Does not compute:
You do realize that ozone is only PART of the atmosphere, right? The movie only said that the ozone layer was destroyed, and that subsequent cosmic radiation (which is a conceptual error, because it's the magnetosphere, not the ozone layer, which shields us from cosmic rays) set everything on fire (also a conceptual error, because that's not how radiation works).
Assuming that the flare somehow managed to destroy all of the Earth's ozone (and it couldn't possibly do that when half of the Earth is blocking the other half), the only subsequent effect would be increased skin burns and cancer from exposure to sunlight (the alternative would be to stay inside).
The point is that the claim here is that radiation from the Sun is somehow going to reach the side of the planet facing away from the Sun, and that's not possible because radiation doesn't work like that. The side of the Earth facing away from the Sun has the entire Earth in front of it shielding it from both the solar flare and any subsequent radiation exposure (assuming we buy the crap about the ozone layer shielding us from cosmic rays).
Edited by 71.31.16.49 I don't need no reason!This is an overly opinionated Trope Page for Knowing, marred by too many arguable interpretations of the film's story. For example, we don't know why Nicholas Cage was not allowed to accompany his son. And we don't know who ascended to the new world in the spaceships. The solar flares are not presented as damage caused by human carelessness with the environment; disasters are often inexplicable and not the result of fault but as natural phenomena.
I agree that it is not a downer ending—as in, for example, Melancholia. The human race was rescued by the ascension of the two children. Children have longer life spans than adults and are able to procreate more easily in the absence of man made morality and religions, a fact somewhat symbolized by the relationship between Cage & his minister father. Why bring that baggage with you?
Just because you can't prove it, doesn't mean it isn't trueArtistic License entry on the main page: is that artistic license or just a short explanation, which by definition will be inaccurate and lacking? He was teaching a class. That was one scene. There is no Artistic License - Philosophy trope because either it's a short explanation, or it's wrong.
I could be wrong, though, which is why I didn't just edit it.
Edited by VandalHeartX- A Million Is a Statistic: Seen in the ending, which is apparently supposed to be upbeat.
I disagree. The ending is meant to be bittersweet. The scenes of the dying earth are melancholy, but the human race will live on.
Support stupid freshness, yo.The plane crash.
More specifically the aftermath. Has anyone either witnessed a similar event? Or work with First Responders or something?
I just wanna know if all the secondary explosions, people getting caught in said explosions et al was accurate.
Yes, it did leave an impression.
Pulled this example for severe Thread Mode and Natter
Please discuss a contested example instead of adding sub-bullets arguing with it.
"But don't give up hope. Everyone is cured sooner or later. In the end we shall shoot you." - O'Brien, 1984