But what if the virus mutates into a more lethal strain (with a 90% kill rate), called the Zepplin Virus, and goes airborne? The virus, causing psychological imbalance and reducing human intelligence to primal instinct and bloodlust, would infect nearly anyone without an oxygen purifying system. Those infected would kill any remaining humans immune to the airborne version of the infection, as ZV would constantly pump the host with adrenaline and enhance their physical attributes and the virus can spread through saliva contact as well as blood.
But what if that virus mutates into the Goomba virus, which would cause the human population to slowly transform into small, mushroom like people that only have the capacity to move back and forth within a 5-10 meter linear location with susceptible weakness to brain trauma.
Ernie's idea sounds a lot like libertarianism. I am surprised no one caught that. But yeah, sourcing from video games is weird. I was wondering why you were doing that.
Ernie's idea sounds a lot like libertarianism. I am surprised no one caught that. But yeah, sourcing from video games is weird. I was wondering why you were doing that.
It's almost like you are implying that video-game logic has no place in WEPR. As if the WEPR is for actual debates using science, logic and real world situations.
There is the famous "hole in the ozone layer," though. Would it be possible to, say, make another one above the poles? Assuming that the hole would actually increase the temperature of a specific area.
It has virtually no impact on the climate/temperature whatsoever. It affects the penetration of ionizing radiation from sunlight.
Ernie's first idea (the libertarianism one) is unlikely to happen because of obvious social disagreement, political limitations, and other unneeded-to-point-out factors. If you want an example, look at how popular the libertarians are.
His second idea (the polar ice caps one) is unlikely to happen because, as FishPreferred pointed out, we're in a fragile enough situation as it is. That and the resources to pull such a feat off are tremendously expensive, while a racial genocide would be much easier.
I'm humourously in favor of the Carlin "4 Groups of People that Gotta Go" scenario.
I already suggested that, but noooo. Apparently it isn't a viable solution. Pfft, as if. Maybe if we target Christians first it would be more effective.
First of all, I don't understand your point. It may just be me, but it went right over my head. Secondly, how much do you think it really costs to melt a continent (and then some), and why?
Here is an article to show that melting the ice caps would cost more than WWII (2-20 trillion or something like that). Also, melting the ice caps is a very noticeable problem, compared to racial genocide anyway. There is genocide occurring right now, so yeah. Are we done with this topic? :S
