AMC The Walking Dead - Michonne's Katana

Quote
Old Spice
Just want to mention I finally watched the first season of The Walking Dead, not for me.

First season sucked. They were all running around like idiots, didn't have a survival mindset, and Rick didn't have a beard yet. First season annoyed me just because of how stupid and naive they were. Looking at the latest episodes where Rick bites someones throat out, its gotten a little more grittier and fun.

Zombies aren't threatening in all honesty, and as a species they are doomed to fail. A creature that has to fight its top predator every time it wants to feed or reproduce? And its top predator is the smartest animal on the planet, is much faster and agile than it, and has the capabilty to kill it from a distance with any number of weapons, or simply trap it and forget about it.

And whatever disease spreads the zombies isn't exactly hard to spot. Its the guy trying to eat people, kill that one. The most succesful diseases are ones that are hard to spot, and easy to spread, biting people is easy to notice, a hard way to spread a disease compared to airbourne viruses, and the victim rotting away and shambling around is not a symptom that will go unnoticed.

All this just proves my point that the real enemy we should be worrying about are the Bigfoots. Massive, agile, intelligent creatures that we can't find? Thats the real threat.

If were are to analyze what is actually happening it's not the zombies that pose the biggest threat. It's other people. The show illustrates this fact, also in some cases people will often refer to a apocalypse as zombies as not to be to realistic of an actual event that may happen. It is sometimes better to appear crazy than smart.

Quote
KWB
If were are to analyze what is actually happening it's not the zombies that pose the biggest threat. It's other people. The show illustrates this fact, also in some cases people will often refer to a apocalypse as zombies as not to be to realistic of an actual event that may happen. It is sometimes better to appear crazy than smart.

But would people actually turn on each other in situations like those? Some studys show that people become altruistic in dangerous situations, giving others food, and taking lone children along with them to keep them safe.

I read an article about peoples behavoirs after a tsunami hit, and how they acted. I'll link it if i can find it. Given it was in some sort of asian country, so you could argue that collective cultures like in asia are more inclined to help each other than an individualistic culture like we see in western countries.

Yeah both sides are true the governor helped people, so did rick. Both have different. Jews and ways of doing things. Just like countries but on a much smaller scale. Some will help others and some will kill others. People often react in a way that you wouldn't expect.

Quote
KWB
Yeah both sides are true the governor helped people, so did rick. Both have different. Jews and ways of doing things. Just like countries but on a much smaller scale. Some will help others and some will kill others. People often react in a way that you wouldn't expect.

I suppose most disasters have not involved the complete and total collapse of society with no hope of anyone helping them.

And this is why a total collapse is so dangerous, my problem with the "prepper thing" in large is everyone is planning in saving themselves in which case you react from training. And they train just for themselves, which in the end could lead to killing people you would otherwise be very close to.

Quote
KWB
And they train just for themselves, which in the end could lead to killing people you would otherwise be very close to.

Yes, and the killing is generally them because they are setting themselves up as ideal targets.

If you want to really be functionally prepared then :

-in a small town you have to be active in getting the town prepared, be on the council for example

-in a large town you have to form a sub-town and do the same

Hording supplies isn't overly functional because people will treat that no differently than a shop/store, you need to horde abilities and information.

Another idea to consider is that if the apocalyse happens, you will most likely be dead. So no point even worrying right?

In case of a zombie oubreak, I want to be a zombie. Much less trouble: "Braiiiinnnnsss....."

By the way, if you want to watch a funny and unusual zombie movie, watch The Revenant.

Aaaaaaahhhhhahahahahahahahahahahaha mad that is hilarious. C'est magnifque!!!

Quote
dragonetti
Another idea to consider is that if the apocalyse happens, you will most likely be dead. So no point even worrying right?

That may be true. But I think that is a rather negative attitude to have.

Quote
KWB
That may be true. But I think that is a rather negative attitude to have.

lol didn't mean to bring you down man. But I do agree with mad, wandering around, doing as you please and eating brains. Sounds like a simple and carefree life!

But you are dead? No different than if you were in the ground. I mean if you are a atheist you think when you die that it is game over so you wouldn't be there. And if you believe in God (a god) you have moved on to the afterlife. Either way that is just a virus controlling your body.

Kyle,

That actually comes up in the show as one of the major points of conflict early on where there is a semi-major character who believes that the zombies are still the people they were. This has been explored in other moves as well and recently other movies have shown zombies who can return to the people they were in some cases or turn into something else which is very much a person-like thing which raises a question as to did the soul change, was there a different soul and if so where did it come from?

The zombie apocalypse will come from a mutated rabies strain that is airborne. We will all be finished.

Quote
Mark a
The zombie apocalypse will come from a mutated rabies strain that is airborne. We will all be finished.

I've been building up a tolerance to rabies for years. When the ZA comes I fully intend to take over the world.


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member

Nice chum. I have spent the last few years building up,a resistance to iocane powder.

You know just in case.

Cliff- yes it depends on what actually may happen (hypothetically). I was just sticking to the script of "the walking dead". Nothing is impossible but I just don't see actual dead people walking around from a scientific standpoint, but if you want to go supernatural then sure. What I find inquisitive is the fact atheist believe in zombies?

What does atheism have to do with zombies? My rabies apocalypse is completely possible and I an a devout non practicing atheist.

I am talking about zombies as in " the walking dead". When you disagree that the are supernatural? If so than you would have to provide proof that it can/do/will happen. As an atheist from my understanding is founded on science and science is the ability to quantify theories and make them facts. And if you believe they are supernatural than you have to say there is a possibility of a God, otherwise where does supernatural things come from? If it can't be proven it doesn't exist. I believe in God so I don't have to provide proof as there is no proof of supernatural (at least in actual science). That's the beauty of being a Christian it makes things much more simple. I know people hate this saying but " it is hard to believe in something you don't understand/prove". But we also use to think the earth was flat, the sun revolved around the earth etc etc. but this whole atheist/believer debate is a non-issue as neither side can prove that there stance is correct, or further that the other side is wrong. And I am not trying to attack your beliefs just stating and explaining my belief.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2014 03:21AM by KWB.

Quote
Mark a
I an a devout non practicing atheist.

What's a non practicing atheist?


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member

Probably an atheist that doesn't engage in discussion of atheism.

Quote
Old Spice
Probably an atheist that doesn't engage in discussion of atheism.

Bingo.

Quote
KWB
I am talking about zombies as in " the walking dead". When you disagree that the are supernatural?

Yes.

This is basically what appears to happen :

-people "die"
-the bodies gain basic physical abilities but severely reduced mental ones
-they do not appear to be conscious as much as they are just reactionary

Look up apocephalus borealis, which is a fly which infects bees which makes them act very much like zombies, this is just one example of how a parasite can control host behavior.

The thing which is not well understood is how a parasite could reanimate tissue because the systems which provide power (that are working in us now) would look to have been destroyed in the WD type zombies so where is the energy coming from.

Quote

If so than you would have to provide proof that it can/do/will happen.

Not necessarily true.

There are many things which are large unknowns in science, one of the most dramatic is how do you get what we call life from what we call non-life, how does a banana come from a rock? This seems absurd but it had to happen in some fashion.

On a less dramatic level, there are many things we do not understand well, or if at all, but just consider what would happen if you then jumped to -> it is supernatural because you can not prove that it can/does happen.

The most you can say, working from within science, is that there is currently no explanation, but if you go back in time this would have been said about everything we currently know before we came to know it.

Quote

As an atheist from my understanding is founded on science and science is the ability to quantify theories and make them facts.

Unfortunately the word has become so convoluted because of its adoption by people who have no basis for conclusions they draw that it is now somewhat vague. It is some combination of god does/can not exist.

However you could reject God and reject science, there is no obligation from one to the other. It would be similar for example to how you could want to collect knives from people who forge and either want to, or not want to, collect knives from people who stock removal knives.

One does not necessarily lead to the other though it can through some underlying driver.

Quote
Mark a

Quote
Old Spice
Probably an atheist that doesn't engage in discussion of atheism.

Bingo.

I was guessing it was an atheist that prayed.


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member

Cliff I thought a virus needed a host that was alive, otherwise once the body decomposes it dies as well, if there is a virus so advance that it can control entire human bodies why would it choose one that is going kill itself.

As for the second paragraph this illustrates the fact of my last point neither side can prove the other to be wrong. But here is a question say God came back to earth, we call it the rapture would you still deny that there was a God? As if you follow the bible it is stated those that follow him will go to heaven and not suffer 7 years of hell. Now I am not trying to preach here as much as I am trying to ask if God came down took 1/3 of the human population with him would you still deny?

As for someone who is an atheist to reject both God and science is ludacris to me.

Quote
KWB
Cliff I thought a virus needed a host that was alive, otherwise once the body decomposes it dies as well, if there is a virus so advance that it can control entire human bodies why would it choose one that is going kill itself.

Many parasites will intentionally kill the hosts often because it is the simplest way to consume them and then they just move on to a new host, during the period before it dies they are in control of it and it doesn't act as it normally does.

In the Walking Dead everyone is infected, they have not defined exactly what happens, but it appears that you observe classic body death, heart attack for example, which triggers the zombie outbreak.

It isn't clear if they need brain death and brain damage will stop the zombie so it appears that whatever is causing the infection is using the brain in some capacity. It seems to be obvious that injuries which would kill any non infected person can (does) produce a zombie.

Quote

As for the second paragraph this illustrates the fact of my last point neither side can prove the other to be wrong.

That would be a hard claim to defend, it is an even stronger claim than to say God exists.

It is possible to easily show that many people who make arguments for/against theism are incoherent. It is however very difficult to show that a coherent (and universal) argument can not be made. That would require some decent mathematics in set logic.

Quote

But here is a question say God came back to earth, we call it the rapture would you still deny that there was a God?

There are lots of atheists who would deny God even if he existed, Christopher Hitchens for example argued that the Christian God, even if he existed would be a being who is not only not deserving of Worship, but should be sent to the very Hell he created.

An interesting question to ask outspoken atheists is "What would you consider as sufficient justification to accept God as existing?".

Many will not answer this which reveals quite a number of problems (chief among them their entire argument collapses as you can not reject something for lack of justification if you don't know what can justify it).

Quote

As for someone who is an atheist to reject both God and science is ludacris to me.

There are people who reject all knowledge.

These statements are not trivial to make/discuss because you have to be very clear what you mean when you say what it is to know something, that it means for something to be true, etc. .

This is why Sye gives atheists fits because they will claim to know something, or that something is true, but then if you use the definition of knowledge/truth they provide then they don't know anything but Sye knows that God exists.

But if they kill everyone at some point the virus will die as well. How is this a good example of evolution. And of course they seem as incoherent as there is no scientific proof (humans reasoning) so if there is a God why would he prove that he exist only to appease the people that deny him? It's free will everyone has a choice it is not forced upon you. If there is a God why would he feel the need to operate in a way that we can explain?

As for Christopher Hitchens- why does he only use the Christian God? Why not all of them? So say God does exist, who would disagree that one man using his own logic can justify his stance against God? Christopher obviously has a reason why he says this, but if you consider that his logic is not the logic of God. Kinda of like a cats knowledge compared to human knowledge, the cat pulls and tugs at the string in your hand completely unaware that you are controlling the string. Does that mean the cat is right in its logic of why the string is swinging?

I just personally believe to reject all knowledge is the worst from my point if view. Even people trying disprove God are searching for reason/ knowledge/ wisdom at its deepest level. But they are trying to make science the means of dismissing God, in the end it's kind of a paradox trying to dismiss only to find the truth.

Quote
KWB
But if they kill everyone at some point the virus will die as well. How is this a good example of evolution.

Current theories of evolution are not goal driven as in the thing is actually attempting to survive and that is why it evolves, if it happens to survive then genes propagate is all. Lots of species go extinct as they all die and many viruses would kill all of humanity if we didn't attempt to stop them, a zombie virus is no different in that way.

Quote

... if there is a God why would he prove that he exist only to appease the people that deny him? It's free will everyone has a choice it is not forced upon you. If there is a God why would he feel the need to operate in a way that we can explain?

The basic argument is that without justification it would be a complete random choice to believe or not to believe. From that the argument develops as to if it is just/wise or even meaningful to punish/reward for purely random actions.

Quote

As for Christopher Hitchens- why does he only use the Christian God? Why not all of them?

He doesn't, he has made the same argument against other Gods, Allah for example. He speaks mainly against Judeo-Christian theism as that is simply the most outspoken/popular.

Quote

So say God does exist, who would disagree that one man using his own logic can justify his stance against God? Christopher obviously has a reason why he says this, but if you consider that his logic is not the logic of God. Kinda of like a cats knowledge compared to human knowledge, the cat pulls and tugs at the string in your hand completely unaware that you are controlling the string. Does that mean the cat is right in its logic of why the string is swinging?

If a child is being horribly mistreated from its point of view should it not cry out against those who abuse it even if its ability to rationalize, even if its intelligence, even its its awareness is vastly inferior to those who are taking action on it?

Now this doesn't mean it is always right, parents do punish children in ways the children can not understand, but would it be rational for children knowing this disparity in ability to reason to just accept without question the acts of the parent?

It also leads you down into odd places because you would be saying that man should not use the aspects that were given to him by that which created it. We are made in God's image, God is rational and uses it, we are rational but should not use it.

Quote

But they are trying to make science the means of dismissing God, in the end it's kind of a paradox trying to dismiss only to find the truth.

Anyone who attempts to use science to dismiss God doesn't understand the meaning of science. It is possible to use science for example to explain something which is claimed to be from God as being understood through natural processes, but that doesn't dismiss God any more than the fact that I can show you how professional wrestling (don't read this next part Chum) is scripted and not "real" doesn't mean that there are not any actual "real" (not staged) fights.