How to destroy a Planet, or 100% of the life forms on it

  • #36
DrStupid
2,167
501
1) Years, it is too much of time.

That’s your opinion. I’m not in a hurry.

The more pathogens, the more peoples infected, the more time spent - the more probability that Virus will be detected.

That doesn’t matter as long as nobody knows that the viruses are pathogens. And how should somebody know it if they almost ever cause no symptoms?

3) Can you give 100% guarantee that there is no fully isolated personal of IC on the planet exist?

There is currently no known technology for full self-sustaining habitats and I’m not going to discuss conspiracy theories.

Any Biological agent […] can be easily countered by even a simple Chemical Suite.

Not if you are already infected.

The Nature can take effect on the pathogens, pathogens can evolve in unpredictable manner (there is no zero probability for that), it is icreasing the chances for detection.

Something like this is very unlikely and would be considered as what it actually is: a natural mutation of an apparently harmless virus or bacterium. In the worst case pandemic plans will be activated for this particular mutant. And even if somebody is paranoid enough to isolate people who have been tested negative for this species, they would take some of the other pathogens into the shelter.

In addition, the above mentioned natural resistance can play it's role, and from a 1 billion of exterminated IC will be just 1 survivor with immunity, and the end.

If the mortality is known for each pathogen it is quite easy to estimate the expected number of survivors. If it appears to be too high – no problem: The risk of failure decreases exponentially with the number of different pathogens. That makes an acceptable cost/benefit ratio from the view of the aggressor.

In addition the incubation period can take different time in different peoples, for an example in larva of IC population, and in old IC population it can take shorter time, it's drasitcally increasing the chance of detection.

Yes, there are individual variations of the incubation periods but they are not unpredictable. Nobody will have suspicions if early symptoms will be limited to isolated cases.

After the detection, governments of IC just and another lot amount of peoples will be immediately isolated

That will be too late. And even if some people can be isolated in time, they are just safe for weeks or maybe months only. It is currently and in the foreseeable future not possible to shelter many people for years or even decades (Did I mention that I do not talk about conspiracy theories?) and that is not sufficient if the pathogens can outlive as spores or in natural reservoirs. The survivors will need to return into the hostile environment.

I hate to disillusion you, but we currently would have no chance to survive such an aggression. Even a natural pandemic, with a single pathogen which has not been designed to kill humans as effective as possible, could terminate mankind as we know it – not as a species but as a technical civilization. Advanced bioweapons would be much more devastating. We just need to hope that nobody is both willing and able to create something like that.
 
  • #37
frostysh
63
3
and all those resulted to complete failure.
In term of Cold War - nope of course, even for today such systems and devices is a very effective, for an example SU Bombers that can carry nuclear arsenal, and US tanks have protection against Nuclear Biological Chemical.
Because it can't work for that... we are talking for a falling meteor and not a nuke.
That is 100% wrong. Hacking can be done by small groups and target larger groups. Afterall we are talking about a civilization that can travel near c.
Well if it's able to travel at the speed of light or create a black hole, it can move a small rock around.
You still have no clue what is going to happen in such a collision, thinking that there is any kind of strategy to save anyone...
In case of global danger no potential is ever released... again you try to drag it into politics, but we are talking about reality.
1) Coz I think the technologies against a meteor attack is not designed to protect most of peoples, I mean like a rural folks, they designed to protect a special personal and government, of course in case of the asteroid of size of US, this will be hard, but still it is a chance to survive in Mars etc. And I think US, CPR, and SU united can easily complete the Mars program.
In case of frostysh, he probably just sitting and waiting for the impact, because the hell with it :) (sorry for dark humor)

2) Hacking is almost impossible on something that is isolated from the world. And no one idiot will left something important connected to the Internet, for an example. In addition even in nowadays some technologies that making cyber attacks a very detectable in a very progress - Chinese satellite is one giant step for the quantum internet, of course we talking about group that can travel trough a "Wormholes" and make a small so-called "Balckholes", but I think we must try to not restrict too many laws of Nature :).

3) Create a very-very small so-called "Blackholes" is the one thing, but moving a large object such as asteroid is another. frostysh is little bit dull in Science, but I think it will harder. I mean when the ship can focus a large amount of Energy in small time-space volume, is the one thing, but how to move a large steroid with such stuff? It will just destroy the asteroid.

4) Global danger is not a just politics - if the US and SU have armed weapon that can left ~10% from 8 billions of peoples after a few days, it is not an imaginary threat... It is a reality, and they guys that have made and arm such weapon, obviously have many-many strategies that can count many-many risks and situations.
Everyone has the right to dream... but the dreams are never coming true... I think we need at least 100 years or even more to have robot slaves... and maybe we will never do.
I remembered Jules Verne and his dreams (books) :), and the fact, that Scientific progress have some 'acceleration'. And I think you too concerned about slavery, such kind of the utopia of the past, very unlikely will appear in the modern rich and progressive societies, and if even it may, I think it will face a horrific collapse soon after.
First of all, let's be again realistic. A meteor is not seen in the deep space, it has to be close to the Earth to be detectable. However I am telling you that supposed that tomorrow NASA announces that a meteor will strike us in 20 years... It will be the end. You don't have the time to do act.
of course I will not have time to act, but frostysh is mentally stable in this case, so I have doubts that he will have a huge panic, at least before he will start melting :D (again sorry for my sarcasm and very dark humor). But if we give 20 years for preparing for powerful government they unite, and with almost no doubts will find the solution.
Cold War was not bloody... that's why it was cold... what weapon can wipe out 70-90% of the population? We have discovered nothing that large yet... when a volcano is to erupt, we cannot stop it.
I will not try to proclaim alternate History of the 20th century AD, but some "signs" of the Cold War much more erlier of the official dates, for an example so-called Communist International has been founded ~ 1919 AD, and the goal of this organization was the global communistic revolution, a very good example is a Civil War in Spain. So counting all those stuff, we can assume that Second World War, was actually somekind of a part of Cold War, well for an example if not landing in Normandy in 1944 AD, probably the borders of SU may be from Vladivostok to the West France Coast-line. Cold War is very characterize by using radical ideologies to manipulate a large masses of peoples to wreak a chaos and destruction.

About a ~70%-90% of pupolation on the Earth destroyed in fsnc between US and SU, is probably true, even a single Conserve underwater Armageddon (aka Submarine with class that can hold lot of nuclear toys) can drastically change the Global Climate on Earth - Alexandrov, V.V. and G.I. Stenchikov (1983): "On the modeling of the climatic consequences of the nuclear war" The Proceeding of Appl. Mathematics, 21 p., The Computing Center of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Moscow., similar conclusion has been reached from the both sides (and I think this is the main reason why we are still alive :D - sorry for the bad humor), the Nuclear Arsenal, ICBM, etc is designed mostly not to kill a militants, but to kill a civilians, it is a perfect killing machines, and with no doubts if all those arsenal of this two superpowers will be launched - the very large part of civilians on the planet Earth will die in horrific sufferings, despite of where they are, or who they are. This is because such powerful guys as United States is very carefully when deal comes to Nuclear Weapons.
documentaries are on youtube and articles are available online too.
The people on the government are also humans... since this is a strategy to wipe out the whole human population, the people in the governments are also doomed. Scientists need: resources, time, time and time and even after that miracles are impossible.
There is a very abyss in ability to protect themselves, between poor rural guys, such as frostysh, and smarty guys in bunkers - such guys cannot be harmed by anybody weak, weak guys is only able to harm (and they usually harming) non protected innocent peoples. But the powerful guys, such as United States, for an example is totally don't care about any weak guys, their attacks and their sandboxes in which they are playing.
I mean the defensive capabilities is very different in our topic
 
  • #38
XZ923
135
63
The threats of North Korea seems the time is not so far for a nuclear arsenal.

You're completely missing the point. You're conflating ending human life on Earth with the physical destruction of the Earth itself. Let's assume for the moment absolute worst-case scenario: all-out nuclear war. Every explosive on earth, nuclear and conventional, is detonated. The cumulative energy release from these weapons would do almost nothing to the physical planet itself. Go the Wikipedia page and read up about the actual mass of the Earth:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth

The resulting nuclear winter would probably cause the human race to go extinct a la the dinosaurs, but in a few million years or so (a small blip on the cosmic stopwatch) the Earth would probably be right back where it is today. To quote George Carlin, "The planet isn't going anywhere. We are! The planet will shake us off like a bad case of fleas, a surface nuisance". Yes I realize a comedian is hardly a scientific reference, but in this case he's right.

Our nuclear arsenal is certainly sufficient to wipe ourselves out (provided we're not real clever about sustainable bomb shelters). However, the premise of this thread is destroy the planet or 100% of life on it. The Chicxulub impact is estimated to have released energy equivalent to 1.30x10^8 megatons of TNT. By contrast, the most powerful man-made device ever detonated, the Tsar Bomba, released ~57MT. If the Chicxulub impact didn't wipe out all life (which it clearly didn't since we're here), our pitiful efforts wouldn't stand a chance. As for "destroying the planet", the Chicxulub impact didn't even significantly alter the Earth's orbit. It made a decent-sized crater but that's about it.

Face it, on a cosmic scale, we're peons. Actually, we're orders of magnitude below peons.

http://impact.ese.ic.ac.uk/ImpactEffects/Chicxulub.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba
 
  • #39
frostysh
63
3
. . . .
Despite I am very sleepy for now, and I may will made a more large answer tomorrow. I want to say that I am very disagree with you. Biological agents is ineffective against special and military personal.
How you can hold isolated some amount of peoples from the civilization and pathogens outside? Just put the Nuclear Power Plant underground, and the end of story. But bucket of different pathogens is looks very deadly, bit still . I have played in PC game - "Plague Inc" there is some mode of infecting of the entire civilization of humans, on the most hard difficulty level - and I can say that pathogens is easily to detect :).
 
  • #40
frostysh
63
3
I have a lot of questions:

1) Does modern models of Full Scale Nuclear Conflict between US and SU including:

--- a) "Waves" character of nuclear carriers attack

--- b) High altitude detonation which aim is to disrupt the communications

--- c) The nuclear defense against nuclear carriers, I mean Anti Air stuff with Nuclear Warheads

--- d) The delayed launches that will be executed after a week (s) from a start of the conflict which aim is to kill/make damage to civilian survivors

--- e) The fact that targets of attacks will be not only on the territories of US or SU, but actually all around the Earth, including Polar stuff.

2) I have found a lot of references to Nuclear "Armageddon", but I have found nothing about Biological "Armageddon" can somebody present an articles that modelling such things.

Thanx for the answers.
 
  • #41
ChrisVer
Gold Member
3,381
464
In term of Cold War - nope of course, even for today such systems and devices is a very effective, for an example SU Bombers that can carry nuclear arsenal, and US tanks have protection against Nuclear Biological Chemical.
how is that a success to surviving a fsnc? In the meantime we also discovered mobile phones... that's not a success when talking for fsnc.

1) Coz I think the technologies against a meteor attack is not designed to protect most of peoples, I mean like a rural folks, they designed to protect a special personal and government, of course in case of the asteroid of size of US, this will be hard, but still it is a chance to survive in Mars etc. And I think US, CPR, and SU united can easily complete the Mars program.
Your guess is wrong there. You seem to believe there are such technologies but the thing is that there are none. If there are, they are at their infancy and there needs to be a long time before actually being able to be done. I don't know how to pass it to you, but studying/researching something doesn't mean you are able to use it. Another example on that is that the military can research about using apes or robots at war, or it can research for drugs that can make the soldiers obey and fight however long, but the thing is that many of these are either non-applicable yet or proved to be impossible to use in practice. Research done != Got the desired result.

2) Hacking is almost impossible on something that is isolated from the world. And no one idiot will left something important connected to the Internet, for an example. In addition even in nowadays some technologies that making cyber attacks a very detectable in a very progress - Chinese satellite is one giant step for the quantum internet, of course we talking about group that can travel trough a "Wormholes" and make a small so-called "Balckholes", but I think we must try to not restrict too many laws of Nature :).
How do you think you can see/detect meteors in space? By throwing bottles with letters inside the ocean?

3) Create a very-very small so-called "Blackholes" is the one thing, but moving a large object such as asteroid is another. frostysh is little bit dull in Science, but I think it will harder. I mean when the ship can focus a large amount of Energy in small time-space volume, is the one thing, but how to move a large steroid with such stuff? It will just destroy the asteroid.
you will need less energy to alter the meteor's trajectory and make it move towards the Earth.

4) Global danger is not a just politics - if the US and SU have armed weapon that can left ~10% from 8 billions of peoples after a few days, it is not an imaginary threat... It is a reality, and they guys that have made and arm such weapon, obviously have many-many strategies that can count many-many risks and situations.
and US and SU were unable to send a human on Mars... leave aside move lifeforms to a different galaxy in a reasonable amount of time.

I remembered Jules Verne and his dreams (books) :), and the fact, that Scientific progress have some 'acceleration'. And I think you too concerned about slavery, such kind of the utopia of the past, very unlikely will appear in the modern rich and progressive societies, and if even it may, I think it will face a horrific collapse soon after.
Acceleration is one thing... expecting for a fish to fly is another. Robot slavery is not a bad thing, we have computers as our slaves, but they are not close to being humans.

of course I will not have time to act, but frostysh is mentally stable in this case, so I have doubts that he will have a huge panic, at least before he will start melting :D (again sorry for my sarcasm and very dark humor). But if we give 20 years for preparing for powerful government they unite, and with almost no doubts will find the solution.
all doubt. It's just not enough time.

Cold War is very characterize by using radical ideologies to manipulate a large masses of peoples to wreak a chaos and destruction.
that was not the cold war. The cold war was the "undeclared" war between the Western civilization and the soviets. It started after WW2 when the new zones of influences began to form. What you call Cold War by your definition (by including the Internationale etc) is the struggle of classes (if you want to believe the communist side) or just a group/party of totalitarians who want to siege power in order to enslave everyone except for themselves (if you want to believe the non-communist side). WW2 had nothing to do with cold war, since it was the war the germans started to conquer the world and make a pure-white race.
For nuclear arsenal, someone already gave a nice answer... again nuclear weapons was not my answer. But a newer article:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2006JD008235/pdf

There is a very abyss in ability to protect themselves, between poor rural guys, such as frostysh, and smarty guys in bunkers - such guys cannot be harmed by anybody weak, weak guys is only able to harm (and they usually harming) non protected innocent peoples. But the powerful guys, such as United States, for an example is totally don't care about any weak guys, their attacks and their sandboxes in which they are playing.
I mean the defensive capabilities is very different in our topic

US is not such a terrible place, given what they offered the world ever after the 50's when they became the world's greatest power... However even the strongest people are humans - against the destruction inflicted by a falling meteor they can do nothing. They need food, they need water, they need normal temperatures to survive.
 
  • #42
newjerseyrunner
1,535
637
My problem with sterilizing a planet is that it's super super hard to kill everything. There is evidence that life existed on Earth during the heavy bombardment, during which time the entire surface of the planet turned molten several times over. Huge impacts can launch projectiles with extremophiles into space, where they will remain until they crash back down later and reseed the planet.

For obliterating a planet, I like the grey goo scenario. It'll quickly envelope the planet, it's be extremely difficult to stop once started, and it would keep the planet sterile.
 
  • #43
ChrisVer
Gold Member
3,381
464
There is evidence that life existed on Earth during the heavy bombardment, during which time the entire surface of the planet turned molten several times over.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Earth
I think life began to form after the crust was solidified

As for other organisms- I avoided saying that doing this damage on Earth would be enough to destroy every life-form... It would be enough to destroy the human-like intelligent population though. Micro-organisms can survive in different environments and can be very adaptive to changes. I am not sure if there is any way to get rid of all of them... but at least the best choice I could come up with is the usage of chemical weapons.
 
  • #45
ChrisVer
Gold Member
3,381
464
that article is suspicious IMO... but maybe that's because I don't really trust those analyzers... they found 1 graphite out of 79 zircons that were selected out of 656 that were selected out of over than 10,000... and on that particular one they were able to identify the age by the selected zircon's Uranium/Lead ?? And they speak for confidence?
(by the way- wikipedia's article should be as suspicious... my point is that I don't understand the statistics used by those people who actually perform those measurements. But certainly we are talking for very basic life-forms and even that appeared after a while)
 
Last edited:
  • #46
frostysh
63
3
how is that a success to surviving a fsnc? In the meantime we also discovered mobile phones... that's not a success when talking for fsnc.
I mean this is a clues that powerful government systems have prepared their military personal, weapon systems, etc, in case of fsnc. This technologies (such as shelters) will obviously work in case of attack of the not very large meteor, or something like that.
Your guess is wrong there. You seem to believe there are such technologies but the thing is that there are none. If there are, they are at their infancy and there needs to be a long time before actually being able to be done. I don't know how to pass it to you, but studying/researching something doesn't mean you are able to use it. Another example on that is that the military can research about using apes or robots at war, or it can research for drugs that can make the soldiers obey and fight however long, but the thing is that many of these are either non-applicable yet or proved to be impossible to use in practice. Research done != Got the desired result.
I am not believing, I just making a possibility, I am making the probability of that and count it in my model. The world is not a computer program "Abc, abc, abc...". If something has been discovered and created, this is not means that this something will be used ever. If the powerful government achieving something during their non-public research, this government will not public this achievements and probably never use without an extreme case.
How do you think you can see/detect meteors in space? By throwing bottles with letters inside the ocean?
I am cannot. But in case of US NASA, for an example, they have a lot of technologies, a detailed map of surrounding space around Earth trajectory, they have (with no doubts) a plan and strategies in case if they will detect a danger, etc. The all of that factors, increasing the probability to detect a large asteroid threat.
you will need less energy to alter the meteor's trajectory and make it move towards the Earth.
And how many asteroid of size of US is near to the orbit of Earth? It's will take an eternity before such asteroid will reach the Earth, it will be obviously detected. And in addition if it will be no Earth, but the another Planet, perhaps there can be no asteroids nearby. Imho asteroid attack is not a good way.
and US and SU were unable to send a human on Mars... leave aside move lifeforms to a different galaxy in a reasonable amount of time.
They have no performed such expeditions, probably due to the fact, that they killing each other (and using anything weaker in their games) right there, on the Earth, and this war is need for an enormous amount of resources (time, human, etc), but if they will be united - they can do a miracles, imho.
And of course, I not speaking to save a frostysh, for an example in that case, nor a large part of humanity but US and SU can send a mission to mars, with some amount of males females, that in the result will restore the population, of course using the any modern Science achievements.
Acceleration is one thing... expecting for a fish to fly is another. Robot slavery is not a bad thing, we have computers as our slaves, but they are not close to being humans.
In term of "Robots" and the "black guy on the bridge that will declare a new era" I mean the film "I, Robot" which has been created on the writings of Isaac Asimov. In short I mean Intelligent Machines, and not just Machines. Imho, any intelligent enough creature that can make it's own choices, we name as something "living being".
all doubt. It's just not enough time.
Maybe, what a matter.
that was not the cold war. The cold war was the "undeclared" war between the Western civilization and the soviets. It started after WW2 when the new zones of influences began to form. What you call Cold War by your definition (by including the Internationale etc) is the struggle of classes (if you want to believe the communist side) or just a group/party of totalitarians who want to siege power in order to enslave everyone except for themselves (if you want to believe the non-communist side). WW2 had nothing to do with cold war, since it was the war the germans started to conquer the world and make a pure-white race.
For nuclear arsenal, someone already gave a nice answer... again nuclear weapons was not my answer. But a newer article:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2006JD008235/pdf
If this war has been not declared officially, how do you know when exactly this war has started? :)
If we going to take for an example Spanish Civil War, we can easily make the parallels with War in Vietnam, and even with the W2 - I mean interior regional conflicts, usually not very bloody and usually take it's over short after begins, unless the any side of this conflict is 'supported' from the outside, the using in this case a radical ideologies was (and probably is) a standard measure, a very good examples Africa (Angola, SAR, etc), Middle East, this list actually touching probably any places on Earth, maybe for an exception of Australia :D. Actually before the W2 was a complicated diplomatic games, but I have doubts that somebody was able to predict a mythological madness that will force nazies to do such genocide things. Neverless, even a pacts between SU and Nazi German has been created, and it looks like SU (probably using it's obtained experience in Spain) have made some support for Nazi before the W2, perhaps the plan was to make a war inside of Europe with help of radical ideologies, and then conquer weekend states (but the homicidal internal politics and aura of fear have played a bad joke in this case with SU, and actually W2 for SU was looks more like a Civil War..), and actually this plan may be succeed if no landing of Allies in the Normandy in 1944AD. So from that point of view, the W2 is a part of Cold War, same as 'demo version' during a Spanish Civil War.

Cannot download the article :/. Anyway, this thoughts give me the idea of most successful scenario (imho) - small fleet may send somekind of Invader Zim (like in the same name cartoon), and Invader will make disruption, war and chaos, and simultaneous will be unleashed a combination of attacks on the weaken after nuclear Armageddon planet - biological pathogens, etc.
US is not such a terrible place, given what they offered the world ever after the 50's when they became the world's greatest power... However even the strongest people are humans - against the destruction inflicted by a falling meteor they can do nothing. They need food, they need water, they need normal temperatures to survive.
Well, actually depending on the Scientific and Society potential, US was no doubts power more earlier too. But of course after the Nuclear Weapon has been created in enough numbers, no any power cannot stands against, for an exception of SU.
About life in shelters - food and water can be produces with help of Nuclear Power Plant. As you may know, even a 'synthetic' meat has been developed a long time ago.

lab-burger-bbc-copy-300x169.png


First lab-grown burger: Groundbreaking, a bit bland, and definitely not GM
 
  • #47
quickquestion
60
5
It's looks ridiculous and totally ineffective, imho.

I'm telling you, moon is your best bet.
Your only investment is rocket fuel. The moon is already gravitating to earth, so the fuel wouldn't be that much. Because once it starts going, it will continually accelerate due to gravity and you won't need fuel anymore.
If the inital impact doesn't destroy the planet completely, it would probably mess up Earth's orbit and make it fall into the sun.
 
  • #48
frostysh
63
3
I'm telling you, moon is your best bet.
Your only investment is rocket fuel. The moon is already gravitating to earth, so the fuel wouldn't be that much. Because once it starts going, it will continually accelerate due to gravity and you won't need fuel anymore.
If the inital impact doesn't destroy the planet completely, it would probably mess up Earth's orbit and make it fall into the sun.
How you can try to move the Moon? If you will apply large amount of Energy to the small area on the Moon it will just be destroyed. It is not a super-hard steel ball, it's will have it's own dynamical reaction on the force applied, that will include destructive deformation, increasing heat, etc. As for myself it's look ridiculous, but frostysh is dull in the Mechanics (as in the other disciplines too ;/ ) so perhaps you can make a more clear explanation of how you want try to move the Moon.
And in addition we talking about the Earth, but the question was about the Planet in general, so if the particular Planet have not Moon? What next? The question was about more universal strategy to destroy IC population on the particular Planet.
 
  • #49
quickquestion
60
5
How you can try to move the Moon? If you will apply large amount of Energy to the small area on the Moon it will just be destroyed. It is not a super-hard steel ball, it's will have it's own dynamical reaction on the force applied, that will include destructive deformation, increasing heat, etc. As for myself it's look ridiculous, but frostysh is dull in the Mechanics (as in the other disciplines too ;/ ) so perhaps you can make a more clear explanation of how you want try to move the Moon.
And in addition we talking about the Earth, but the question was about the Planet in general, so if the particular Planet have not Moon? What next? The question was about more universal strategy to destroy IC population on the particular Planet.
Ugh, the math indicates the rockets won't accelerate the moon fast enough.
But what if we attach rockets to asteroids, and we bombard the moon with asteroids? Will this push the moon more, because the kinetic energy is nonlinear and ke=1/2*m*(v2)?
 
  • #50
frostysh
63
3
Ugh, the math indicates the rockets won't accelerate the moon fast enough.
But what if we attach rockets to asteroids, and we bombard the moon with asteroids? Will this push the moon more, because the kinetic energy is nonlinear and ke=1/2*m*(v2)?
But how large must be this asteroids? I think it is almost impossible to hit the Moon with undetected asteroid, and when such organization as US NASA will detect asteroid, they can try to change it's trajectory, if this will be not very large asteroid, and counting the fact that hitting the Moon is much more harder than the Earth, so they can change it's trajectory only for little bit, and asteroid will miss the Moon.

And again, what if the Planet have no such large Moon? Imho all this mess with cosmic bodies, such as asteroid is only effective versus a primitive form of life, (for an example those Comet that hits the Earth many millions years ago, indeed was effective against Dinosaurs in long term perspective, but still).
 

Suggested for: How to destroy a Planet, or 100% of the life forms on it

Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
0
Views
104
Replies
0
Views
7
Replies
87
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
162
Replies
17
Views
551
  • Last Post
2
Replies
49
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
814
  • Last Post
Replies
28
Views
4K
Top