Ok this idea of a story has been in my fucking head for a week now and I need answers or suggestion.

So in this alternate universe the humans civilization collapsed but after 3000 years later the horses evolved into ponies and other pony type species. As the other types of animal evolved into griffins and Minotaur. This takes after 3 months after season 3 BTW.

One day Twilight and her friends found a map of the US but since the US looks like Equestria they don't know what it means and they go and ask Celestia about the old ancients humans.

I want to know is there any story related to what I said and should I write a FimFiction with this idea? And yes I know they writing above sounds weird cause I have a disorder that makes me hard to explain things to other people but it doesn't really show in my writing since I'm not talking to anybody just myself and ponies.

1778467
Equestria looks completely different.

1778467

Their is... Something a little like it. Diaries of a madman has something similar going on however the evolution theory is a little.... Unknown. And if you wanna write it... Go for it. However the idea of the human race dying out is a little..... Impossible. It'd take a huge event like a volcanic eruption so large it would trigger all the over volcanoes and screw us over... Or a meteorite...... Both would leave the world mostly devoid of life.... So it might be a little *cough* difficult to do without sounding ridiculous...

No link because I can't be bothered :P

1778467 I'd read it.

1778467

Their isn't an official map, genius. Or at least I dun think there is....

I've seen this idea in several HiE fics, some with really good backstories. The best I've come across was 'With a little help from my friends' by DatsNoMoon which used the idea as an explanation for the humans arrival. It's also a really good idea if you ever want to introduce any kind of advanced human tech that Equestria wouldn't typically possess.

1778515

#Doesn'tknowaboutdiariesofamadman

My bad.

1778529

1778479>>1778540>>1778515>>1778502 ok il might just do it and also this is a alternate universe so idk what here world exactly looks like but it's similar.

1778577

You get a follow :P

1778494 No, war, disease, famine, climate or geographic change that we can't adapt quick enough to, or running out resources that we can use would easily knock us out. I mean we are more vulnerable than we realize.

I think George Carlin said it best:

1778596

We'd fight through a war. Famine.... With current technology that's unlikely to happen AT ALL! Climate or geographical changes? That could happen I suppose.

1778644

We'd fight through a war

Good luck with the radiation from all the nucks.

1778467
I wouldn't mind it... I'd read it. I've got many human, pony theories... Perhaps my favourite was Celestia being worshipped by an ancient civilisation as a sun god, eventually for some reason a fight breaks out and a human champion destroys Celestia's body and seals her back in Equestria, thus taking her place as the human sun god. Other theories include ponies being a human experiment to see if life could be established on other worlds.

1778644
I've been keeping my eye on this for some time. A majority of food crops for the planet is now grown in North America. There have been food shortages and riots across the world in recent years because of efforts to divert corn to ethinol production for gasohol. This only shows me how narrow the margin for error is. The margin for error has been tightened even more with irrigation to the most productive land in California shut off for several years now over a fish that's not endangered at all.
Any major disruption like droughts or winters intensified by volcanos, a blight spawned in gene-modified crops, any of this can make a shortfall ranging from millions starving to several billion, all looking at several billion with food and figuring out how to take it at gunpoint....

1778596 You under estimate humanity's resilience, anything that would make us extinct would probably render all life (Except maybe microscopic life) extinct as well. We are incredibly adaptable, more so than most, if not all other species on this planet.

Also nuclear war isn't guaranteed to wipe out humanity either, first; nukes would only be fired at major cities of apposing nations, there will be towns, small cities, and the country side that don't get nuked. While the radiation from global nuclear war with every single nation involved may spread to towns that weren't directly targeted there are fallout shelters, hell there's a company that still makes them for anyone who wants one. They're not even that expensive. (For an underground complex)

The radiation wouldn't be around for as long as people like to believe, in fact the weather is a fairly good radiation scrubber, it'll be below lethal levels in most places in a few decades, even the impact site of a nuke would probably be below lethal (But still not healthy) in less than a century.

Then of course there's all the places that, due to having few large population centres, like the American Midwest, the radiation would be limited to what came in the winds blown from East or West coast attacks. Radiation there may only be lethal for a decade, probably less.

A nuclear winter that blocks out the sun is worse because then plants die, then the animals that eat those plants die, and then the only food left on Earth for humanity are Twinkies. Because Twinkies can be made to include no natural ingredients at all with minimal effort/taste different.

It should also be mentioned that chances are a nuclear war wouldn't get so large as to block out the sun, that would take a lot of nukes. Like more than what is needed for MAD.

So in short; chances are we're not going anywhere from one of our wars. A Gamma-ray burst from a collapsing star light-years away is something that is guaranteed to render us extinct however, but they are incredibly rare.

1778655

Nukes* And you'll fid that their are countervmeasures. Th nucear weaons are currently being dismantled slowly and poured into nuclear plants. Well most of them. And don't forget that we can fire missiles at any nukes that getclose and detonate them in the air before they get close.

1779077 1779117 Unfortunately right now there are enough nucks on this planet to kill every single life form 50 times, and Mutual Assured Destruction/Nuclear Deterrence is fake.

Even though it's a video game it's true.

Also MAD and ND don't work against terrorism.

1779155 Re-read my comment, I've covered this. While there are enough nukes to destroy all life on the surface, they're not going to fire an entire nuclear weapon at a tiny little town in the middle of nowhere. I also covered; fallout shelters, radiation doesn't stick around that long, and isolated locations, among other things.

Tell me how MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) is fake? It means literally; you destroy my nation, I destroy yours.

If you're saying nukes will make us extinct, then you're PROVING MAD is real, because obviously if everyone is dead it means Mutually Assured Destruction was carried out.

You're contradicting yourself.

Nukes, We love them, Nothing says power like having so many nukes we make houses out of them.

1779219 MAD as a deterrent is fake. If you watched the video you would have learned that in most cases the decision to launch a nuke is left up to battle field commanders who are taught to and will take out the enemy if they have the chance no mater the cost. Why do you think Russia offered a peaceful solution to the resent conflict in the Middle East? Because they know that if it comes to war nukes will fly. And if a nuclear weapon hits a city the weapon's not the only nuclear thing that's going to explode, the power-plant for that city will also go. Not everyone has a fallout shelter, and what if the nuclear strike happens in the form of a bomb placed in the middle of a city by terrorists and explodes with out warning? No time to get to the shelter, your dead. Ok lets say your right and enough people get to the shelters, the radiation will be there for a long long time. Don't believe me? then lets have a look at Chernobyl shall we? The disaster happened 27 years ago and high levels of radiation still cover most of the city. Just 1 of the nuclear weapons around today would do 100x the damage the reactor at Chernobyl did. That would mean we would be down in those bunkers for a very long while. How long do you think we would last before food and water would run out? And if we did survive it would be another 50 years before the ground was fetal again, and any plants/animals that did survive would be extremely radioactive.

1779353 You're completely ignoring the part where nukes aren't going to be launched at small towns and the country side. Or do you think people only live in cities?

There are towns in the American Midwest where you won't find a city for miles upon miles in any direction from them.

Also I said the radiation would last for, and I quote "decades" on locations that WERE NOT a direct blast site, Chernobyl is a direct blast site. (Which I said would be below "lethal" levels, but still dangerous, in under a century.) Stop twisting my words. Also 27 years is only 2.7 decades. I didn't say how long it would take to be back to normal, just not lethal, which for locations where the radiation was blown in by a nearby city than it would be only a couple decades.

Why do you think Russia offered a peaceful solution to the resent conflict in the Middle East?

You just gave an example of how a nuclear deterrent stopped Russia from getting in a war. More contradictions.

That's the point of a nuclear deterrent, not to stop nukes from being used in a war, but to keep the war from happening in the first place.

Also you make it sound like every city has a nuclear power station, new flash; most in the US are oil or coal, which doesn't make a very big boom at all. (Well I guess oil makes a big fire, but if a nuke went off I doubt an oil fire would even be noticed.)

Your radiation lifespan facts are all coming from one location, and a fairly stagnate one. In places where weather is more dynamic the rain is going to wash most of the radiation into rivers within the first decade, where it will then be diluted upon entering the ocean.

Hell, there are catfish living in Chernobyl's reactor's COOLING RESERVOIR. I'm not even going to bother pointing out all the other animals. Also may I mention that currently Chernobyl is fairly safe now, you know that right? The radiation is only lethal is localised pockets, hell the wildlife of Chernobyl is actually higher because there's no humans killing them.

Watch this:

Radiation isn't even half as deadly/long lasting as you seem to think it is. Chernobyl has suffered like 70x more damage from plant roots ripping apart buildings than the reactor meltdown, and the evacuation costs combined.

So please, go on about how "deadly" and "long lasting" radiation is, because I'll keep turning your own examples upon you.

1779567 I happen to live in the country and I know that if a nuclear weapon were to detonate in a city the radiation would still effect the plants, animals and ground with in a 5000 mile radios of the city. for evidence I point to to the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. after the bombing hundreds of farms miles away from the cities were effected. ALL nuclear weapons in the modern world are 50-100x more radioactive and deadly then the bombs dropped on Japan so the blast radius, the amount of radiation and amount of destruction would be that much higher.

You know your right. There are a lot of area's in the US. where there are people living on farms with no cities for miles. But you know what else is out there? Nuclear "Disposal" Facilities were old nuclear bombs and missiles from the cold war are stored that are either MUF (Materiel Unaccounted For) or leaking as well as missile silos and Military bases all of which would be targets.

The only counties that follow Nuclear Deterrents are those that made their own during the cold war and Japan because they fully understand what they can do, most countries that make them today either got them pre-made or are just looking at the blue prints made by countries that made them during the cold war and thuse don't full understand and are more likely to use them. despite what other countries say. also it hasn't been desided yet if they are going to go through with Russia's plan, so war is still on the table.

The reason for the more damage from the plants and not the meltdown is because it was a meltdown and not a full explosion. Most of that video was taken on the out skirts and the outer parts of the city, the farther in you go the less wild life you will find. and even though the plants are growing that doesn't mean they aren't radioactive on some level. scientists have managed to grow tomatoes and other plants well exposing them to high levels of radiation that doesn't make them safe to eat.

1780016

animals and ground with in a 5000 mile radios of the city.

New York to California is ~2,700 miles, so a nuke in New York is going to affect people in Hawaii? By your logic: yes.

I'm not even going to bother continuing to argue with you. You don't have nearly as good a grasp on radiation as you think you do and it is quite clear to me fighting you is pointless.

But before I stop completely I will end this in a one-liner based on your quote.

video was taken on the out skirts and the outer parts of the city, the farther in you go the less wild life you will find.

CATFISH IN REACTOR COOLING RESVOIR! Anyways, good day sir.

1780151 sorry the 5000 was a typo.

water doesn't hold radiation that long i will give you that, but something to keep in mind is that Catfish are bottom feeders so they would have stuck to the bottom and avoided the radiation all together.

also they're mutated:

That species of catfish isn't supposed to be that big.

1780219 I've seen the mutation, it's very light. (Literally just a second lower jaw, that's it, well and they're smaller than normal.)

Also those men in that video, the place there standing is only a couple hundred feet from the reactor, "ground zero" and they're not in the water, yet they're fine.

Even though I said the other was my last I felt I needed to point that out to you, since you gave me the opportunity.

1778467
Three thousand years is scarcely enough time for horses to naturally evolve new and unusual colors, particularly in the variety seen in the show, much less wings, horns, magic and sapience. Same goes for the other species as well. The idea is fine, but the time would need to be vastly longer. Say... 50,000 years minimum. Barest minimum.

If you want it to work in such a short timeframe as 3,000 years you're going to need to make them purposefully engineered to be what they are by pre-fall humanity, whether as weapons, servants, tools of observation or simply child races (maybe a mix).

1778596
1779077
1778644

Recently read a good book on this subject.

1780271>>1780219
Water is an excellent radiological insulator.

1778467

Millions of years difference here. Don't listen to that guy about fifty thousand, we're talking evolution that has to create limbs. Unless something changes the DNA of all of the horses' reproductive cells and they create ponies, the US wouldn't remain the same shape and allow for you to change horses into ponies. Now, if they found the map and there was nothing shaped like it, or the Constitution or something, or dig up the Capitol building, well, then you've got stuff to do.