Yeah again I didn't think too much about the practicality of this as it's not possible anyway. Let's just say that since we somehow have the technology to instantly delete all self-thinking capable humans at once, we surely have the technology to keep all the infrastructure running and raise the children without adults. Like I said earlier, robots!

I believe everything we know comes from others, whether it's learning to be good or bad. In your 2yr old example, I'd say that's likely a result of the parent's overreacting whenever the child makes a mistake. If they yell at or hurt him, rather than understand the fact that he's 2, naturally he's gonna learn to do whatever it takes to avoid said punishment.

Ha no offense taken, I'm well aware this is crazy idea. It'd be weird if anyone actually liked it.

I do agree with those philosophy's, though probably just so I can feel better about myself. I don't actively go out of my way to hurt anyone, so I'd like to think that means I'm not a bad person, but I also don't help anyone thus not a good person either, so I take comfort in claiming to be neutral. However, part of me does feel that sitting by doing nothing while knowing better is bad and it's something we should be held accountable for.

Yes they are what has shaped the generations, that's why they need to go. :L

What would you consider a hard reset?

Who would you leave alive to teach the new generation the correct things? If they have to figure things out themselves it will end exactly the same. And if you leave teachers, there is a 100% chance that they will get murdered and it will end exactly the same.

The problems we have today aren't because humans aren't smart enough to figure things out. It's because humanity as a collective isn't smart enough, won't act smart in large groups. It is absolutely impossible to steer such a large number into the right direction. The bigger the number, the more people will focus only on their own in favor of the greater good. Just ask yourself: when have you last thought about the suffering of other humans without being reminded of it by others? When have you last acted selfless for people you don't even know? It's just not in the human nature to work like that. Humans can't possibly fathom global consequences, they can barely acknowledge consequences in their immediate surroundings, some not even that.

It's gonna be cephalopods. Praise your octopus overlords.

Well so much for science.  So how did those two animals of each (predators and prey) survive.  God must have fed them magic Mana and made sure none of them got sick. The gene pool would be completely fucked due to incest but you believe in Adam and Eve and that is pure incest.  Who do you think Seth the third son of Adam fucked his sisters or Eve?  I guess his sisters.  Then you have another incest story if Noah and his family were only survivers.  We are some pretty damn inbred humans if that was the case.

What about all the fresh water fish?  Surely most would die out if entire earth was flooded with salt water considering only a minority can handle fresh and salt water.  I don't think they came in twos to this made up ark.  What about the insects?  Where is the fossil records of this mass extinction?

Good thing you don't have to think too much about it and just believe.  Keep believing in your fairytales.

The way you say we would just lose all knowledge and be throw back to some centuries ago. And these young people would just grow to be even worse than us. Technology is what tamed human being.

Now if you were talking about killing all criminals and dumb people at once we would certainly reduce our carbon footprint.

Most of these 10 directions seem fine.

That scenario would put us all dead.

One lesson you can take from any zombie apocalypse is that the worse enemies usually are the humans that remain alive. They know they need to cooperate to survive, but they will fight among themselves and end dead.

Problem is it's about 7.0 billion too late. The secret person behind these stones hoping for a slow natural decline to eventually make this reality?

A future, 'I told ya so'?

Well that is why I said most. Because unless they were also thinking of killing people and/or controlling birth to keep population reduced the natural course is population growth until stagnation due to cost of living/comfort of having 0-2 child per couple. On most developed countries we are having slow reduction of population along time but the rest of the globe is still growing population. I would say we probably will hit 15 or even 20B people before reduction becomes a natural occurence worldwide.