I think people have predicted that the world will end when a gamma ray that exploded from a nearby stellar mass will swipe the earth atmosphere.

Oh, you mean that gamma ray burst over there?

@Ace (View Post)
Yeah, there have been no NASA predictions of stars exploding close to us.

people don't realise the extent of the solar storms... this one is special.
there have been a few documentaries about it: the earths magnetic field that protects us from solar storms and their plasma is rapidly disappearing and is nearly completely gone... think about what it would be like if we were bombarded with something that was so hot, It was not a solid, liquid or gas... but plasma. NASA says it is on a cycle and will repair eventually, but that will take thousands of years.

I'm sure we all know that most of these theories are a load of cheese droppings...

actually earth will hold life for at least 1.5 billion more years after life is dead because it's too hot.

@stickman101 (View Post)
Correction, the sun will become a red giant and torch us in over 4 billion years time. Before that is a galactic merger with Andromeda which gives us a 50% chance of survival, in 2 billion years time, and, a threat to most but not all life, climate change, we can deal with it now, but we have only 20 years or else it will get out of control and wipe most species
(including us) out by 2200.

The thing with change, is that people say they want it, then they don't. For example: In Australia, our prime minister (Julia Gillard) is trying to impose a carbon tax (I'm not sure if she still is, but for the purpose if this comment, she is) and people are complaining because it will cost too much, but before, people were upset because the government wasn't doing anything about climate change. My point is that people only want to change to help the environment if it doesn't effect them negatively... people are that shallow. I could say that I want to save the environment, then the government would say give us money then, and If I didn't have money...

@The-Con (View Post)
Carbon dioxide is natural. It's in bread. It's in soft drink. You cant tax breathing.

@me4502 (View Post)
*1 Bread and soft drink are manmade.
*2 It is natural, yes, but not too much of it, just look at Venus, worse than Earth could ever be for 4,000,000,000 years but still worth a look. Mars doesn't have enough CO2.

@me4502 (View Post)
I'm not talking about the government putting a tax on bread... I'm talking about the tax on the companies that produce large amounts of air pollution. that then translates to expensive taxes on tax payers and increased prices on goods and services.

@me4502 (View Post)
*facepalm*