Re: 2012?
TJ Griffin;370917 said:
The thing I didn't understand about that movie is, the earth was literally collapsing into itself and the people rushed onto a plane and few away. Where the hell do they think they are going to land? Plus huge fireballs were raining down and all sorts of other crap was going on, seems to me that the best thing to do in a situation like that is to just die and get it over with.
What's the point in that? If it's a choice between throwing yourself into a volcano and definitely dying, or running for you life and probably dying, why not give yourself the best chance of living?
TJ Griffin;370917 said:
I never saw that movie, nor do I intend to, but its my understanding that they were fleeing to some shelters or boats that the government set up to save people. Yeah, that would totally work to save you from and Armageddon that features parts of the earth collapsing into nothing.
Why not? Assuming the events in the movie did happen the way it was described, then of course it would work.
Evan52395;370949 said:
ya it was a ship because the last part of apocalypse is the oceans increasing in vloume and flooding everything so they made giant ships that could withsatnd pretty much everthing and survived. they built 3 and i think 2 of them got destroyed or just one, i forget
All three of them survived, but one nearly didn't because of the guys in the door closey thing.
Evan52395;371052 said:
^im just saying that the movie made sense and its coinsidental that its following that. I'm not saying movies predict everything. The way everything played out made sense
No, the movie
didn't make sense. It was based on nothing scientific. It's whole thing was that "The neutrinos from the sun were mutating!" I don't know what you know about physics, but it's impossible for subatomic particles to "mutate". The output might change, or might stop, or a new particle might come out, but to say that and hope that no one will realise is the thing that droded me the most.