitable extinction by not being able to cope in the new environment).
  +
  +
And the difference between this and science fiction writing is...? [[User:Noodleguy|Noodleguy]] 02:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)Noodle

Revision as of 02:26, 4 January 2009

It might be best to name the scenarios after their titles, rather than just using numbers. For example, Davos World rather than Scenario 1. It makes it easier for a reader to know what the page is about if they see a meaningful title, and is probably easier to remember which page is which if you don't need to remember what number each one is. Angela 03:00, 13 Feb 2005 (GMT)

I agree with that. I moved the corresponding pages. Paranoid 20:25, 14 Feb 2005 (GMT)

Additions and Corrections

Angela and Paranoid, your suggestion and corrections were excellent. Thanks! --Stoic viper 03:03, 16 Feb 2005 (GMT)


Why is there no category for human extinction by natural developements of the world? Only outlandish ideas seem to incorporate this very real inevitability. Are there really no one else who thinks this is scientifically acceptable mode of thought? It will happen eventually, but there seem to be no studies towards its probablity in the near future by natural processes (population growth, over-using of resources, and inevitable reduction of population, enviromental damage, inevitable extinction by not being able to cope in the new environment).

And the difference between this and science fiction writing is...? Noodleguy 02:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)Noodle

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.