Poll: Zombies Apocalypse: Could it happen?

[Sven und EIN HUND]

No... Maybe some sort of virus or uhhh, something, but, no.

 

[PyroZombie]

Really? We called travel to the moon impossible to within the last 1000 years, we called the use of a nuclear device impossible with in that same millennium, as well as harnessing electricity.

Their is nothing that should shock us when it comes to human ingenuity and a idea, when we live in this world when the word "Impossible" has been thrown by pompous skeptics so recklessly before us. We are no smarter then they, at most we are so goddamn clouded by our distracting technology that we may actually be out-matched by the minds that we look back on, but the one thing that we haven't loss is the ever-present curiosity that has rebuilt and destroyed us.

If you fail to see the possibility of science, then you fail to acknowledge the second purpose of science, while proving something is impossible, then proving the impossible possible.

Now this topic has kept me awake for too long, time to move on to my next question. Will I dream?

 

[Serge A. Storms]

If this happens, I'm shooting Uwe Boll. If he isn't a zombie yet, no one will bother checking.

 

[PyroZombie]

...yet.

Goodnight.

 

[Der Golem]

Firstly you're contradicting any argument for zombies. A zombie is by definition a mindless thing, meaning it wouldn't have the mental capacity for any of that even if it was just relying on the rudimentary survival instincts. A zombie can not hallucinate without the brain functions to do so, nor can it feel paranoia without awareness or fear. What you are describing is NOT a zombie by any definition, not an infected zombie, not a magic zombie and not an undead zombie. You're just describing an angry person with mental issues.

Lord Nue, you make an excellent point. When I witness a person once-dead, slowly stumbling towards me and moaning 'brains', I will not run, but politely refer to him as a 'zombie'. And when I also witness a person suffering from, say, some form of evolved, super-resistant rabies, coming towards me gibbering and bleeding from where he has scratched his own skin, I will refer to him as 'an angry person with mental issues'.

-> Lord Nue, too busy classifying what is and isn't a zombie to survive the 'angry-people-with-mental-issues apocalypse' <-

Seriously tho, you've based your rather closed idea of a zombie on either the magical, viral or undead zombie.
According to you, they HAVE to be mindless, which is strange, since the magical ones of caribbean fame are created from a combination of drugs, biotoxins and magic, if memory serves.
Now if only drugs that were designed to make the soon-to-be-zombie's mind susceptible to suggestion worked on these 'mindless' zombies.
Of course, you could be talking about magical as it necromantic zombies, who are indeed, also mindless.
So... necromancy, zombie viruses, and plain just hell-is-too-full zombies, the zombies you're using for the basis of your counterargument. Why does this seem so contradictory???

A guy made a movie disease because he heard about a disease and it inspired him to make something interesting and scary. Ok, that means NOTHING though. It is a fucking FICTIONAL movie. Your post was the most worthless zombie defense in this topic, everyone else had managed better.

OH that's right, you condemned the use of fictional evidence in regards to a fictional phenomenon.
Now, I'm not here to be critical, its just that... well, you are being critical, extremely so, and that got on my nerves a tad.
Point is, we can decide from this that the idea of 'zombies' (a fictional phenomenon) as being 'mindless' (as you so vehemently claim) is based solely on 'zombie movies' (fictional evidence).
As such, the idea that 'zombies' are always 'mindless', less they not be 'zombies' may itself be a fictional convention.
So, our personal conceptions of zombies need not include mindlessness, since, indeed, true literal mindlessness would result in the collapse of said zombies anyway.

Now, finally.

As had been said in this topic, if a disease that could make zombies existed it would have been discovered and documented by now. You really shouldn't talk about diseases or anything if you don't even know the very, very basics of anything.

You know what, you actually might've got this one right. We have documented every disease in existence.
Of course, then you might need to factor in evolution. That would explain how that dastardly swine flu seem to get the drop on us (even though we've been keeping tabs on that bastard since we discovered and documented him!)
And then you should probably factor in blissful ignorance and environmental factors. How many new species of fish do we discover in the depths of the ocean a day? Or species of frog? Now, for special credit, how much smaller, and therefore harder to see, are viruses and germs in comparison to fish and frogs?
And then you should probably factor in the fact that, well, no, we haven't discovered and documented everything by now. Unless scientists have been to the nearest planet capable of habituating bacteria. And every other such planet from here to eternity. They haven't, have they?
You really shouldn't talk about diseases or anything if you don't even know the very, very basics of anything (such as how much we've explored the universe).

Finally, stop pointing out that some or all of us may have merely repeated arguments, because you're doing it quite a bit yourself. I've read the first and last page of this topic only, and on this page only you've already told people twice that 'the topic has been discussed to death'. Speaking of arguments discussed to death, how bout the argument that "people should shut up because they're repeating others' arguments"? Frankly, I get the impression that you've kept this topic going for 5 pages almost by yourself, and almost only by making such poor arguments as the ones i have listed above.

On that note, I hope this argument was original enough for you. Cheers

 

[Z of the Na'vi]

No.

It is impossible for a corpse to come back to life.

Of course, if we are talking about ZOMBIES here, and not just infected people, who are alive.

In which case, then it is not a zombie apocalypse, just a disease outbreak.

 

[gbemery]

Well according to a report on the Haiti earthquake by CNN some of the people are and I quote "not dead, not alive but in a gray area"...

 

[Thyunda]

No because doing that much damage to the brain would still kill you.

No, you see, you don't actually kill the braincells.

You just put part of the brain in a cryosleep-state
Somewhat

A virus can't do that.

Not a discovered virus, at any rate. And perhaps it's a parasite? You sound like an arrogant swine who's just determined to say 'no', no matter how many reasons are put in front of you.

How about the word from a Neurobiology major from a major school in the US, who is currently studying medicine.
No, it cannot happen, the body and central nervous system are so ridiculously complex and interdependent.
Say by some miracle that there is some kind of infected, even then they would die out incredibly fast, they wouldn't be able to run around forever, hell they would probably last less than a week. A human body cannot function more than a few days without food and water.

Alright, let's see this from the philosophical view. A zombie, to us, is a person without a sentient mind, say something that runs on eating, drinking, and sleeping. But remember this is an entirely dualist idea, that the brain can exist without the mind. So if we take dualism to be true, and if there was some way for a parasite or a virus to cut off the interaction between the mind and brain, then zombies are possible, and it could go even further for them to stop recognising members of their own species as what they are, and as another form of prey.

 

[Rednog]

No because doing that much damage to the brain would still kill you.

No, you see, you don't actually kill the braincells.

You just put part of the brain in a cryosleep-state
Somewhat

A virus can't do that.

Not a discovered virus, at any rate. And perhaps it's a parasite? You sound like an arrogant swine who's just determined to say 'no', no matter how many reasons are put in front of you.

How about the word from a Neurobiology major from a major school in the US, who is currently studying medicine.
No, it cannot happen, the body and central nervous system are so ridiculously complex and interdependent.
Say by some miracle that there is some kind of infected, even then they would die out incredibly fast, they wouldn't be able to run around forever, hell they would probably last less than a week. A human body cannot function more than a few days without food and water.

Alright, let's see this from the philosophical view. A zombie, to us, is a person without a sentient mind, say something that runs on eating, drinking, and sleeping. But remember this is an entirely dualist idea, that the brain can exist without the mind. So if we take dualism to be true, and if there was some way for a parasite or a virus to cut off the interaction between the mind and brain, then zombies are possible, and it could go even further for them to stop recognising members of their own species as what they are, and as another form of prey.

I don't see how you can bring in a "philosophical view" into a problem that has to do about anatomy and physiology. Based on your line of logic if the mind exists and something cuts off the mind then yes by your definition it would be a zombie. The problem with this, however, is by making your definition, you are ignoring a lot of science. There is no defined "mind" in the brain and thus there is nothing to be physically cut. The popular (and incredibly wrong) idea about the brain is that the brain is directly divided into specific areas, ie a music area, a sports, area, an eating area..etc and w/e. This is in fact not true. The brain has several small sections that function in unison in order to form a complete action or thought. Once again, the brain is an incredibly interconnected section. Once you start saying that a parasite or a virus could start severing connections, you are forgetting the fact that they would also loose the other parts of functionality, you cannot lose one with the other. Think about this, why don't we have comma patients running around?
And to go back to your argument. If somehow a creature was unable to recognize their species from another, it is highly likely they would have no ability to distinguish anything from anything, much less choose the action to physically attack it. Your philosophical zombie might try to eat and attack a statue and hump a tree.

 

[Thyunda]

SNIP

So the mind is supposedly separate from the brain. It's a big debate. And when I said difficulty in differentiating their species from another, it's only the same as cannibalism, only more natural than choice. Assuming it's choice, of course.

 

[DuplicateValue]

if your talking about the 30 days of night vamps, this yes there cooler, and the only reason books betray vamps to be romantic is... well, lets be honest, its easier to have someone vulnerable to suck there blood, much harder to do that to some one who hates you, if your trying to be a fucking ninja vamp.

I didn't mean that they were romantic because they were prone to romance, I meant it in a broader sense of the word.
It's like how you can describe a period of time as romantic ("Romantic Ireland's dead and gone"), or how something can be conveyed in a romantic way (Pirates of the Caribbean romanticized the concept of pirates, for example).

you think pale as shit skin or burning flesh in the sun is beautiful? wait are you talking twilight vampires, the vampire vampires, or those really primal vamps?

I said the concept - the concept, man!
Vampires have a beautiful concept. They are gifted with immortality, increased strength, increased speed, (usually) irresistible looks, and (sometimes) the gift of flight or transformation. But they get all this at such a terrible price, that the good is almost evened out by the bad.

 

[Yokai]

Not necromantic "undead" zombies, but I think the idea of rabid crazies that ignore pain and eat human flesh isn't entirely impossible. A virus might work that way. Either way, I'll worry about it when it happens.

You didn't read the topic at all did you?

Not all the way, no. I didn't have the time. If you're referring to the differences between rabies and a "Zombie virus" I meant to use the term "rabid" figuratively, meaning vicious and insane. I'm aware that rabies could not become a zombie virus.