The question

How to wipe out humanity within a week?

is marked with a . But, IMO neither the question, nor any of the answer really live up to the exigence. Or am I being too strict?

Note: this follows the previously discussed point

A hard-science ultimatum

  • $\begingroup$ I see no mathematical equations. Thus, it is not hard-science. $\endgroup$ – DaaaahWhoosh Jul 20 '15 at 20:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ bilbo_pingouin - I agree, and have downvoted some of the answers for this reason. @DaaaahWhoosh Equations are not needed for it to be hard-science! $\endgroup$ – HDE 226868 Jul 20 '15 at 20:48
  • $\begingroup$ @HDE226868 From the wiki: "All answers to this question should be backed up by equations". And I like math. $\endgroup$ – DaaaahWhoosh Jul 20 '15 at 20:52
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @DaaaahWhoosh " . . . empirical evidence, scientific papers, other citations, etc." Those are examples, not requirements. I like math, too. $\endgroup$ – HDE 226868 Jul 20 '15 at 20:53
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ IMO, some questions aren't good fit for the hard science tag, or the tag is misused. Maybe we should take a tag editing day to put tags in order? The hard science tag but others as well. $\endgroup$ – Vincent Jul 20 '15 at 22:48

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .