Talk:List of predictions of the end of the world

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This End of the world related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: <1>

Another suggestion[edit]

End of the world bingo:

  • Asteroids/Nibiru/Planet X/astronomically invisible star orbiting the sun
  • Computer related (including grey goo, and Y2000/Y2038 problem)
  • Assorted radiation-related topics
  • Reversing the (magnetic) polarity (inside or outside a police phone box)
  • 'An excess of predictions of the end of the world' (whether or not involving lampreys)

Any more? (And how many points for each?) Anna Livia (talk) 19:32, 10 January 2018 (UTC)


This page seems to have become a favorite target for vandals. Is there a reason why, or is it merely a trend? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 01:03, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Another prediction[edit]

From 'a sufficiently unreliable source' [1]. Anna Livia (talk) 10:19, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

December 2019 the end of the world according to this book from 2013 — Unsigned, by: / talk

∞th century[edit]

'I assume this end-of-the-world-scenario will not cause the Universes (yes, Universes( to be everlastingly empty, but will end the Universes, so can we change the specific part of the the section ?’-- (talk) 16:43, 18 November 2018 (UTC)


Is this list 'a bonfire of the apocalypses'? Anna Livia (talk) 20:21, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

More possibilities[edit]

Trump gets his wall started off, and 'five days after Brexit finally occurs.' Anna Livia (talk) 17:09, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Fictional End of the World?[edit]

Could we add stuff from fiction, like the great journey from Halo?Tanker One (talk) 16:40, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

No, this list is for doomsday "prophecies" made by people in the real world. The point is to compile all the failed/probably going to fail "predictions" in one place in order to illustrate the absurdity of it all. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 16:46, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
We have a few jokingly fictional ones already in the list, but those tend to have articles anyway. Zero (talk - contributions) 16:52, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

2031 entry is incorrect[edit]

2031:World's end by way of irreversible climate change if there is insufficient mitigation, according to a United Nations report by climate scientists

This is not at all what they said. They said that we have until 2050 to reduce emissions to zero for the easiest way to stay within 1.5°C. That includes reducing by 45% by 2030. But if we don't achieve that we then have to ramp down rapidly to zero emissions by 2045. If we don't do that and overshoot we then need carbon capture and storage using existing technology of burning biofuels and capturing the emissions of power stations.

See my

What The IPCC Scientists Really Said - NOT 'All Going To Die' - Key Points, Press Conference And Some Highlights From The Report - which has the actual video of the press conference itself plus interviews with the individual co-chairs all from their YouTube channel - which is material that as far as I know none of the mainstream journalists shared. It was very upbeat and positive and this idea that they said we have 12 years to save teh planet from total destruction or devastation is a paraody of what they said.

But if we go over to 2 C we lose most of the corals but it is not an uninhabitable Earth or collapse of civilization. We are already on track to 3 C and that is not either especially as we have lots of slack to up our pledges (and already many are).

The report includes it's own example of a worst case scenario, box 8 of chapter 3

“Scenario 3 [one possible storyline among worst-case scenarios]:Mitigation: uncoordinated action, major actions late in the 21st century, 3°C of warming in 2100

I discuss this here

The IPCC’s own worst case climate change example - a 3°C rise by 2100

Robertinventor (talk) 19:07, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

It's certainly an exaggeration of the climate report, but people (e.g. AOC) have said it means the world will end in/by 2031, and so it absolutely deserves a place here. --Annanoon (talk) 15:55, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
It's the "according to climate scientists" that I think is misleading. It should be "According to some journalists and politicians who misunderstood the science in a United Nations report by climate scientists" Robertinventor (talk) 23:19, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Citation Needed?[edit]

"2039: End of life, the universe and everything. Also known as the Ascension."

That one don't have a citation. That's from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy?--ANewUser (talk) 19:34, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

I tried and failed to find a citation, but a long time since I read any Adams; does anyone know better? --Annanoon (talk) 15:55, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
I don't know of anything, doesn't ring any bells. I think it is just a joke entry by someone that made up the idea of a date in the Hitch Hiker's Guide at least it doesn't cite anything. And the HitchHiker's guide doesn't talk about "the Ascension" either AFAIK. Robertinventor (talk) 23:27, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Just checked, bought the kindle book and there is no occurrence of "2039" or "Ascension" in it. Robertinventor (talk) 23:29, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Can we just remove this entry? It's a joke entry. We are not supposed to cover fictional ends of the world here, and if it was in HitchHiker's guide it would be fictional but it doesn't seem to be even by Douglas Adams but just invented by an editor of this page without a source. At least nobody has turned up a source yet. I help people who are scared of things like this and I am contacted from time to time by people who find this joke entry scary and I don't see what the point in it is. Or if it is here for a reason it needs to be explained to the reader. Robertinventor (talk) 21:53, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Clogged with fluff[edit]

Some sections, particularly from 2019, have been annotated with every single event in some person's interpretation of the Book of Revelation (e.g. there's at least 10 entries from If someone prophecies a series of events that together form a narrative of the end of the world, don't put every event as a separate entry, or the page will become insanely long. Instead, pick a single date: either the end of the world or something that's equally visible and obvious (rapture or final apocalyptic battle or resurrection of all the dead). You can mention later dates/narrative in the first entry, but keep it brief. Also, every entry should say who made the prediction, otherwise it's just a list of "2020 World ends" "2021 World ends". I will try and prune this, but wanted to give warning. --Annanoon (talk) 12:11, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Also, what the fuck does this mean:
2019 (February 3rd): His 7 billion populated people's ideas, theories, memories, plans & imaginations are gone at all, causing the sequel movies have been released. No one will notice because the link was never found at all or everyone be noticed.
--Annanoon (talk) 12:20, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
I've deleted some fluff but still no idea about the above quote. --Annanoon (talk) 15:55, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

The real end of the world[edit]

Five minutes after you die. Anna Livia (talk) 12:58, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Where should[edit]

'Closing time at The World's End' pubs be included? Anna Livia (talk) 19:19, 10 February 2020 (UTC)