What can be credited for the greatest amount of death throughout history?
And if I shift the conversation to warfare, which weapon in specific do you believe holds the highest accumulative kill rate?
Final question, from this moment, to the foreseeable and possibly distant future, how will the answers for either of those questions change and form as time continues?
>>30497706
>Fire
>Fire
>It won't
>>30497712
So there has been more victims of immolation than anything that's passed between all realms and cultures as of yet?
What's your reasoning?
>>30497749
Fire was killing things before people even came around, and people have used fire to great effect. The firebombing campaign on Japan in WW2 did more damage than both nukes, the nukes were just more sudden.
>>30497757
And at that, how would fire continue it's dominance for ending lives, while history unfolds, producing more effective technology used as tools of destruction?
Mosquitoes
Hunger.
>>30497770
Fire wasps.
>>30497706
Ar/15
>>30497706
>What can be credited for the greatest amount of death throughout history?
Disease.
Every other answer is wrong.
>And if I shift the conversation to warfare, which weapon in specific do you believe holds the highest accumulative kill rate?
Depends how specific you're talking about.
And if you consider something like "starvation" a weapon.
>Final question, from this moment, to the foreseeable and possibly distant future, how will the answers for either of those questions change and form as time continues?
No way of knowing.
>>30497706
Time.
Time.
....tick tock tick tock
>>30497775
Meaning disease? I can see another disease killing a large amount of people like the Bubonic plague.
>>30497779
Just hunger? Not starvation or malnutrition?
I guess the Four Horsemen will visit with their own volition and take stabs at humanity and life in general.
>>30497785
You're funny. Definitely not.
As much of a meme gun as the Mosin Nagant is, it's been used in enough wars and around for long enough that it's probably pretty high up there when it comes to kill count.
The Browning M2 probably has quite a few kills to its name, too.
>>30497803
If we're working off of age/usage and if we count all AK variants and clones as the same (for the purpose of the argument), then I'd say the AK family are probably top of the metaphorical scoreboard when it comes to kill count.
War.. war never changes.
>>30497786
>Depends how specific you're talking about. And if you consider something like "starvation" a weapon.
Anything intentionally used by an entity as a means of force, to produce and achieve victory, therein an ultimate gain for higher interests, can be called a weapon.
>>30497814
>Anything intentionally used by an entity as a means of force, to produce and achieve victory, therein an ultimate gain for higher interests, can be called a weapon.
Well then you end up with extremely vague concepts like "logistics" "strategy" and "tactics"
>>30497706
Until the invention of the AK47 historians believed the Roman Gladius had the highest accumulative kill count as a single specific weapon.
>>30497706
>Time
>Time
>Will probably never change
>>30497838
Time doesn't kill people.
>>30497833
I'd put my money on spears.
>>30497824
Do these not hold value when considering the topic at hand? Does one answer with simple words and phrases to explain and construed their particular opinions or beliefs while managing constructive reasoning?
It's what tactics or what strategies the actions intrinsically produce that have any real substance for elaboration and interpretation.
>>30497842
Life does, faggot.
>>30497855
If that's an answer you're willing to accept, then fine.
The answer is logistics.
Tactics made it possible for one group of a few dozen people to go throw spears and rocks at another group.
Strategy made it possible for a warlord to get a larger group together and go wreck other people's shit.
Logistics made it possible for Caesar to carve up Gaul, the Europeans to colonize America, and for the Allies to bomb the shit out of Japan and Germany.
>>30497864
No, life is not a cause of death.
>>30497706
Hasn't malaria killed like 1/4 of humankind throughout history?
So Malaria by a landslide.
As for weapons, no idea. One must assume firearms in general, I suppose whatever guns Russia or China used to mow down civilians en masse.
In the future, Malaria will harm less and some new weapon will take the throne.
>>30497706
AR-15
>>30497878
*FACT* 100% of the people who were alive are now dead. Riddle me that faggot.
>>30497846
Yes but 'spear' is broad term for a lot of weapons. That's like saying 'rifles' or something. If we're getting broad with just weapon categories I would also say spears or bow and arrow.
>>30497894
Yeah, no.
The AR-15 hasn't been around that long and hasn't been used by that many people. Especially when you compare it to something like the AK or the Gladius.
>>30497706
>What can be credited for the greatest amount of death throughout history?
unsanitary conditions
>>30497871
Now having said this, where does your knowledge and perception reflects on the OP, choosing tactics, strategies, and logistics, as an idea to argue where those create a value for concept?
Do people simply kill, so it is only people that have brought the entire reality of death onto themselves?
>>30497896
correlation =! causation
>>30497907
Is English not your first language?
Because I can't understand what you're trying to ask.
>>30497924
All I know is; I'm not a robot.
>>30497933
That's not how you use the semicolon, you faget.
>>30497907
a motorcycle has no doors
>>30497907
>If people simply kill, then it is only people that have brought the reality that is death onto themselves
He's asking if we can attribute humans as the most deadly weapon, as humans killed every human. (Via fire, sword, and organ failure)
Good question, can anyone answer?
>>30497952
guns dun kill people people do
>>30497952
>He's asking if we can attribute humans as the most deadly weapon, as humans killed every human.
Humans have killed a tiny minority of other humans.
Disease is way bigger.
>>30497964
>Disease is way bigger
Cancer and heart failure (the leading cause of death in developed countries) are both caused by the human body.
And, arguably, we don't die from a disease, but from the human body failing (caused by the disease, usually)
>>30497976
Good job, you made a shit thread even worse.
>>30497878
Life is the only cause of death because any other cause of death excluding age is another form of life (living man shoots you, living bacteria kills you) and you never would doe of age if you weren't alive in the first place.
>>30497706
Statistically? Probably disease.
For warfare? It depends, direct impact or over time? I'd assume starvation caused by siege or maybe disease caused by war. If we're talking about instantly, I guess I'd go with explosives.
In the future I believe this will change, because I believe in longevity escape velocity, where eventually humans become more or less immortal by choice, and only accidents and warfare will kill us
>>30497838
>people still not getting this shit
Time kills everything, as if time doesn't pass/exist nothing can live or die, as it takes time for those binary values to change.
Time is the inherent cause of a fatal injury turning a living thing, into a dead thing.
>>30497706
Whiteness.
Y'all crackas betta pay dem reporashuns
>>30498025
indeed: speed doesn't kill, t=0 kills.
fizix...the silent killer.
>>30497842
People kill time
