Religion: No Good; Just Bad and Ugly: Part Two

Is our Christian religion really the right religion? Human societies have believed in hundreds of religions, some current, many extinct. Humans have worshiped literally thousands of deities over a hundred thousand or some odd years. All religions, and all deities, can’t all be true. Perhaps none are. Regardless, religion has a lot to answer for.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

As recent and even not so recent revelations have made clear, it has come to pass that not all members in the employment of the inner sanctums of the Church (pick a church, any church) are especially moral beings. If church Vickers, priests, parsons, rabbis, bishops, and associated clergy types are to be believed, as reported in the media and acknowledged by the Church, well let’s just say they don’t apparently always do the right thing by those in their care. 

Speaking of all things moral and ethical, the Church has blood on its collective hands, right up to its proverbial elbows. There’s the Inquisition, the Crusades, all manner of Holy Wars, etc. The Church is guilty of murder, legal death by execution (being burned at the stake, being stoned to death), torture, imprisonment, exile, ridicule, harassment, and all other manner of atrocities, etc. The Church is in no way in any position to cast the first stone, as it were. 

Further examples of religious atrocities now include religious terrorism. Once upon a time, I used to view terrorism as a political act, mainly for the purpose of overthrowing the government-of-the-day; the powers-that-be, by ‘well meaning’ revolutionaries. It wasn’t an attempt to slaughter the average man-in-the-street. The violent revolutions that led to Castro's Cuba or the overthrow of the pro-Western government of Iran are but a few examples of revolutionary terrorism, terrorism with the goal of a forced change of government. Those are but two of many that have taken place in Africa, South and Central America, etc.

Today however, terrorism appears to have a decidedly less political edge to it and way more of a religious context or motivation behind acts of terrorism. It’s also more ‘personal’ since there are millions around the world who wish you dead (and some who would be happy to be your executioner if they could) all because you don’t belong to their religious faith – you’re their infidel. The spate of suicide bombings, the events of 9/11, were (or are) examples of terrorism generally carried out in the name of religion.

While it might be true that some extremely militant fundamentalist Christians might like to eliminate moderate Christians, what I had in mind here is more one faith vs. another - Catholics vs. Protestants (say in Northern Ireland); Muslims vs. Christians, as say in the Bali bombings. Those terrorist bombers, in Bali, wanted Australians, Americans, anyone not of their faith, dead! I believe there is equally faith vs. faith terrorist acts on the Subcontinent, probably of the Hindu vs. Buddhism kind.

How many around the world, who do not share the faith of the average Australian (or other Western democracy), would be happy to see lots of Australians dead? Not the majority of course, but a sizable enough minority, and worldwide, that amounts to millions. That minority of course ultimately form the core of suicide bombers, or at least those who encourage, sanction, condone, support, etc. their actions.

That’s somehow even more disturbing than outright political terrorism. If this is the sort of trait that separates humans from animals, maybe it might have been better to have been born an animal – at least until such time as you’re slaughtered as a sacrifice to someone’s God! You can’t win.  

Then there are those religious vested interests. Let’s face it; organized religion is at least a multi-million dollar industry, if not a multi-billion dollar interest to all and sundry. Religious organizations employ lots of people. These people have a lot invested in the subject matter – money and time and probably training. There’s lots of money tied up in religious real estate and infrastructure.

If someone could conclusively prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was no supernatural God, no supernatural JC, no dastardly Devil, no white-picket-fence heaven and no fire-and-brimstone hell, thousands would be out of work and lots of both big and small business (religious publishers and bookstores, religious institutions/schools for example) would go broke. Not to mention all those individuals, from the popes to your local clergy, having lots of collective egg on their faces. In fact, if God were shown not to exist, that religion was a fraud, it would have a major impact on the economy. 

So, it’s not surprising that religious personnel have to talk up the subject of God, etc. anywhere and anytime the opportunity arises – just in case.

One interesting thing is how religion and those who are religious, have seemingly put religion on an untouchably high pedestal that can not do any wrong. It’s nearly taboo to criticise religion without causing massive offence to those who follow whatever religion you’re having a go at. It’s quite alright to criticise the tax office, the opposite sex, a sporting team, a political party, weather forecasters, the banks and just about any and all other institutions – but not religion. That’s blasphemy. But, blasphemy is IMHO a victimless ‘crime’. God, if there is a God, doesn’t seem to take offence at all those highly profile members of the New Atheist movement. After all, none of them have been struck down by a bolt of lightning from the sky, have they?

Lastly, what is it about these religious nutters from religions far and wide that believe they have not only the right, but the duty to disturb you by doorknocking, phoning, dropping literature into and clogging up your private mail box, etc? They feel they can somehow justify shoving their philosophy down your throat.  If you, like me, are one of the normal members of the multitudes, we do not go around pestering others with our personal philosophy, and we all have one.

No doubt the religious nutters will claim their version of whatever holy book they cling to, tells them to do this. If that book told them to take a long walk off a short pier, or to jump off a high cliff, I wonder if they would feel quite the same sense of duty or compulsion to act. 

Biblical Foreign Policy: Make War, Not Love: Part One

When we think of religious fanatics, we think of those long ago times like the Crusades and the Inquisition and those who imposed the doctrines of Christianity by force on non-Christian societies like those in Africa and the Americas. Or, perhaps we think of some modern countries today that have one form or another of religious fundamentalism at the core of their domestic and foreign policies. But surely nations like the United States have not had, and do not have, any such associations, at least at leadership levels. Well, as the 2012 Presidential election campaign rolls on, one has to wonder if that could change.

When it comes to Biblical (God’s) domestic policy, well we all know the basics – the Ten Commandments and all the hundreds of lesser commandments that tell us that ‘thou shall’ or ‘thou shall not’ do this, that and the next thing. Things like what foods to eat and when; the banning of homosexuality; contraception; abortion; and all sorts of other rituals that should be observed like how many ‘Hail Mary’s’ to utter or when to bow and scrape and how low. But unless there literally is a “Big Brother is watching you” scenario, what you do, and with whom, behind closed doors, are of no concern when it comes to the fate of life, the universe and everything.

When it comes to Biblical (God’s) foreign policy, well one now crosses over into the red danger zone. Things aren’t personal issues anymore but national issues. And those national issues have implications above and beyond national borders. Those national issues do indeed have implications for life, the universe and everything. So, pray tell, what’s foreign policy when it comes to Biblical texts – those words of God – or God’s directives when it comes to foreign affairs? In short, it’s ‘shoot first and don’t bother asking questions later’.

Matthew 10:34 (King James Version) “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.”

Do you realise the word diplomacy or diplomatic or negotiation or treaty or compromise does NOT appear anywhere in the King James Version of the Bible? But you do get conflict (twice), warfare (5 times), war (220 times in fact), battle (163 times), destruction (92 times), smite (117 times), smote (220 times), wrath (197 times), destroy (243 occasions), Armageddon (once only), terror or terrors (44 times), murder and variations (37 times), just plain ‘kill’ (118 occasions) and so on. I think you get the general idea that the general theme of Biblical policy and especially foreign policy is when crunch comes to the crunch, it’s “make war, not love”. Thou shall not turn the other cheek but kick the SOB in the ass. If there really was a God, and if God were really around today, I’m sure His advice to any and all Christian leaders, would be, “when in doubt, nuke them”!

Since the start of the 20^th Century there have been many world leaders who have launched invasions of foreign lands without any real rhyme or reason other than power for its own sake, and there have been many world leaders who have initiated a policy of genocide within their own borders. But relatively few world leaders have done both. Saddam Hussein springs to mind, but he was small bickies compared to Adolph Hitler. But who out eclipses even Hitler (or anyone else you care to name over the past 2000+ years) – God, that’s who. The invasion – by His chosen people of the Land of Canaan under His guidance; genocide – well it can’t get much bigger than the flood as related in the Book of Genesis.  

What ‘person’ in authority was first to use biological warfare – germs as a weapon? Just you’re ever-loving God of the Bible, that’s who. There are some 46 references to pestilence in the Bible. Here are just two of them.

*1 Chronicles 21:14: So the LORD sent pestilence upon Israel: and there fell of Israel seventy thousand men.

*Jeremiah 21:6: And I will smite the inhabitants of this city, both man and beast: they shall die of a great pestilence.

Speaking of pestilence and by association plagues, one well-known example of God’s foreign policy was the Ten Plagues inflicted on ancient Egypt, most notably the final one, death to all the Egyptian firstborn, regardless of name, age, sex or rank. So mass murder is definitely one of God’s foreign policy instruments (and that’s God’s story and He’s sticking to it, though fortunately the ancient Egyptians don’t seem to be aware that they were culled).

Since 1945 there have been lots and lots of chin-wagging over and about ‘weapons of mass destruction’. Japan knows about them first hand; they were a major reason for the second Gulf War. But who was the first to actually make and employ weapons of mass destruction? God again, that’s who. Perhaps it will jog your memory if I mention Sodom and Gomorrah, and other nearby cities. In fact, God used a weapon of total destruction, since no trace of these settlements, have ever been found to this day. You can read all the gory details in Genesis chapters 18 & 19, but the Bible keeps on keeping on mentioning them, as if God were patting Himself on the back. Here are two examples.

*2 Peter 2:6: And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;

*Jude 1:7: Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

One question immediately arises, if God was so against homosexuality (‘strange flesh’), how come He didn’t smite ancient Greece, ruled by those – shock, horror – ‘other gods’? That’s strike one alone. Homosexuality was socially acceptable in ancient Greek society (strike two), not only between consulting adults but between adults and minors as well (strike three). 

Oh, by the way at least in the case of WWII Japan, the punishment probably fit the crime and ended up in the long run saving lives – that rational hardly applies to Sodom and Gomorrah.

Another household word today on the lips of the great unwashed is ‘terrorism’, least they be next to have to expect the unexpected. So imagine the terror of the great unwashed of long ago caught up unexpectedly in a long-term weather event of 960 straight hours of not just heavy, but torrential rain, and not an umbrella in sight. The great unwashed didn’t stay unwashed for long. It was sink-or-swim time, and nearly everyone sank. The terror of the Big Wet was bought to your local neighbourhood courtesy of God. If you don’t think that deluge would have been terrifying, imagine yourself slipping overboard in mid-ocean off a cruise ship. There you are floundering thousands of miles from dry land, all alone, just you (and maybe some sharks) and the waves. I’d wager you’d be as terrified as those trapped atop the World Trade Centre on 9/11.   

Then there is this little oft quoted gem.

*Matthew 5:44: But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Love thy enemy? I don’t bloody well think so!

For a prime example that totally contradicts such nonsense, consider Deuteronomy 20:10-17.

*Deuteronomy 20:10: When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it.

*Deuteronomy 20:11: And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee.

*Deuteronomy 20:12: And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it:

*Deuteronomy 20:13: And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword:

*Deuteronomy 20:14: But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.

*Deuteronomy 20:15: Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of the cities of these nations.

*Deuteronomy 20:16: But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:

*Deuteronomy 20:17: But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee:

The upshot is if your enemy doesn’t want to fight, you have a right to enslave them. If they don’t care for that option and fight, then you invade their territory, put every male to death and have your wicked way with the women and children (and then kill them) and take all else as spoils of war. With that sort of attitude, you really want God on your side! On the other hand, not even Hitler was that barbaric. Love your enemy? That’s just pure bovine fertilizer.

To be continued…

Doomsday: The End of the World in Art, Science, Mythology and Prophecy: 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: 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. 

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 (see below).

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.

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 will 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 will be very disappointed when he wakes 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 (i.e. – 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!  

But say now, what if you absolutely and firmly believed that within three days the entire world was history. What sort of constraints, the kind normal society places on you, would now have an impact? Probably none I’d wager. I mean if the end was neigh, what constraints would stop you from stealing, rioting, or murder? Well, let’s face facts, there wouldn’t be any. Now, what if a significant percentage of the population believed that? What might happen? Mob rule? Total anarchy? Rioting in the streets? The total breakdown of society and society’s rule of law and order? All that and more? What if you had an absolute dictatorial ruler who believed that? Why wouldn’t that leader, who say hated this other nation for whatever religious or ideological reason(s) decide that’s there’s nothing to lose now by pressing the nuclear button.

Let me repeat – 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 21^st of May 2011 aside, 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. 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.  

[ALTERNATIVE: The End of the World in Prophecy: All that really needs to be said for the end of the world in prophecy – religiously themed or otherwise – is that there has been a 100% failure rate by end of the world prophets despite literally thousands of such predictions over thousands of years. Hardly a week goes by without some soothsayer predicting not only that the end is neigh but giving exact dates, even times. So, hands up please for all of you who have total conviction that the next end of the world prediction will bear fruit, say 21 May 2011 or 21 December 2012, the later currently on top of the prediction pops. Thought so! 

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!] 

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. 

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:

Doomsday: The End of the World in Art, Science, Mythology and Prophecy: 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…