It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Of course, the easiest way to remove Humanity from the face of the Earth would be with a virus, perhaps one keyed to our genetic makeup. This scenario becomes especially terrifying when we realise that such an attack would probably not even be viewed as such. A virus could be seeded by a cloaked alien ship, or could be hidden within a meteor which, after disintegrating in the Earth’s atmosphere, would disperse the virus throughout the Earth’s atmosphere. When significant numbers of Humans began dying of a previously unknown virus, it is likely that a majority of the Earth’s population would regard the act as an act of terrorism or as a terrible accident. It would not be out of the realm of possibility that the blame would be placed on our own institutions of defence and governance, rather than the more abstract possibility of an alien invader.
How about a virus transmitted by exchange of bodily fluids, so that it would spread rapidly through sexual contact and deter reproductive activity at the same time? One that mutated so rapidly that neither the human immune system nor the best human scientists could mount a defence against it?
Originally posted by The_Doctor
could possibly be engineered.
Originally posted by gnosis
Perhaps the slow working process of the AIDS virus allows time for pre-invasion preperation and logistics?
Originally posted by Gemwolf
Wouldn't something like SARS, the Ebola Virus, etc. (the bird-flu maybe?) be more effective? An infection that causes death within days not months or years? And why not choose something that is airborne or easily "transferable"? You basically have a direct choice whether you will be infected with the HIV/AIDS virus or not.
Originally posted by Astyanax
Why give themselves the hassle of cleaning up the mess we leave behind? With something like AIDS, we'd end up doing most of the janitorial work for them. The dead would bury the dead, so to speak.
As for having a choice, don't forget it prevents humans from reproducing naturally.
Originally posted by Elsenorpompom
History has shown that the more virulent and deadly a virus the more likely humanity is to survive. Look at the common cold...not very severe....but damn adaptable.been around for a LONG time.....Humans eventually adapted to it and it has adapted back....Spanish Flu 1918 burns through the entire world...Kills offf millions...then its gone...people survive live on, virus dies off.
Originally posted by Astyanax
What do you think?
A team at the Institute of Tropical Medicine, in Antwerp, compared HIV-1 samples from 1986-89 and 2002-03.
They found the newer samples appeared not to multiply as well, and were more sensitive to drugs - some other studies argue they are becoming more resistant.
"What appears to be happening is that by the time HIV passes from one person to another, it has already toned down some of its most pathogenic effects in response to its host's immune system," he said.
"So the virus that is passed on is less 'fit' each time.
"This would suggest that over several generations, HIV could become less harmful to its human hosts.
Originally posted by JackofBlades
How would it infect priests? Or nuns? Or any celibate. AIDS is a disease which can be avoided and is actively being bred out of our life as time goes on.
Why didn't they just pee in our water supply
Originally posted by Astyanax
Individuals can avoid AIDS by not reproducing, or they can reproduce and risk death. As far as the species is concerned the outcome is more or less the same.
Originally posted by The_Doctor
If it was engineered it was made to attack specific populations. for example gay men have the highest rate of transmission. The disease was only introduced into the regular population by unsafe blood transfusions etc.