Tec death of all things or...

Tecnolodgy is advancing even as you read this, what would it be used for, why and how? Our weapons have became even more devastating eg a nuclear bomb landing on a city.

1. In the blink of a eye it kills thousands maybe millions.
2. The blast so hot it can melt your bones spreads usually 20-60 miles.
3.Killing yet more innocents but then the nuclear material gets into the air and water supply.
4. People in near by cities drink the water, slowly dying.
5. Poisen gas clouds form, poisening the rain that will fall.
6. The rain falls killing people, plants as well as animals.
7. Crops die leading to starvation.
8. The gas clouds travel the sea, poiening the oceans.
9. Killing fish, not to mention the creatures that feed on them.
10. The clouds travel tens miles over Earth causing yet more death.

How many deaths could that cause?

If weapons/tecnolodgy that in the future could turn into weapons become more advanced, if they got into the wrong hands what could happen?

Please think about your answers.

Originally posted by Darth Zedster
Tecnolodgy is advancing even as you read this, what would it be used for, why and how? Our weapons have became even more devastating eg a nuclear bomb landing on a city.

1. In the blink of a eye it kills thousands maybe millions.
2. The blast so hot it can melt your bones spreads usually 20-60 miles.
3.Killing yet more innocents but then the nuclear material gets into the air and water supply.
4. People in near by cities drink the water, slowly dying.
5. Poisen gas clouds form, poisening the rain that will fall.
6. The rain falls killing people, plants as well as animals.
7. Crops die leading to starvation.
8. The gas clouds travel the sea, poiening the oceans.
9. Killing fish, not to mention the creatures that feed on them.
10. The clouds travel tens miles over Earth causing yet more death.

How many deaths could that cause?

If weapons/tecnolodgy that in the future could turn into weapons become more advanced, if they got into the wrong hands what could happen?

Please think about your answers.

Technology is advancing, as military technology is about 20-30 years in advance. When it comes to security, counter-intelligence is used, just finding out who knows what, and maybe hacking into the "enemy's" database and corrupting as much information as possible.

I can't guess the extent of damage from a nuclear blast, wow, I've seen documentaries, and I think the roaches do live.

there are people who store food in basements and houses in order to prepare for n-day.

Originally posted by Darth Zedster
If weapons/tecnolodgy that in the future could turn into weapons become more advanced, if they got into the wrong hands what could happen?

If you are a purely scientific individual, man could basically show his lack of fitness by personally creating an environment where he is incapable of survival.

Originally posted by Darth Zedster
Tecnolodgy is advancing even as you read this, what would it be used for, why and how? Our weapons have became even more devastating eg a nuclear bomb landing on a city.

1. In the blink of a eye it kills thousands maybe millions.
2. The blast so hot it can melt your bones spreads usually 20-60 miles.
3.Killing yet more innocents but then the nuclear material gets into the air and water supply.
4. People in near by cities drink the water, slowly dying.
5. Poisen gas clouds form, poisening the rain that will fall.
6. The rain falls killing people, plants as well as animals.
7. Crops die leading to starvation.
8. The gas clouds travel the sea, poiening the oceans.
9. Killing fish, not to mention the creatures that feed on them.
10. The clouds travel tens miles over Earth causing yet more death.

How many deaths could that cause?

If weapons/tecnolodgy that in the future could turn into weapons become more advanced, if they got into the wrong hands what could happen?

Please think about your answers.

What about everything else besides warfare technology?

Originally posted by Darth Zedster
How many deaths could that cause?

A lot.

And the A-bomb was invented in the 1940's, so your a little late with that one.

I asked what would happen if it got to the wrong hands especially with these new weapons eg America is close to perfecting a laser, that scrambles satellites [ they don't know the effect it has on people], other countries are trying to produce an antimatter [ that destroys cells].

And yes it is a bit late to discuss this but I always say no time like the present.

Everything other than warfare tec eg new types of ipods make people greedy, envy eachother etc Which leads to fights and stuff getting stolen. "Big tec" that can make other cities/ counties get more money, crops etc , lead to arguments and sometimes civil wars, which brings us back to war tec.

Originally posted by Darth Zedster
I asked what would happen if it got to the wrong hands especially with these new weapons eg America is close to perfecting a laser, that scrambles satellites [ they don't know the effect it has on people], other countries are trying to produce an antimatter [ that destroys cells].

And yes it is a bit late to discuss this but I always say no time like the present.

Everything other than warfare tec eg new types of ipods make people greedy, envy eachother etc Which leads to fights and stuff getting stolen. "Big tec" that can make other cities/ counties get more money, crops etc , lead to arguments and sometimes civil wars, which brings us back to war tec.

You really think all technology leads to fighting and is therefor evil?

Try living without a computer, try living without electricity, it would kill far more people if we would stop using technology then even the two nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki did. Without technology we wouldn't have those things that is true, we wouldn't have weapons that could destroy entire city's in a second we would however have thousnads of people running at each other on a battlefield and dying by swords. We would have doctors selling us sewer water as cure for magical diseases and we would probably get something like the plague back.

You're right technology sucks.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
A lot.

And the A-bomb was invented in the 1940's, so your a little late with that one.

There seems to be a common (and what I feel is a) misconception about future weaponry: that they will become more powerful and do wider ranges of damage. For example, a laser hand weapon will be more deadly than a conventional, projectile-hurling weapon.

The thing is this...
First of all, energy is energy. It doesn't matter if it's a laser or a bullet, a bullet that strikes with, say, 100 kilojoules of kinetic energy is going to be no more destructive than a 100 kJ laser beam.

Secondly, a weapon's effectiveness is based more than on just brute force. Heck, the most powerful nuke ever detonated happened some forty/fifty years ago...just imagine what we could build now. But we don't build 100-500 megaton bombs because we want weapons with precision and controlled destruction.

Basically, a weapon is built to fulfill a specific function, so unless that function is ever-more-massive destruction, such superbombs are hardly inevitable. Indeed, we seem to striving for just the opposite.

Originally posted by Mindship
There seems to be a common (and what I feel is a) misconception about future weaponry: that they will become more powerful and do wider ranges of damage. For example, a laser hand weapon will be more deadly than a conventional, projectile-hurling weapon.

The thing is this...
First of all, energy is energy. It doesn't matter if it's a laser or a bullet, a bullet that strikes with, say, 100 kilojoules of kinetic energy is going to be no more destructive than a 100 kJ laser beam.

Secondly, a weapon's effectiveness is based more than on just brute force. Heck, the most powerful nuke ever detonated happened some forty/fifty years ago...just imagine what we could build now. But we don't build 100-500 megaton bombs because we want weapons with precision and controlled destruction.

Basically, a weapon is built to fulfill a specific function, so unless that function is ever-more-massive destruction, such superbombs are hardly inevitable. Indeed, we seem to striving for just the opposite.

Yeah , the 'Super Bombs' your talking about is the kinda shit we'd use to take out a planet (If the Earth needed to....)

Originally posted by grey fox
Yeah , the 'Super Bombs' your talking about is the kinda shit we'd use to take out a planet (If the Earth needed to....)

You may have not understood what I said, I meant what would happen in the future if " super bombs " got into the wrong hands eg terrorists.

Or possibly someone who dosn't know how to contain them eg, THE SUPER BOMB WAS MENT BE KEPT AT A CONSANT TEMPARATURE BUT SOME MANIAC SMUGGLED SOME OUT AND COULDN'T CONTAIN THEM!

:large bang:
:bye bye earthy:

Now do you get it!

Originally posted by Darth Zedster
You may have not understood what I said, I meant what would happen in the future if " super bombs " got into the wrong hands eg terrorists.

Or possibly someone who dosn't know how to contain them eg, THE SUPER BOMB WAS MENT BE KEPT AT A CONSANT TEMPARATURE BUT SOME MANIAC SMUGGLED SOME OUT AND COULDN'T CONTAIN THEM!

:large bang:
:bye bye earthy:

Now do you get it!

I'd prefer the chance of that happening to earlier ages.... You can say what you want about those weapons, less people die in wars now then they have ever before. Medical science saves more lives now then ever before and we have half a billion other things far better then most other times in history. All things considered I'd call technology a huge progress even if all those set backs take place.

Originally posted by Fishy
I'd prefer the chance of that happening to earlier ages.... You can say what you want about those weapons, less people die in wars now then they have ever before. Medical science saves more lives now then ever before and we have half a billion other things far better then most other times in history. All things considered I'd call technology a huge progress even if all those set backs take place.

I understand your point "Mr comeupwithgreatideiasandgenius " but, who is to say that medical tec can be used for destructive purposes as all tec can eg: A nutter pours a set of vacinations down the drain of a large city, they mix, peopled drink it and get ill or even die.

Tec can save billions of people plus do the oppisite.

P.S Thank you, this thread needed some good ideas to spice it up , oh yeah this thread ain't just about bombs but about tec altogether. Even little things like ipods making people greedy.

Originally posted by Darth Zedster
I understand your point "Mr comeupwithgreatideiasandgenius " but, who is to say that medical tec can be used for destructive purposes as all tec can eg: A nutter pours a set of vacinations down the drain of a large city, they mix, peopled drink it and get ill or even die.

Tec can save billions of people plus do the oppisite.

P.S Thank you, this thread needed some good ideas to spice it up , oh yeah this thread ain't just about bombs but about tec altogether. Even little things like ipods making people greedy.

If we would not have had technology we would be living isolated in huts if even that and we would probably have been long dead. Scientific breakthroughs have always been important to our survival and they are the only reason the human race is still alive, from fire to the wheel to farming fields to water plants and from spears to swords guns bombs and planes.

All kinds of science are required, and if you are just against modern science then you are delusional because the technology we have now provides so much more then it would likely ever destroy. It's just a matter of taking risks, is the risk of total destruction worth it? I would have to say yes, it is. Besides the risk of total destruction is quite limited. Those weapons you are talking about don't exist and if they would they would likely be guarded by the strongest most advanced military in the world. The nuclear bombs existing today might not be as well protected, but apparently nobody has the ability to actually get them because Osama hasn't used nukes on us yet.

Besides even if he did fire a nuke and it would destroy all of New York it would still be a small price to pay for the technological advancements we have today, and we got from those weapons. As nuclear technology has saved more lives then it has destroyed.