Doomsday: The End of the World: Part Three

The end of the world has been a popular theme in the arts (film, literature, etc.) as we’re no doubt aware. It’s also been a popular theme in science, in mythology, in religion, in prophecy, and so on. The fascination with the end of the world theme is that while unlikely (in your lifetime), it’s plausible as the dinosaurs found out 65 million years ago. So, in the short term, in your lifetime, is it likely, and if so, what’s the means of delivery?

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

The End of the World in Prophecy: Now most of the end of the world prophecies tends to have religious overtones, as in Armageddon and the Biblical Book of Revelation. I’ve noted on the Internet one 54 year old Californian religious loony who is absolutely convinced he would be part of the rapture on the 21^st of May, 2011. That’s it – that’s the judgement day, the second coming of Christ, the end of the world as we know it. I predict that he was very disappointed when he woke up in his California abode on the 22^nd of May 2011 in a totally un-raptured state. I really shouldn’t single him out, it wasn’t he who came up with that date, yet still he got sucked into the frenzy. Over the millennium he’s but one of millions of loonies who got sucked into the end of the world frenzy!

It’s a pity that so many peoples’ lives are so miserable that they literally look forward to someone else (God or Jesus Christ) ending their mundane existence of everyday mortality and transporting them into another one of peaceful eternity, although who really knows, maybe it’s a case of going from the frying pan into the fire! 

However, there’s a dark side to the forces behind prophecy. The central focus, as always, is me, myself, and I. If you’re reading the astrology horoscope, what it predicts for your next door neighbour is probably of no consequence to you. However, if someone predicts that the world is about to go down the gurgler; that the end is neigh, well, you’re part of the world, so you’re heading down the gurgler too! Now that may, or may not, upset you. For religious reasons, many look forward to the world going down the gurgler, because that means that they, while going down the gurgler too, get deposited at the other end of the tube into an eternal paradise. Or so they believe. 

Unfortunately people who are suckered into believing that on such-and-such a date they, along with everybody else, are going to meet their maker, well that can have serious consequences. There are more than a handful of case studies which have shown that ordinary people, caught up in the end-of-the-world hype, lacking the qualities of logical and critical thinking, have sold off all their worldly goods, left their homes and families, to await the end – which never came. Some have banded together to form end-of-the-world doomsday cults which have required suicidal philosophies as the alleged end drew near. Human delusion can have tragic consequences.

There are several downsides to end of the world prophecy. It’s not the same sort of harmless fun as consulting your daily horoscope in the paper. Firstly, there’s the letdown, trauma, disappointment, humiliation, etc. suffered by the true believers when their idiocy is revealed for the entire world to see. There’s the often bizarre behaviour of true believers before-the-fact – the break-up of family units, giving away all worldly goods and possessions, joining doomsday cults, sometimes to the tune of ritual suicides.

Then there’s the lack of moral, ethical, law and order constraints – I mean if you really wanted for once in your life to live the good life, the best foods, the best wines, the most expensive resorts, the best women money can buy, all the fantasy dreams of the great unwashed, and you truly believed you only had a week to go before The End, well there’s this bank down the road just begging to be robbed and a certain snooty little teller who’s been asking for an extra hole in her head right between the eyes – how dare she turn you down for a date – well, why not? You’re dead in a week anyway, so nothing much to lose is there?

Now extrapolate that up to a true believer who does hold some high position of real power. What if you could manipulate foreign policy in such a way as to ensure or bring forward Armageddon? Or, if the world’s going to end tomorrow anyway and you believe that with all your heart and soul that’s going to be the case, well you may as well press the nuclear button now. The leader of your most hated foreign power is laughing at your stupidity, so you’re going to want to make sure it’s doomsday for them too! 

There have been thousands of end of the word prophecies from the religious Armageddon as given in the Biblical Book of Revelation to predictions of alien invasions to nuclear suicide as per the “On the Beach” scenario or maybe some ‘the-sky-is-falling’ alarmist who’s convinced there’s an undetected and undetectable asteroid that’s heading our way – ground zero; target Earth.  It ain’t happened – the asteroid anyway – to us, but T-Rex would tell a different tale methinks. T-Rex aside, anyone who places any sort of faith that the next prophetic quack has got it right is in serious delusion. The odds favour the exact opposite. Mother Earth will go on her merry way for a long time yet. If you’re anxiously awaiting the rapture – well, be prepared to wait a lot longer.

The next predicted doomsday biggie is the 21^st of December 2012 for a whole potful of various reasons that’s relatively easy to find out about given hundreds of books, articles, Internet sites and blogs, DVDs, etc. all devoted to the subject. So, hands up please for all of you who have total conviction that the next end of the world prediction will bear fruit, 21 December 2012. Thought so!  Well, I’ll go on the record now as prophesizing that it’s going to be quite safe for you to plan your 2012 Christmas and post-Christmas activities and holidays and welcome in 2013 with the usual New Year antics we’ve all come to love and participate in. How so?

There’s one really main problem with end of the world prophecy, and it doesn’t matter a hoot what you’re ultimate source is that you base, or believe, the prophecy on – to date, 100% of all end of the world predictions have failed (that’s bloody obvious isn’t it? I mean we’re still here; we’re still standing)! If I’d received a fiver for each failed doomsday prediction, I, my bank manager and the tax man would all be happy little campers. A 100% failure record - that’s a pretty piss-poor track record, 100% opposite to science predicting a solar eclipse three decades down the track. Now if there have been just a handful of these the-end-is-neigh predictions, and I mean down to the exact day of the year, well that could easily be dismissed. However, when the absolute number of them, over the millennia, have been such that if you’d collected a fiver for every one, and that collection of fivers would make you one of the wealthiest persons on the planet, well you’ve have to conclude that there’s an awful lot of deluded people. A 100% track record of failure inspires bugger-all confidence that the next quack or gaggle of quacks that comes along with an ‘end-is-neigh’ sign can be taken seriously, such as the 21^st of May 2011 or the 21^st of December 2012.

Further reading: The end of the world in prophecy. 

Guyatt, Nicholas; Have A Nice Doomsday: Why Millions of Americans Are Looking Forward to the End of the World; Ebury Press, UK; 2007:

Kirsch, Jonathan; A History of the End of the World: How the Most Controversial Book in the Bible Changed the Course of Western Civilization; Harper-Collins, New York; 2006:

Price, Robert M.; The Paperback Apocalypse: How the Christian Church Was Left Behind; Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York; 2007:

Willis, Barbara & Willis, Jim; Armageddon Now: The End of the World A to Z; Visible Ink Press, Detroit, Michigan; 2006:

The End of the World: John’s Best Guess Scenario: Okay, here’s my best guess prophecy for our demise. Firstly, it’s going to be at the hands of our fellow nutters. Now you’d have to admit there are all sorts of evil genus types out there. Fortunately, most lack the actual guts and finances to do any actual dirt on us. However, there are a number of highly motivated, highly educated, well financed ‘mad scientist’ terrorist types out there. As noted above, there’s not much they can accomplish with bombs, even nuclear bombs, or explosives or chemicals at least in terms of eliminating humans from the face of the Earth. But, there’s the ultimate in terrorist weaponry - the humble bacteria or virus that’s been genetically or bio-engineered to cause a global pandemic can be a nasty threat indeed. It’s not a Manhattan Project sized operation to bioengineer viruses and bacteria. A well equipped sophisticated lab, perhaps the size of a normal house would do. Several people well acquainted with genetic engineering techniques of micro-organisms, coupled with such information already readily available in the scientific literature, easily available via the Internet who have some sort of super-ultra hatred for humanity and who don’t care a fig about themselves (as per suicide bombers) might be tempted to induce a global pandemic, wiping humanity once and for all from existence. I mean their motto might be: “Kill them all; God will sort out the mess”. If people are willing to die in order to kill a relatively few others, like say the plane hijackers of 9/11 or your run-of-the-mill suicide bombers, then I can easily imagine some people would be willing to along for the doomsday ride if it meant taking the rest of the world with them – what a legacy, even if there’s nobody left to read the obituary. Now a variation would be to destroy via an agricultural plague all food crops, but it’s really easier to target just one species (i.e. – humans) than many dozens.

The possible perpetrators of such a scenario might not even be religious or political terrorists so much as devoted and determined eco-terrorists who figure the best way to save the whales, etc. is to kill off the humans – all of them.

An ideal bio-weapon might be some bacteria or virus that had an incubation period of say 60 hours which gives it plenty of time in this age of jet travel to spread around the globe before anyone’s the wiser that there’s trouble brewing; The microbe would have an easy transmission means from human to human, probably airborne so actual human-to-human contact wouldn’t be necessary; and most important it would be as close to 100% lethal as could be conceived. I imagine that no matter what a few will always have some sort of natural immunity, so wishing for total annihilation might be a stretch. Maybe, maybe not. 

The End of the World for Absolute Certain: Now, to end on a downbeat note, let’s return to scientific prophecy. Our world will end! That’s 100% certain! At the very least it will end when the lifespan of our parent star, the Sun, ends. Just like your car has a limited supply of fuel in its gas tank, so too our Sun has a limited supply of fuel that keeps it burning forever. When the Sun exhausts its fuel, well you can kiss life on Planet Earth goodbye. However, least I scare you into losing a good night’s sleep, that’s still some roughly five billion years in the future, or so modern astronomical prophecy dictates. Even if that’s off by 10%, well that still gives you plenty of time to enjoy the good life, including a good night’s sleep. 

Doomsday: The End of the World: Part Two

The end of the world has been a popular theme in the arts (film, literature, etc.) as we’re no doubt aware. It’s also been a popular theme in science, in mythology, in religion, in prophecy, and so on. The fascination with the end of the world theme is that while unlikely (in your lifetime), it’s plausible as the dinosaurs found out 65 million years ago. So, in the short term, in your lifetime, is it likely, and if so, what’s the means of delivery?

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

The End of the World in Science: How can I destroy thee? Let me count the ways! Well, when counting up the possibilities, it could be a ‘bang’, a ‘whimper’, or anything in-between.

The End of the World in Science: Astronomy: There’s the obvious cosmic connection. I mean the greater Universe out there isn’t all that peaceful and tranquil. A great big rouge asteroid/comet could slam into us. A ‘nearby’ star could explode showering us with intense and deadly radiation. Even from quite a distance, a gamma ray burster could fry us. Perhaps a near invisible Black Hole could wander past just a wee bit too close and down the gravitational hatch we go. Closer to home, super-ultra one-in-a-billion-year solar storms could microwave us to oblivion. After that, things calm down a bit.

The End of the World in Science: Geology:  Planet Earth can be pretty violent too, but nothing geology throws at us can cause our 100% extermination – probably. Earthquakes, volcanos, hurricanes, tornados, floods, droughts, tsunamis, can all create total destructive chaos, but each is too local to be of global concern – except, maybe a super-volcano. Super-volcanoes, which have erupted and will erupt again, might only affect several hundreds-of-thousands to maybe millions of square miles directly vis-à-vis lava, etc. but the ash ejecta can quickly enter and traverse the entire atmosphere, blocking solar radiation causing global cooling and total disruption to the food chain. Then too there are the natural swings and roundabouts that now and again cause the Ice Ages. The saving grace there is that the transition from global normalcy to global Ice Age takes thousands of years – time enough for humans to adapt, even if not loving it.   

The End of the World in Science: Biology: Lots of things can kill us – tigers and crocodiles and sharks, and related beasties, even invertebrates like certain species of spiders and shellfish and octopuses and jellyfish and wasps/bee stings and swarming army ants, etc. Still, we’re more threat to them than they are to us. But, it’s not the macro life forms that are going to do us in, it’s the micro forms. We all get sick now and again. Bacteria and viruses have their wicked way with us or our bodies. Ultimately, we win every battle against them, except the last battle. They always win the war. In the end, they kill us, and to add insult to injury, feast off our remains! History is not without case studies of humans on mass (pandemics and epidemics) being slaughtered by these micro-beasties. There’s nothing in the cards to guarantee that history won’t repeat yet again. It’s not beyond the bounds of possibility that bacteria and/or viruses, caring not one jot for our high IQ’s and medical technology, won’t exterminate us.

The End of the World in Science: Astrobiology: Then there’s the old chestnut of alien invasion! That an alien (from space) might wipe us out might depend on whether the alien was or was not intelligent. If non-intelligent spores from space (panspermia) landed on Earth, well, it’s alien invasion never-the-less. If said spores took a liking to our biochemistry, well, the ‘alien’ diseases of smallpox etc. had quite an effect on the native Mesoamericans post European contact. Of course those European invaders weren’t exactly friendly as macro-beings either. In the similar, but extraterrestrial context, Planet Earth has attracted the attention of alien invaders near a zillion times in films, TV shows, novels and short stories. Most guys and gals would love to be as popular as Planet Earth is to the extraterrestrials! Still, invasion by extraterrestrial intelligences is highly unlikely. It’s going to a heck of a lot of expenditure of time and effort for relatively little gain. I mean if you’re a resident of the Big Apple, why would you, invade Paris for a loaf of bread when the necessary bakery ingredients are available in your local corner store. What could we have that the aliens couldn’t find a lot closer to home, be it gold or water? No, the least likely end-of-the-world scenario is alien invasion – at least by intelligent aliens. And if aliens did want Planet Earth, they wouldn’t have to fire a laser shot or even show up close and personal. All they need do is chuck a few large asteroids our way. There’s nothing we could do about it and when the dust settles, Planet Earth is theirs.

The End of the World in Science: Nanotechnology: There’s also been some worry about nanotechnology, both in fact (for example Prince Charles and his concerns over grey goo) and in fiction (for example, ‘Stargate: SG-1’ and ‘Stargate: Atlantis’ with the nanotechnology themed Replicators), that run amuck and cause human extinction if not worse. The basic scenario is that nanotechnology ‘robots’, a sort of artificial intelligence that can be programmed to do useful things like travel through a human’s circulatory system clearing out clogs and gunk and obstructions in the veins and arteries, end up, in order to recreate or reproduce themselves, start assimilating anything and everything they come across. In short, everything is gobbled up and turned into more and more of those nanotechnology ‘robots’. Like bacteria that exponentially reproduce and expand to meet the available food supply, so too will these ever hungry nanotechnology ‘robots’ gobble up the entire Planet Earth, turning all organic life forms, plus all the air, water and rock into a uniform grey goo. If that comes to pass, it’s clearly going to be a case of bend over and kiss your own ass goodbye. 

The End of the World in Science Fiction: Apart from the above, there have been various proposals put forth about potential ways and means that Earth could meet doomsday that have very little scientific credibility. Some would argue that alien invasion is one such implausibility. What I have in mind here are somewhat ‘mad scientist’ schemes, say the creation in particle accelerators like the Large Hadron Collider of mini Black Holes that would eat us up from the inside out. Or somehow scientists could accidentally via weather modification experiments set off global storms that last for months, or trigger geological faults that would crack the world in two or more pieces. Then there are nuclear bombs that could send the planet careening out of orbit heading either into the Sun or out into the depths of interstellar space. Then there’s the creation of artificial intelligences (robots and related) who eventually take over as the Top Dog life form. Then there are all those exotic super-weapons like neutron bombs or weapons with invented techno-babble names that sound impressive but mean absolutely nothing. Then there are those weird scenarios where one wakes up to find oneself as the last man on Earth for no apparent reason (albeit there are a very few others otherwise you’re plot’s pretty thin on the ground), though sometimes a plague turns 99.99% of humans into zombies and you’re the near lone normal human fighting off the mob.

The End of the World in Social Fiction: Then there’s the total worldwide breakdown of society, of government, of financial institutions, of law and order for no real logical reason (unlike say society in a post nuclear WWIII scenario). But, perhaps a super Global Financial Crisis, a GREAT DEPRESSION that makes the Great Depression look like the good times, or we finally exhaust our oil and gas supplies, might be a potential trigger. However, even in a society of total chaos, as witnessed by many such societies that have undergone such upheavals, there would be many survivors. 

The End of the World via Terrorism: As opposed to military actions by entire countries and associated governments, terrorists and terrorism are small scale events, hardly global in nature. But it would be wrong to dismiss terrorists as having no end of the world potential.

There’s only one plausible way IMHO that terrorists could bring about the end of the world. See the section ‘End of the World: John’s Best Guess Scenario’ for the details.

*Terrorist suicide bombings – too local; no end of the world way.

*Terrorist chemical attacks – too local; no end of the world scenario.

*Terrorist nuclear weapons & related – nasty, but overall no way that would be an ultimate end of the world event.

*Terrorist biological warfare – where there’s a will there’s a way.

To be continued…

The Creation: God vs. Natural History: Part Two

Probably among the most familiar of familiar phrases in the English language is one that starts out “In the beginning God created…” However, there are alternative non-theological variations on that phrase that fall more in the realm of natural philosophy (or as we call it today, science). What’s at stake is the credibility of God’s alleged word vs. the credibility of the word of science. Christians might believe the Bible, but they put their real faith in science when they turn on their TV set or board an aircraft. So too should they put their money on the scientific (natural history) scenarios of the creations.

In the beginning God said a whole bunch of stuff central to His creation of life, the Universe and everything.*

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

Botany is next up on the creation agenda. Of course you need land and water before you can have a garden (hydroponics and phytoplankton aside) so the ordering is, well, in order. Except God then makes a mistake. He starts off all things botanical with grass, which, truth be known, is a pretty complex and highly evolved plant. There were lots of simpler plants that pre-existed grasses. Even the dinosaurs existed before grass did! What God should have said is that “let the Earth bring forth algae and phytoplankton and mosses and ferns”. That would have been a detail which would have made botanical atheists stand up and take notice of Biblical bona-fides.

But, just when you think the Biblical creations gets things in a reasonable and logical order, here comes the next bit – the creation of the Sun, Moon and stars. The relevant quote, in case there’s any doubt:

Genesis 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

Okay, the Moon and the stars aren’t all that relevant, but what did all those plants, those grasses, herbs and fruit trees, do for solar energy (photosynthesis) before the Sun got created? This is without question a major Biblical screw-up; the height of all that’s illogical in the scientific ordering of things, but then the Bible and science are not exactly bedfellows. Science on the other hand has the Sun and the Earth formed about 4.5 billion years ago – plants came much later on and thus they never lacked for solar energy.

The screw-ups keep on keeping on. Next up we have the creation of marine life and avian life. Unfortunately for God, He screwed up by including whales among marine life. Okay, whales are marine creatures, but they are not fish. Whales are mammals. God apparently created whales before the end of the fifth day of creation. After the fifth day had ended, and the sixth day had begun, God then apparently created mammals, like cattle, and lots of other critters that in the fossil record preceded whales, as well as those things that “creepeth” upon the earth for example (I assume worms and snakes, etc.). What’s the relevant proof?

Genesis 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

We note that whales were created before other beasts as outlined in Genesis 1:24. Yet, as any biologist will outline for you, whales evolved from land mammals and went back to a marine habitat. Whales are a relatively recent product of natural selection. They were hardly an animal that kicked off the mammalian branch of the tree of life, contrary to what God says. 

Take as a further example the creation of the male and female of the human species, which is I’m sure a bit more relevant and personal to all you readers. The barebones (as it were) were given in Genesis 1:26. Now, finally, God gives out the details!  

Genesis 2:7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Genesis 2:21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

Genesis 2:22 And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

Well at least now we get some sort of explanation – the male created from common dust; the female from the masculine rib. Details are still thin on the (dusty) ground, but the dust-and-rib theory is at least something that scientists can explore and play around with. Hands up all of you who attended high school biology class or university Biology 101 and got the dust-and-rib explanation? I thought so. Biologists have found a more convincing explanation. If you don’t need dust, and you don’t need ribs, then you don’t need God either in the equation. That aside…    

Now if you’re a male, are you overjoyed that your original alpha-male ancestor was made out of ordinary everyday garden-variety dust? Would you be happy if you had been made out of dust motes? If you’re a female, does it tickle your fancy that you’re (well your sex is) just a second generation afterthought (there is quite a break in Genesis between Adam’s creation and Eve’s coming to the party); a creation from a masculine rib? Does any of this strike you as slightly ridiculous? That’s all the more so since the creation of the original alpha-male and alpha-female afterthought was just a one-off. Post-dust and post-rib it was creation by that time-honoured mechanism – sex, which is smelly and messy and rather hit-or-miss. I mean hey, if dust and ribs work, well when you’re on a winner, stick to the original blueprint. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. God should have left the dust-and-rib instruction manual behind. So, if a modern loving couple wants a bouncing baby boy, well a bit of housework will round up the raw material. If it’s a little girl, well hubby can have a rib job at the local clinic. Okay, that’s ridiculous. But if it’s ridiculous now, it was equally ridiculous back then.

Now kindly note another creation screw-up here. We’re all familiar with the concept of day and night; morning and evening. Now the question is what celestial object is responsible for there being light and darkness, day and night, morning and evening? Did I hear you suggest that the Sun was the orb responsible? If so, go to the head of the class.

But it comes to pass that we have this verse:

Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And then we have this verse (repeated from above):

Genesis 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

So the upshot here is that day and night, morning and evening, existed prior to the creation of the Sun. Wow! Neat magician’s trick that!

Now kindly note yet another creation screw-up here.

Recall: Genesis 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

Recall: Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Now recall: Genesis 2:18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone.

Now recall: Genesis 2:19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them.

In Biblical parlance, this is the equivalent of the chicken and egg question. Which came first, man or beast? The Bible provides statements for both that’s can’t both be correct, so take your pick. Whichever you pick, the alternative then has to be nonsense. Odds are neither version is correct.

Now if God is perfect, there can be no Biblical screw-ups. If there are Biblical screw-ups, then either God isn’t perfect or the Bible is NOT God’s Holy Word. A reasonable explanation is that the Bible was written by non-perfect humans, and God doesn’t exist since the errors, the screw-ups, were never corrected by Him. God never proofread His own Holy Words!

One further anomaly that proves just about beyond any doubt that Genesis is the work of man and not of God; we note the endless repetition of “And God said.” My question – prior to Adam, just who was around back then to copy down anything that God said? And if the answer to that is nobody, then presumably God is just talking to Himself! Or, more likely as not, the entirety of Genesis, creation and all, is just an early example of what would later become known as science fiction.

*Kindly note that all Biblical references have been taken from the Book of Genesis that appear in the King James Version of the Bible.