How would you survive my Apocalypse?

[Tackle and Tickle]

1.EMP Survivable - I spent months due to a hurricane without power and water was collected by rain barrels or gotten at emergency response areas. I know a lot of people who still live off the land near by so food can be gotten from the see and local farmers. Protection from criminals well that is no problem also.

2. Hurricane well I survived plenty of those that seem to wreak havoc in the USA with no problem, so don't see a problem with that.

3. Volcano may be a problem it just depends on where it erupts, but probable be dead.


4. Impact - again depends on where but as I see no problem due to location I have little affect.

[DarkSohisohi]

Suicidesoldier#1

DarkSohisohi

Suicidesoldier#1

1. EMP or Solar Flare

A nuke would be much more devastating than an EMP, but you already stated that. Survival would actually be quite high, or at least higher then what you suggest, since we could simply rebuild such infrastructures. That and not all devices/technology would be effected.

A solar flare, if it hit the Earth directly, would not be survivable. You'd be vaporized once it touched our planet. If you where not vaporized, then you will suffocate since there is now a hole in the ozone layer and quite a bit of air just got burned up. If you are not vaporized and have not suffocated, chances are the radiation will kill you. If you have not vaporized, suffocated, or died due to radiation poisoning then you are on the other side of the planet. If that is the case, you will be largely unaffected, except you really should consider planting alot of ******** trees.

All that being said, solar flares "hit" the planet all the time. But the Earths magnetic field deflects them. Even if there was a solar flare big enough and headed in the right direction, chances are the Earths magnetic field will also deflect it.

Neither one of these situations are truly threatening, even in the worst case. Radiation diminishes, the ozone layer will repair itself, and people can simply rebuild any and all technological infrastructure.

The problem is that 90% of people would die as a result of a lack of these utilities. The tools needed to rebuild our infrastructure would be effected as well, so trying to rebuild is a huge part of the problem. The problem is that people can't survive in the time it would take to get back to where we are, which we rely on to survive. Like, electricity pumps water, purifies it, helps to grow food etc. Most people start having problems past 3 days with no water. Assuming raiding stores, catching as much rainwater as possible, and what they had in the cuboard could last up to 20 days, they still could only survive about 10 days max without clean water. So, maybe a month? After several years everyone would just be dead.

Alright, sure, although it would still be quite high it would still not even be near 90% in losses. Don't forget that we worked are way up. Why did it take so long? Because we had to figure things out for the first time. There is a reason why China is growing so fast, because everything we learned by trial and error they already have access to. A while back a friend of my was offered a chance to move to China with his family if he helped teach machinists and also ran the plant. He did not take it up, he hates China, but others have. Anyway, point is, we wouldn't be 'starting over'. We know what tool we need to make machines so we can make other machines and/or the products we need. I'd bet water and sewage would be up and running within the year in most places. Once you get running water the rest is too easy.

likewise, depending on your cities/towns water system, simply removing the filters will allow free access to water.

Suicidesoldier#1

DarkSohisohi

Suicidesoldier#1

2. Devastating Hurricane

I don't live by the coast, unless you count Chicago. I'm more worried about a tornado making it's way to Chicago, unlikely, but over the years they have been getting closer and closer. In either case, unless it can destroy 1/3 of the country, then the threat is miniscule.

It's more about if you are in that hurricane particularly.

Chicago would not fair well against a hurricane, the flooding would be quite bad. Though, I live in the western most part of Chicago. If I walk across the street I will leave Chicago. If need be I can leave and stay with some family. Though, assuming I can't, there are quite a few abandoned homes I can squat in until aid comes away from the disaster zone.

[PoultryChamp]

Quote:

12.6% of our energy supply goes to filtering and pumping water; human power wouldn't be sufficient for that, nor would it replicate everything needed, nor do we have dozens upon dozens of areas to allow people to provide manual pump pressure for it, as in, there's no connection to that. Nor do we have enough transformers nor cables to replace all of them, and the time it would take would be tremendous, in addition to other aspects of our infrastructure. Nor would people necessarily immediately know an EMP was what hit us, so they wouldn't necessarily know or be able to organize well enough to begin replacing all of this.

Critical components may be preserved, which would reduce the downtime, but ultimately as long as we have things like exposed above ground power lines, radio towers, and all that it's still vulnerable. Electricity not only exists for luxuries, but also for necessary aspects of living, meaning it's not just convent. Things like agriculture, water filters, refrigeration, heating and cooling, sewer systems and such all rely on it.


None of these are likely the ultimate end for humanity, and the U.S. for instance has bunkers underground full of scientists who can preserve knowledge and repopulate the earth if necessary.

But they would kill off over 90% of people, which would be horrendous, and things would be really hard for about 5-10 years, if not longer? So that would be pretty bad.

According to Greenpeace (which isn't a reliable source I know), they state that about 40% of the world population are subsistence farmers who farm less than 5 acres. According to the EU, about 35% of the world population doesn't have access to basic sanitation.

That's 35-40% of the world who aren't likely to be hugely affected.

Water filtration can be accomplished by manual filters and through distillation. Don't tell me that we can't use fire because of the EMP. We can boil out most bacteria and particulates can be filtered through a coffee filter. The only thing to really worry about would be heavy metals.

Heating and cooling isn't a major issue in most cases. Cooling is obviously important in Phoenix, AZ; and heating is important in Canada. Heating can be taken care of with fire (if a house is equip with a fireplace) and blankets. We've survived millenia without electrical heat. We're not going to die because we got cold.
Overheating might be an issue, which is why I said places like Los Angelos and Houston will have a hard time. Obviously there is really no way to cool down without either electric A/C or water. Water would become precious in southwestern states. It already is.

Sewer systems and basic sanitation would continue to function, albeit at a horrible cost to the local environment. Instead of sending the wastewater to be treated it could be dumped into local waterways. It would suck, and cause more water contamination, but it would prevent sewage from backing up. Don't forget a lot of people still rely on septic systems which are not connected in any way to a municipal sewer system.

Yes, an EMP would cause widespread economic devastation, and it would result in millions of deaths, but I still can't see how it would decimate 90% of the population.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

DarkSohisohi

Suicidesoldier#1

DarkSohisohi

Suicidesoldier#1

1. EMP or Solar Flare

A nuke would be much more devastating than an EMP, but you already stated that. Survival would actually be quite high, or at least higher then what you suggest, since we could simply rebuild such infrastructures. That and not all devices/technology would be effected.

A solar flare, if it hit the Earth directly, would not be survivable. You'd be vaporized once it touched our planet. If you where not vaporized, then you will suffocate since there is now a hole in the ozone layer and quite a bit of air just got burned up. If you are not vaporized and have not suffocated, chances are the radiation will kill you. If you have not vaporized, suffocated, or died due to radiation poisoning then you are on the other side of the planet. If that is the case, you will be largely unaffected, except you really should consider planting alot of ******** trees.

All that being said, solar flares "hit" the planet all the time. But the Earths magnetic field deflects them. Even if there was a solar flare big enough and headed in the right direction, chances are the Earths magnetic field will also deflect it.

Neither one of these situations are truly threatening, even in the worst case. Radiation diminishes, the ozone layer will repair itself, and people can simply rebuild any and all technological infrastructure.

The problem is that 90% of people would die as a result of a lack of these utilities. The tools needed to rebuild our infrastructure would be effected as well, so trying to rebuild is a huge part of the problem. The problem is that people can't survive in the time it would take to get back to where we are, which we rely on to survive. Like, electricity pumps water, purifies it, helps to grow food etc. Most people start having problems past 3 days with no water. Assuming raiding stores, catching as much rainwater as possible, and what they had in the cuboard could last up to 20 days, they still could only survive about 10 days max without clean water. So, maybe a month? After several years everyone would just be dead.

Alright, sure, although it would still be quite high it would still not even be near 90% in losses. Don't forget that we worked are way up. Why did it take so long? Because we had to figure things out for the first time. There is a reason why China is growing so fast, because everything we learned by trial and error they already have access to. A while back a friend of my was offered a chance to move to China with his family if he helped teach machinists and also ran the plant. He did not take it up, he hates China, but others have. Anyway, point is, we wouldn't be 'starting over'. We know what tool we need to make machines so we can make other machines and/or the products we need. I'd bet water and sewage would be up and running within the year in most places. Once you get running water the rest is too easy.

likewise, depending on your cities/towns water system, simply removing the filters will allow free access to water.

Let's even say that it got turned back on in a year. People can't survive without water that long. The vast majority wouldn't make it to the point.

Quote:

Suicidesoldier#1

DarkSohisohi

Suicidesoldier#1

2. Devastating Hurricane

I don't live by the coast, unless you count Chicago. I'm more worried about a tornado making it's way to Chicago, unlikely, but over the years they have been getting closer and closer. In either case, unless it can destroy 1/3 of the country, then the threat is miniscule.

It's more about if you are in that hurricane particularly.

Chicago would not fair well against a hurricane, the flooding would be quite bad. Though, I live in the western most part of Chicago. If I walk across the street I will leave Chicago. If need be I can leave and stay with some family. Though, assuming I can't, there are quite a few abandoned homes I can squat in until aid comes away from the disaster zone.

Neat!

[Suicidesoldier#1]

PoultryChamp

Quote:

12.6% of our energy supply goes to filtering and pumping water; human power wouldn't be sufficient for that, nor would it replicate everything needed, nor do we have dozens upon dozens of areas to allow people to provide manual pump pressure for it, as in, there's no connection to that. Nor do we have enough transformers nor cables to replace all of them, and the time it would take would be tremendous, in addition to other aspects of our infrastructure. Nor would people necessarily immediately know an EMP was what hit us, so they wouldn't necessarily know or be able to organize well enough to begin replacing all of this.

Critical components may be preserved, which would reduce the downtime, but ultimately as long as we have things like exposed above ground power lines, radio towers, and all that it's still vulnerable. Electricity not only exists for luxuries, but also for necessary aspects of living, meaning it's not just convent. Things like agriculture, water filters, refrigeration, heating and cooling, sewer systems and such all rely on it.


None of these are likely the ultimate end for humanity, and the U.S. for instance has bunkers underground full of scientists who can preserve knowledge and repopulate the earth if necessary.

But they would kill off over 90% of people, which would be horrendous, and things would be really hard for about 5-10 years, if not longer? So that would be pretty bad.

According to Greenpeace (which isn't a reliable source I know), they state that about 40% of the world population are subsistence farmers who farm less than 5 acres. According to the EU, about 35% of the world population doesn't have access to basic sanitation.

That's 35-40% of the world who aren't likely to be hugely affected.

Water filtration can be accomplished by manual filters and through distillation. Don't tell me that we can't use fire because of the EMP. We can boil out most bacteria and particulates can be filtered through a coffee filter. The only thing to really worry about would be heavy metals.

Heating and cooling isn't a major issue in most cases. Cooling is obviously important in Phoenix, AZ; and heating is important in Canada. Heating can be taken care of with fire (if a house is equip with a fireplace) and blankets. We've survived millenia without electrical heat. We're not going to die because we got cold.
Overheating might be an issue, which is why I said places like Los Angelos and Houston will have a hard time. Obviously there is really no way to cool down without either electric A/C or water. Water would become precious in southwestern states. It already is.

Sewer systems and basic sanitation would continue to function, albeit at a horrible cost to the local environment. Instead of sending the wastewater to be treated it could be dumped into local waterways. It would suck, and cause more water contamination, but it would prevent sewage from backing up. Don't forget a lot of people still rely on septic systems which are not connected in any way to a municipal sewer system.

Yes, an EMP would cause widespread economic devastation, and it would result in millions of deaths, but I still can't see how it would decimate 90% of the population.

10,000 years ago, our population was about 3-6 million. Today, it's about 7 billion. That's a factor of over 1000.

If we were to revert back to the living conditions they had, just due to the change in carrying capacity, most of us would die. The reality is that our carrying capacity is substantially increased by the advent of modern technology, and more or less dependent on it; the average age has gone from 25 in the mid eval ages to 75 in the modern ages because of it, and our population has ballooned up, as well. If you take these things away from developed nations, they can no longer support such a population. As a result, the millions currently alive die, which amplifies the problem of spreading disease and worsening the psychological condition of the still living people, making the fall in some ways worse than if we started off at that point. Everything from running water to electricity to modern agriculture is dependent on electricity in some form or another. If the U.S. were to try to revert back to subsistence agriculture using primitive methods, our crop output in terms of total work and land area would be insufficient to feed our current population. We simply wouldn't have the capability to produce as much as we do, right now, given our current resources. Approximately .5-2% of our population is into agriculture; to allow a jump to 35% would be asking quite a lot. We could begin sharing land and having workers come in to tend to fields, but ultimately it wouldn't be enough to feed everyone, nor would it provide things like B12 or high levels of protein.

As for boiling water, that would take far more energy than we currently even use now. Without things like coal, gasoline or natural gas, we would be using largely wood. Wood could not possibly give us all the energy we would need to boil the water we would need for 300 million people to survive, partially evidenced by the fact we don't do it. Sediment and other things would need to be removed, as well, in addition to organic material that would still be present. Most water in the U.S. comes from ground water; with the energy and sophistication required to pump it out, this would no longer available. Of all the fresh water on earth, 1.2% comes from surface water; of this, about 21.5% comes from lakes and rivers. Trying to subsist our entire population on this when we already are digging deeper and deeper wells for water as it is, spending gratuitous amounts of money and energy on it, when we lack those infrastructures and energy sources, is more or less not going to be possible. There's simply not enough immediately available surface water, potable or not. Filters do exist, but hardly anyone has hand pump filters in their sufficient to last many years.

Coffee filters are likely insufficient to filter water, and even if they were, we would run out after about a month or so. So, without new factories to make them, there in lies a large part of the problem?


Back in the day, people all lived in very small areas. With the advent of things like clothing and heating, people were able to move into cold areas, and now today with cooling can live in particularly hot areas, such as Nevada, Arizona, and California. Considering how many people live in these otherwise inhabitable areas, with the western water table shut off and no cooling, it could spell the deaths of millions. They wouldn't be able to move out of the major cities, let alone in time.

[disabledaccount0069]

I would die ASAP in all scenarios

Talk about having low self esteem...