HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: corleyj@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Jason D Corley )
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
Subject: Trash the cities?
Summary: Get our priorities straight!
Date: 12 Oct 92 21:36:47 GMT
Distribution: alt.destroy.the.earth
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

It seems we've had a difference of opionion in this group
about the status of cities in our plans to destroy the
earth.  It is true that cities are a gigantic center of
population density (sorry about the grammar, bad editor),
but on the other hand, they are also the centers of
environmental destruction.  So, do we take advantage of all
those people living together in one place, by using cities
as gigantic petri dishes for whatever bacteriological, viral,
or nuclear plan we have this week, eventually destroying them
all and getting a jump start on the whole human race?  Or do
we nurture cities, making them grow, until the environmental
destruction they wreak is so devastating that the world will
be completely uninhabitable and everyone will die then?

My personal opinion is that we should balance the two.  Let the
Eastern Seaboard and the Los Angeles Corridor live the longest, they
produce the most waste per square mile.  Then rank the cities in
terms of environmental destructiveness and population, and start
with the most desirable city for our experiments, walking the
fine line between getting areas with too low a population and areas
that devastate the environment much better than we ever could.  Once
we have our list, we will have plenty of choices not only for testing,
but for...manipulation (insert maniacal laughter of choice here.)

	Jason
	Our Reporter on the Hideous Plane of Leng
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
From: dproudfo@jarthur.claremont.edu (Kekoa Proudfoot)
Subject: Re: Tesla (was Re: Summary of Ideas)
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 17:33:24 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.210157.1295@sol.ctr.columbia.edu>
locklin@titan.ucc.umass.edu writes:

> Damn it! Noone likes the Tesla-inspired idea of cracking the earths crust
> like a ripe melon?!

Actually, this idea came up a long time ago, and it was discussed then.

> The way I see it, its not too complicated (although it may be difficult to
> keep the driving oscillations going in the later stages of disintigration)

Keeping the driving forces (nuclear explosions or whatever) going is only half
of the problem.  Remember that the amplitude of oscillation is going to have
to be quite substantial--much stronger than the strongest earthquakes ever
recorded--to rip apart the crust "like a ripe melon."  How do you propose to
keep the explosions synchronized?  This complication almost puts this idea
into category three--except I can think of a few ways around the
synchronization problem (like store all the nuclear weapons/whatever in space
and deliver the driving forces from above the earth, or something like that).

That's not the real problem, though.

First, have you considered conservation of energy?  The amount of energy
needed to get the earth's surface to oscillate just one centimeter is
enormous.  A simple nuclear explosion won't do the trick.  One gigantic
nuclear explosion will shake things up a bit--but not enough to rip the earth
to pieces.  Where do you propose to get the _energy_ to accomplish this task?
Remember that you must put in enough energy to actually move large sections
of the planet--resonance won't provide this energy, you must.  Resonance
just allows you to supply energy in short bursts which build up the amplitude
of oscillation slowly.

Secondly, have you considered dissipation of energy or damping?  This will
increase the required energy even more.

- - - - -_- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
         |     _
        (|avid |)roudfoot              dproudfo@jarthur.claremont.edu
               |                      Harvey Mudd Engineering c/o 1995

Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
From: Alan@NXSci173a.mrs.umn.edu (Puffin)
Subject: Re: The End
Reply-To: kruegewa@cda.mrs.umn.edu
Organization: University of Minnesota - Morris
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 18:02:45 GMT

<CMH114@psuvm.psu.edu> writes
>in message: <BvtDos.E70@cda.mrs.umn.edu>, Puffin sez:
>
[short description of a cool story]
>  --
>I remember this, it was in one of those old golden fifties sf collections.
>One problem, I seem to remember the guy in the ship returning to die in the
>sea, spreading his DNA and bacteria in that nice, nutrient-rich broth.
>We still get life rampaging across the globe. No more iron for expansionist
>savages like, say the Greeks or the Romans, to play with, tho.

Yup, I remember.  At least alt.destroy.the.earth (and most other newsgroups as  
well) would be no more.  Personally, I don't think all possibility of further  
life on Earth need be destroyed, so that's okay then.  =P
--
   W. Alan "Puffin" Krueger  | >> fixed action set in motion doubting amnesia
  Univ of Minnesota, Morris  |    potion what to hide red carpet ride guessing
KRUEGEWA  @  CAB.MRS.UMN.EDU |    right << tIN oMEN sKINNY pUPPY
ALAN  @ NXSCI173.MRS.UMN.EDU | Listen to the U~90 Alternative!  KUMM 89.7 fm
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
From: kruegewa@cda.mrs.umn.edu (Alan Krueger)
Subject: Re: How much is a megaton?
Organization: University of Minnesota - Morris
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 01:58:37 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.215424.11572@ornl.gov> dbj@blencoe2.chem.ornl.gov (David B. Joyce) writes:
>I'm trying to do a rough calculation of the relative effects of a 10 km  
>diameter meteor impact (Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction - type impact) versus  
>all the nuckes in the world.  Does anyone know how much energy is released by  
>your average megaton nuke ? (in Joules, please.)

When in doubt, Estimate, Estimate, Estimate!  (i.e., not I... =)
-- 
   W. Alan "Puffin" Krueger  | >> fixed action set in motion doubting amnesia
  Univ of Minnesota, Morris  |    potion what to hide red carpet ride guessing
KRUEGEWA  @  CAB.MRS.UMN.EDU |    right << tIN oMEN sKINNY pUPPY
ALAN  @ NXSCI173.MRS.UMN.EDU | Listen to the U~90 Alternative!  KUMM 89.7 fm
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
Subject: Re: WHY?
From: sjan1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz (Simon Lee           Jansen         )
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 02:20:19 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept. University of Auckland

In <1992Oct9.002430.3915@sol.ctr.columbia.edu> locklin@titan.ucc.umass.edu () writes:

>I've got an idea. What destroys ozone? Chlorine. WHere is there lots of 
>chlorine?
>Salt deposits. Would a nuke dissociate the chlorine fron the sodium?
>I think so, if we could get lots of salt near the nuke.
>Comments?

Ummm... it wouldn't work.  You don't need to *heat* the salt, you need to
electrolyse it  - the chloride needs to be oxidised to chlorine.  This is
normally done by passing a massive electric current through a brine solution,
although I guess molten sodium chloride would work too...

--KW 8-)

(please ignore address in header)
-- 
/* ==Usenet/Internet==  Keith_Wansbrough@kcbbs.gen.nz  +=============+ *\
 *   ==Fidonet==  3:772/90                             | Forty-Two!! | *
 *     ==Real-life==  Keith Wansbrough +64 9 579 2572  +=============+ *
\* for (p=malloc(-1L);*p=1;p+=4096);  (kids: don't try this at home!)  */
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
From: bc205cs@opie.bgsu.edu
Subject: Re: Sterilization of Planet
Organization: Bowling Green State University
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 12:54:01 GMT

I like the idea of sterilizing the entire planet, but I detect something wrong
with the idea.  Any method that I can think of to sterilize a person could be
used just as effectively to kill him (which would also sterilize him :-}).  If
we are going to be sterilizing people, why don't we just kill them while we're
at it?  One benifit for sterilization, though, is that it takes people a
little longer to realize that they are sterile than that they are dead, if the
sterilization method is something sneaky, like polluting major cities' water
supplies or something.  I guess if you are sterilizing people, you could
operate a lot longer without someone catching on.

Even if it doesn't wipe out the whole human race (I think _someone_ would catch
on in time to ensure that they propogated) I think that it is a superb idea,
and I'd love to see it happen.  Kind of like forced birth control.

Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
From: wmperry@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (William Michael Perry)
Subject: Re: WHY?
Organization: Computer Science Student, Indiana University
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 15:31:33 GMT

>LET ME GUESS.  YOU ALL LISTEN TO HEAVY METAL FOR BREAKFAST.  NO OFFENSE...  

No, actually for breakfast I prefer to listen to Mozart.  And if I am
in a bad mood I'll listen to Beethoven's 'Wellington's Victory'.  Or
if I am in a _really_ bad mood I will listen to public enemy :)

I think Tarzan needs to stereotype less and work on his typing more :)

BTW: How about just nuking the ozone layer completely?  That'd
sterilize a people pretty quick wouldn't it?  Lets just all buy
plastic dixie cups and have a big bonfire at the South Pole.  (But
seriously:  is there something we could do to quickly and seriously
damage the atmosphere so it would not screen out as much radiation?)

-Bill Perry
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'If a man insisted always on being serious, and never allowed himself a bit of
 fun and relaxation, he would go mad or become unstable without knowing it.'
    - Herodotus
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: lizi@ocf.berkeley.edu (Cosma R. Shalizi)
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
Subject: Re: Atmospheric Destruction (was: Re: WHY?)
Date: 15 Oct 1992 23:06:47 GMT
Organization: Vampire Research Group at Berkeley :)
NNTP-Posting-Host: tempest.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Oct14.134041.19380@abo.fi> MANDTBACKA@finabo.abo.fi (Mats Andtbacka Ktf92) writes:
>In <1b5bciINN89v@agate.berkeley.edu> lizi@ocf.berkeley.edu writes:
>      Heat up the *sun* ?!? You don't go for second best, do you...
>Dropping planets into the darng thing: Sorry, unless I misremember
>Jupiter's only about a one-thousandth the size (and mass) of the sun -
>or was that a ten-thousandth? Enough zeroes to make the scheme
>pointless, though.
    I wasn't thinking so much of giving it more fuel, as of putting a 
fairly large mass at the center of the thing to increase the gravitational
pressure and drive up the fusion reaction rate. I haven't gone through the
math, and stopping the thing in the center would be tough. Perhaps we should
compress the target mass to neutronium first? You're probably right about
the mass though. Anyone have an idea of how much the Oort Cloud ways in
toto, and what percentage of it is hydrogen?

>      Global warming: I don't *think* the ozone layer contributes very
>much to that, but I'll go along with it being a good idea. The best
>greenhouse gas by orders of magnitude is water (well, steam then) - how
>about nuking the Pacific Ocean? Details, anyone?
>  Mats Andtbacka is really: MANDTBACKA@finabo.abo.fi (or ABOVAX::MANDTBACKA).
   Heating up the sun wasn't for global warming - though of course that
could be fun too :). What heating up the Sun would do is make it put out more
ultraviolet, so that even if the ozone layer was at full strength more UV
would get through, leading to skin cancer, mutations, et cetera.
   Remember that water vapor has the tendency to form clouds, which have a
high albedo and reflect light back into space, rather than using it to
steam-cook the planet. Temperature went down after the Dinosaur Killer. We
might be able to rig it so that the greenhouse effect outweighs the increased
albedo, but I'd prefer something less chancy.  As to nuking the Pacific: Let
me think about this...
	Cosma Rohilla Shalizi
	In Real Life: lizi@ocf.berkeley.edu
	larval physicist
	VP, Campus Crusade for Cthulhu
"Now is the time to drop the bomb." - Bertrand Russell
-- 
"Apart from hydrogen, the most common thing in the universe is stupidity."
-Harlan Ellison, _An Edge in My Voice_
From: bc205cs@opie.bgsu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
Subject: Re: Philisophical and Biological hints
Date: 14 Oct 92 00:32:04 GMT
Organization: Bowling Green State University

Sorry, man, I don't agree with you about Sade.

The sex was the only part worth reading.  I rather thought that 99% of Sade's
philosophy was flawed -- severely.  I worked my way through the philosophy
parts, but it was difficult considering the revolting quality of his reasoning.

--Joshua
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
From: locklin@titan.ucc.umass.edu ()
Subject: Re: Summary of Ideas (was Re: list)
Organization: Campus Crusade for Cthulhu
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 21:01:57 GMT
X-Posted-From: titan.ucc.umass.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

>
>I wrote three articles summarizing major ideas way back in April of this
>year, at the request of Francis Uy.  Since then, I have concluded that most
>ideas (read: all ideas thus far) fall somewhere into the following categories:
>
>    1) Scientifically or physically impossible with technology available
>          within a reasonable time frame
>
>       Example: Crashing the moon into the Earth, since the moon is much
>                to massive to be moved (with technology available...)
>
>    2) Lacking the ability to destroy (forever) all life (or all intellegent
>          life or even all surface life)
>
>       Example: Nuking every square inch of the planet surface, since deep
>                sea life will survive with the forseeable ability to re-evolve
>                into intellegent, space-faring surface life with years and
>                years to spare before the sun engulfs the earth.
>
>    3) Too complicated to guarantee success
>
>       Example: Use of off-planet robotic machines which manufacture nukes
>                and periodically hurl them at the earth in an effort to
>                maintain a planetary state without intellegent surface life
>                by trying to make sure the only living creatures around are
>                deep sea organisms, since this idea neglects the issues of
>                robot maintenance and periodic failure over the billion-some
>                years before the sun engulfs the earth--two issues which
>                complicate the solution emmensely.
>


Damn it! Noone likes the Tesla-inspired idea of cracking the earths crust like
a ripe melon?! 
The way I see it, its not too complicated (although it may be difficult to keep
the driving oscillations going in the later stages of disintigration), it
would destroy all life, as there will be nowhere for the life to exist 
(presumably the surface of the earth would be molten again after the process)
& I have not heard any arguments, scientific or aesthetic, that this is not
scientifically feasable.

This takes care of all 3 categories. Now someone challenge me on this before
I forget about it, or change schools or something! (I always work best with a
good critic)

-Scott (foaming at the mouth) Locklin
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 11:19:19 EDT
From: <CMH114@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
Subject: Re: The End

in message: <BvtDos.E70@cda.mrs.umn.edu>, Puffin sez:

>Actually, my favorite scenario was a short story that I don't remeber the name
>to.  This hobbyist builds his own rocket ship, powered by an iron oxidizer.
>Yes, that's right.  This fellow found a catalyst that speeds up iron oxidation
>to a phenominal rate, so high that he could fuel a rocket engine with it.  He
>launches and makes it into orbit.  But, alas for everyone else on the planet,
>some of ths catalyst drips out.  It starts an iron fire that burns so hot that
>it propagates across the ENTIRE planet, turning the surface of the earth in to
>a large rust and ash pile.  Whatta way to go...
  --
I remember this, it was in one of those old golden fifties sf collections.
One problem, I seem to remember the guy in the ship returning to die in the
sea, spreading his DNA and bacteria in that nice, nutrient-rich broth.
We still get life rampaging across the globe. No more iron for expansionist
savages like, say the Greeks or the Romans, to play with, tho.


Mitch Hagmaier         One Moment in Annilihation's Waste,
Quest Laboratories     One Monent, of the Well of Life to taste-
Terraforming Division   The Stars are setting and the Caravan
State College, Pa      Starts for the Dawn of Nothing - Oh, make haste!
cmh114@psuvm.psu.edu
From: re0t+@andrew.cmu.edu (Ronald William Ely)
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
Subject: Re: Doing nothing at all
Date: 9 Oct 92 17:07:19 GMT
Organization: Senior, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


>I told a friend of mine about the idea of destroying the earth. He then 
>imidiatly replied that we should do nothing. If we keep running it like now 
>we are sure to be doomed anyway....
	That sounds optimistic to me.

>I myself have got a new idea...
>
>We could start a new type of religion that would demand castration. (If it 
>could appeal to youth it could be devestating.) Another way could be to make 
>people to avoid sex. That would lead to lower bird rate, and maby in the end 
>negative birth rate. (Then the humanity would die out eventually.)

Unfortunately there are two flaws in this plan:

1)  You could never wipe out humanity through voluntary or religion
	supported birth control, since only those people who don't
	support this idea would live to reproduce... all the anti-lifers
	would go extinct and everyone else would just keep in fucking.
	Now maybe some sort of mandatory retroactive abortion......

2)  If you want to destroy the world, you would do better to INCREASE
	population growth so that we deplete the world's resources and
	destroy the environment.


>At the end I got to tell you another suggestion made by my friend. (He     
>was'nt very serious...)
>
>If everybody got gay, humanity would die !
	Wouldn't work.... gays can still reproduce.


*************************************************************************
* Ronald Ely	: re0t@andrew.cmu.edu                                   *
* -Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what's right!- *
*************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
Subject: Philosophical and Biological hints
From: garcia@husc10.harvard.edu (Javier Garcia-Torres)
Date: 13 Oct 92 18:48:35 EDT
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

	A little point I'd like to make.  Viruses, which are slightly hard
to kill through biological weapons, require other organisms for
reproduction, so if our ideal bio-weapon kills all other organisms,
including bacteria, then viruses will just not be able to reproduce and
will die out(we hope.)  Just a little pointer.

	A little while back someone mentioned that a.d.t.e promotes
entropy, which is the natural trend of the universe.  For the literary
minded, the Marquis du Sade based his entire philosophy on the principle
that nature encourages destruction, and humans should help it along.  His
books are really long, but the philosophical discourses would
probably be agreeable to the a.d.t.e gang.  The sex is a bit disgusting
towards the end of all his works, but you can just skip those parts.
From: corleyj@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Jason D Corley )
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
Subject: Ready-made destruction
Summary: Nuke all you want- we'll make more
Date: 9 Oct 92 21:00:52 GMT
Distribution: alt.destroy.the.earth
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

Has anyone considered the possibility that the devices
we need to destroy the earth might already exist in a
military stockpile or Pentagon laboratory somewhere?
Sure, our access to it would be extremely limited, but
it's certainly a lot easier than trying to put together
a backyard nuke!  Maybe alt.conspirators should get in
on this: "What aren'
t they telling us?  Why won't they declassify that
Department of Agriculture document that reveals all  about
the blight of 1879?  And _what connection does this have
with the death of Mikhail Tal_?????"  Only alt.conspiracy
knows for sure.

Why put out all the effort to build our own world-destroying
device if one can be found already made, tested, put together,
just waiting for the right finger on that big red button...
Heck, if we're willing to expend all this energy on our
project, we might as well clean up the earth and make it
a better place to...naaaaaaaah.  We can't be constructive!
It violates natural law (The Second Law of Thermodynamics,
to be precise.)  What the eco-hobbits don't realise is that
disorder, chaos and destruction are all _parts of a natural
process designed to bring about the heat death of the universe_.
Alt.destroy.the.earth is just trying to do it's little part in
that big picture.  Think about it, won't you?  Thank you.

	Jason
	Our Reporter on the Hideous Plane of Leng
From: corleyj@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Jason D Corley )
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
Subject: Re: No looking at your neighbors' papers
Date: 14 Oct 92 02:34:09 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

In article <1992Oct14.005704.11660@sol.ctr.columbia.edu> locklin@titan.ucc.umass.edu writes:
>In article <1992Oct12.232602.1@opie.bgsu.edu> bc205cs@opie.bgsu.edu writes:
>>Q: What's wrong when an eco-fuck says:
>>>I'm an environmentalist...
>>and the person he is arguing with says:
>>>[paraphrased] I'm an environmentalist too...
>>and they are posting to alt.destroy.the.earth?
>>
>>A:  They are in the wrong newsgroup! Yeah! Wrong fucking newsgroup! Spouting
>>eco-fucking-shit on the _wrong_ newsgroup.  Send them away, make them go home,
>>leave us alone, eco-fucks!  Go home and plant a tree!  Fuck a baby seal!  Post
>>to alt.save.the.earth!  Hahahahahah, yayayayayayayay! Leave us alone!
>>
>>--Joshua
>right fucking on man!

OK, calm down.  Calm down.  I think they're gone...no?
All right, go beserk again.  (Duck!)
But seriously, people, we should _let_ the eco-hobbits
post here every once in a while...get their names...flame them
all to hell...keep their names...in a big file...then...well...
(At this point the sinister pauses get way too long to describe
with ...s  You may fill in what you like.)
	Jason
	Our Reporter on the Hideous Plane of Leng
From: pg23+@andrew.cmu.edu (Patrick Pearse Gallagher)
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
Subject: Re: I'm your man
Date: 15 Oct 92 17:28:28 GMT
	<1992Oct14.231809.144736@zeus.calpoly.edu>
Organization: Freshman, MCS general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


	Yes, you may join the long line of henchman, including, Randy Griffith,
Andy Byler, Steve Gordon, Matt Brown, Bryan Mulvey, Dan Reisman, and
now, Scot Woodward.  Make your check payable to Patrick Gallagher.
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.the.earth
From: jkiley@andy.bgsu.edu (James H. Kiley)
Subject: Re: The End
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 15:40:58 GMT

In article <mumble>, re0t+@andrew.cmu.edu (Ronald William Ely) writes:

|> 	My personal choice would be a virus which would STERILIZE
|> everyone on the planet.  Granted it would take about a hundred years for
|> humanity to glide off into oblivion, unless when people found ouyt that they
|> didn't have to worry about birth control anymore they let loose all restraints
|> and get wiped out by sexually transmitted diseases:-)
|> 
|> Keep a good thought.

	Naah, sterilization can be gotten around, the sneaky bastards.  They're
already working on cloning, you'd think that research'd increase a lot into 
artificial eggs/sperm/wombs and such (just snip that DNA right in two, yes sir!)
if it were discovered that no one could reproduce.
	Besides, can you sterilize asexual creatures (bacteria and such)?  I
mean, if we're trying to wipe out *everything*...


Jim Kiley, lurker.