which is better WORLD WAR 3 or ICE AGE(any global natural disaster)?

Question

It's not a question of if but when..........

Answer 1

Ice Age, because at least we would know it was on its way, and we would have a certain amount of time to adapt. How could a world war be preferable to that, especially with the latest horrific technological weapons available?

Answer 2

People could probably survive an ice age, asteroid impact or global pandemic. But if World War 3 occurred, particularly given the proliferation of nuclear weapons, I'm not sure if any of humanity world survive for very long.

Answer 3

Neither!

World war 3 is caused by humans which can be avoided peacefully .

Any global natural disaster can be caused by either:

(1) Humans Action (Eg: Green house effect) - Again it can be avoided or reduced damage through human's effort(Eg: minimise usage of CFC products).

(2) Naturally Occuring (Eg: Earthquark) - Contingency plans to minimise damage and death rate.

Hence Mr just_mi concludes that if humans can choose what kind of disaster to avoid... will depend on the effort, responsibility and contribution of the human race.

Answer 4

God forbid there is a World War 3, you won't have to worry about the Ice Age, or anything else for that matter.

Answer 5

I would take WW3 any day.
Nuclear blast is one of the best ways to die.
BOOM! and before the nerve impulses can tell the brain that you are in pain, your brain and your nerves do not even exist! IN fact the ATOMS from which your brain was made -- do not even exist.

Natural disasters, on the other hand have a reputation of keeling people in a slow and painfully manner.

So give me a nuke, instead of a slow and painful death from cold and malnutrition any day.

Answer 6

world war 3 is global suicide, ice age is total inconvenience....no contest.