2012: Will the world really end? [ENDS 29/04/2012]

2012: Will the world really end?
Ends: 29/04/2012

This notion of the world ending at the end of this year, although to some may seem insane, might not actually be. There is a lot of evidence for both sides of the argument, too much evidence almost. I will briefly outline some of it.

Some things for the world ending include a nuclear fallout, an large still unidentified asteroid, the Universe being pulled into a black hole etc. There is also the evidence that the Mayan calender ends on 21 December 2012.

Others argue that there is no conclusive scientific proof to say the world is actually going to end and that scholars couldn't find such bold predictions in Mayan accounts. They say it is a bunch of pseudoscience.

I could ramble on and on, but it is your time to answer whether doomsday is upon us. Debate away!

There's a lot of evidence for both sides? This is the first time I've heard that.

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012.html

The world won't end in 2012. /debate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neversoft

There's a lot of evidence for both sides? This is the first time I've heard that.

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012.html

The world won't end in 2012. /debate

---

I guess I'm going to have to debate within my own debate here. Yes there are. You are basing your reasoning purely on science here and on what NASA tells you.

NASA and science has far from found every near earth object that could potentially pose a great risk to the human race. Evidence shows it, such as in 2002 there were 2 whole meteor incidents that were not recorded by NASA. Furthermore, in 2008 we had a similar situation where a meteoroid named TC3 was spotted a day before impact, unknown to NASA before. Who is to say such things such as massive asteroids aren't covered up to prevent large scale panic?

Also, who is to say we won't go to nuclear war with Iran or even North Korea. That is something science cannot prove.

Remember hearing something about how the mayan calender has ended before and so that's a load of rubbish tbh. Also, is there was a black hole other stuff nearer to it would likely have gone and there has been no vanishing of things that we have seen in last however long you want to way that we are so close to being sucked into it, and to believe stuff like the mayan calendar then you might aswell believe that there is white holes, in which case the world wouldn't even end with the black hole.
Nuclear fall out could happen admitadlly, but the chances of wiping the whole planet out and for it to happen on that day makes winning the lottery look as easy as just filling in your 6 numbers and winning a few million quid.
On topic of the asteroid, we should look at a few factors -
1) if it is one of the factors about the dinosaurs dying, very likely, then that shows that life will indeed carry on, and some things will survive past it anyway.
2) nearly all asteroids would never be big enough, and if they are, are more likely to be dragged iron a planet with a much bigger gravity field, and would also likely reduce in size from atmosphere burning it up anyway.

Indeed however, the threat of an asteroid still remains, but a point to remember is that there is no longer such a widespread amount of volcanic activity, even I'd it managed to cause lake tons to erupt from impact, it would be nowhere as severe as in the distant past, and would likely only represent around an 80% wipeout, give or take 10%. You have to remember that also an asteroid will still leave some life, the chances of EVERYTHING being wiped out is minimal.

In all honesty, the whole thing is a scare from exteremists, and with common sence it seems extremely unlikely, also to venture to the quantum lane, I'd we were all indeed to believe that it won't happen, even if it sefinately will happen, the collective power of that belief would be great enough to change this, especially if all thought at the same time, plus we have to also remember that life will go on in every other dimension where this doesn't happen, as we know it will happen in one dimension for sure constantly in every manner possible, but there will always be an infinite number of other dimensions where every other possibility is being carried out, therefore technically the world will never fully end at any given moment.

(Sorry for any weird words, written this on phone so some may be slightly gibberish)

This debate topic is ridiculous imo. How can there be lots of evidence for both sides of arguments?

If I agree, you may say the predictions done by whatever different civilisations weren't true. So, why this one?

But if I disagree, then I'm just lying to myself as obviously the world is going to end someday. So, why not 2012? How can I know? I don't have psychic powers. I can listen to NASA's stories etc and believe that the world isn't gonna end in 2012. But, there's a saying that goes like this. If we can predict the future, poor people shouldn't exist in this world at all.

In terms of nucleur war, that is possible I suppose, but are we really that stupid to let it happen, if u really think MI5 and MI6 and whatever else we don't know about as the public doesn't probably have double agents who could completely sabotage the nuclear weapons then I think a reminder of how cleverly Tar Robinson wove into the Germans with double spies to cause massive damage is due. one thing is for certain, we may not know much about our military intelligance but they certainly know a lot about what we don't know, and it foes without saying that there must be a huge number of backup plans if nuclear war breaks out.

Personally I don't think it will. It's hard to support such a belief with evidence, other than call forth life as a witness against those who believe it will end and their conspiracy theories and loose facts based on the Maya.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pipette

In terms of nucleur war, that is possible I suppose, but are we really that stupid to let it happen, if u really think MI5 and MI6 and whatever else we don't know about as the public doesn't probably have double agents who could completely sabotage the nuclear weapons then I think a reminder of how cleverly Tar Robinson wove into the Germans with double spies to cause massive damage is due. one thing is for certain, we may not know much about our military intelligance but they certainly know a lot about what we don't know, and it foes without saying that there must be a huge number of backup plans if nuclear war breaks out.

---

You've been watching far too many films, Even if a nuclear war broke out (Which it won't) It wouldn't be the end of the world...

I think this debate is a bit silly, someone please provide me with one argument in favour of the world ending in 2012.

a) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcc_KAhwpa0
b) "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence". Since there is no evidence for or against the wacky theories we can forget the issue.

And in terms of an argument, for really complicated logic reasons if something is not falsifiable then it cannot be presented as an argument and if it is not an a priori truth then it can only be regarded as false.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grig

I guess I'm going to have to debate within my own debate here. Yes there are. You are basing your reasoning purely on science here and on what NASA tells you.

NASA and science has far from found every near earth object that could potentially pose a great risk to the human race. Evidence shows it, such as in 2002 there were 2 whole meteor incidents that were not recorded by NASA. Furthermore, in 2008 we had a similar situation where a meteoroid named TC3 was spotted a day before impact, unknown to NASA before. Who is to say such things such as massive asteroids aren't covered up to prevent large scale panic?

Also, who is to say we won't go to nuclear war with Iran or even North Korea. That is something science cannot prove.

---

Coincidence and possibility is not something you can debate about. I could say THE WORLD MIGHT END TOMORROW AND YOU CAN'T DISPROVE ME BECAUSE ENOUGH DESTRUCTIVE POWER DOES EXIST and be correct, but there's no way to debate that to any end other than "ok maybe, but probably not"