Do you think the world will in in 2012

@Deranged Midget said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@Deranged Midget said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

Oh bloody hell.. the world isn't ending in 2012, people. Quit being so damn fascinated with it and go back to your zombie apocalypse fantasies (which will also not happen).

Oh really?

Not a zombie. That's just people making s**t up.

The skeptical ones are usually the first to get mauled.This is real,It's all over the news.Read a few other articles and go further into the details.

Or, alternatively, you can stop buying into the fanaticism and realize that drugs were very likely involved. Even if a 'zombie outbreak' happened, there's no plausible way for it to turn into a full-blown apocalypse.

I never said that I was optimistic for the possibility of a zombie outbreak.Drugs were probably involved however the officer shot the "offender" multiple times and he did not go down.And has the for Plausibility of a Full-Blown apocalypse happening is debatable.What if a particular "zombie Virus" were airborne or water borne?Have you seen what the regular flew could do?

You obviously know very little of the extensive effects of drugs. The user can be so withdrawn from reality, they won't hear nor feel anyone or anything trying to communicate with them. There were cases where people were so drugged up, they would completely shatter their bone through the skin and still walk around as if it were nothing. Other cases, where people's adrenaline had skyrocketed to an un-healthy limit, had taken direct shots to the chest without even flinching and police were absolutely baffled.

Stop watching so much tv and movies. Even if a "zombie" apocalypse broke out, it would either barely spread or the world would merely become inhabitable due to the untended nuclear reactors all around the world failing.

The definition of a "Zombie" doesn't necessarily mean a Dead corpse walking and devouring the living.The Movie "28 days later" offers a realistic portrayal of zombies in which a rage virus turned people into cannibals.My point is that a disease or a zombie like virus can eventually spread causing an outbreak.Zombies are probably non-existent but you can't say the same for a "Zombi".

Those weren't "zombies", those were infected. If you base a comparison of what a zombie should be, it's a bumbling, undead corpse with a massive appetite for human flesh. The majority of the media thinks of it that way and that's what the definition has been assumed to be. There is most definitely a chance for an infected breakout virus, but it's easily containable and this was a severely isolated situation.

Again, drugs do crazy things to people.

Well if we want those kind of zombies let's wait for a huge break through in nano-technology to make it happen (It could happen).

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@Deranged Midget said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

Oh bloody hell.. the world isn't ending in 2012, people. Quit being so damn fascinated with it and go back to your zombie apocalypse fantasies (which will also not happen).

Oh really?

Not a zombie. That's just people making s**t up.

The skeptical ones are usually the first to get mauled.This is real,It's all over the news.Read a few other articles and go further into the details.

Or, alternatively, you can stop buying into the fanaticism and realize that drugs were very likely involved. Even if a 'zombie outbreak' happened, there's no plausible way for it to turn into a full-blown apocalypse.

I never said that I was optimistic for the possibility of a zombie outbreak.Drugs were probably involved however the officer shot the "offender" multiple times and he did not go down.And has the for Plausibility of a Full-Blown apocalypse happening is debatable.What if a particular "zombie Virus" were airborne or water borne?Have you seen what the regular flew could do?

You obviously know very little of the extensive effects of drugs. The user can be so withdrawn from reality, they won't hear nor feel anyone or anything trying to communicate with them. There were cases where people were so drugged up, they would completely shatter their bone through the skin and still walk around as if it were nothing. Other cases, where people's adrenaline had skyrocketed to an un-healthy limit, had taken direct shots to the chest without even flinching and police were absolutely baffled.

Stop watching so much tv and movies. Even if a "zombie" apocalypse broke out, it would either barely spread or the world would merely become inhabitable due to the untended nuclear reactors all around the world failing.

The definition of a "Zombie" doesn't necessarily mean a Dead corpse walking and devouring the living.The Movie "28 days later" offers a realistic portrayal of zombies in which a rage virus turned people into cannibals.My point is that a disease or a zombie like virus can eventually spread causing an outbreak.Zombies are probably non-existent but you can't say the same for a "Zombi".

You're still not addressing the fact that humans have so many weapons that we very well could handle a situation like that ourselves.

That's true,however the average civilian would not engage in combat with them and mostly panic (depending on the person).A virus can spreads quickly.You said Cracked providing an articles listing why one would fail quickly.However cracked is a humor website and is not a reliable source.Check the comment section and you will see people pointing out flaws and wrong information within the article.You know guys,your making me want to contradict what your saying by genetically engineering my own zombie virus and disposing of it in the sewer system to cause an outbreak.Don't think I won't do it (:

I'm pretty sure due to the massive media exposure, the general public would realize what to do in a situation where someone attempted to devour their flesh. In films, the difference is obvious due to the sheer stupidity of the plot. As mentioned, there are an insane amount of drugs that could compel one to lose their sense of reality and do something absolutely absurd like this. PCP comes to mind almost instantly.

@Deranged Midget said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@Deranged Midget said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

Oh bloody hell.. the world isn't ending in 2012, people. Quit being so damn fascinated with it and go back to your zombie apocalypse fantasies (which will also not happen).

Oh really?

Not a zombie. That's just people making s**t up.

The skeptical ones are usually the first to get mauled.This is real,It's all over the news.Read a few other articles and go further into the details.

Or, alternatively, you can stop buying into the fanaticism and realize that drugs were very likely involved. Even if a 'zombie outbreak' happened, there's no plausible way for it to turn into a full-blown apocalypse.

I never said that I was optimistic for the possibility of a zombie outbreak.Drugs were probably involved however the officer shot the "offender" multiple times and he did not go down.And has the for Plausibility of a Full-Blown apocalypse happening is debatable.What if a particular "zombie Virus" were airborne or water borne?Have you seen what the regular flew could do?

You obviously know very little of the extensive effects of drugs. The user can be so withdrawn from reality, they won't hear nor feel anyone or anything trying to communicate with them. There were cases where people were so drugged up, they would completely shatter their bone through the skin and still walk around as if it were nothing. Other cases, where people's adrenaline had skyrocketed to an un-healthy limit, had taken direct shots to the chest without even flinching and police were absolutely baffled.

Stop watching so much tv and movies. Even if a "zombie" apocalypse broke out, it would either barely spread or the world would merely become inhabitable due to the untended nuclear reactors all around the world failing.

The definition of a "Zombie" doesn't necessarily mean a Dead corpse walking and devouring the living.The Movie "28 days later" offers a realistic portrayal of zombies in which a rage virus turned people into cannibals.My point is that a disease or a zombie like virus can eventually spread causing an outbreak.Zombies are probably non-existent but you can't say the same for a "Zombi".

You're still not addressing the fact that humans have so many weapons that we very well could handle a situation like that ourselves.

That's true,however the average civilian would not engage in combat with them and mostly panic (depending on the person).A virus can spreads quickly.You said Cracked providing an articles listing why one would fail quickly.However cracked is a humor website and is not a reliable source.Check the comment section and you will see people pointing out flaws and wrong information within the article.You know guys,your making me want to contradict what your saying by genetically engineering my own zombie virus and disposing of it in the sewer system to cause an outbreak.Don't think I won't do it (:

I'm pretty sure due to the massive media exposure, the general public would realize what to do in a situation where someone attempted to devour their flesh. In films, the difference is obvious due to the sheer stupidity of the plot. As mentioned, there are an insane amount of drugs that could compel one to lose their sense of reality and do something absolutely absurd like this. PCP comes to mind almost instantly.

But either way,I just want to go on an adventure.Wether it's fighting zombies or traveling across the appalachian mountains.Is that too much to ask for? ):

@CrimsonCake: No, no it's not.

@FIash said:

@Glitch_Spawn said:

No. Don't watch the history channel.

LOL I agree. The history channel lost credibility long ago.

It's still quite credible with history stuff. Just not those shows with pawning, pickers, truckers, the future, etc... So yeah they're still about 10% credible.

@ssejllenrad: and shows on History Channel about zombies and aliens.

Nope!

Now with the whole Zombie Apocalypse hysteria I say....No.

@Deranged Midget said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@Deranged Midget said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

@CrimsonCake said:

@ZombieBigfoot said:

Oh bloody hell.. the world isn't ending in 2012, people. Quit being so damn fascinated with it and go back to your zombie apocalypse fantasies (which will also not happen).

Oh really?

Not a zombie. That's just people making s**t up.

The skeptical ones are usually the first to get mauled.Thisis real,It's all over the news.Read a few other articles and go further into the details.

Or, alternatively, you can stop buying into the fanaticism and realize that drugs were very likely involved. Even if a 'zombie outbreak' happened, there's no plausible way for it to turn into a full-blown apocalypse.

I never said that I was optimistic for the possibility of a zombie outbreak.Drugs were probably involved however the officer shot the "offender" multiple times and he did not go down.And has the for Plausibility of a Full-Blown apocalypse happening is debatable.What if a particular "zombie Virus" were airborne or water borne?Have you seen what the regular flew could do?

You obviously know very little of the extensive effects of drugs. The user can be so withdrawn from reality, they won't hear nor feel anyone or anything trying to communicate with them. There were cases where people were so drugged up, they would completely shatter their bone through the skin and still walk around as if it were nothing. Other cases, where people's adrenaline had skyrocketed to an un-healthy limit, had taken direct shots to the chest without even flinching and police were absolutely baffled.

Stop watching so much tv and movies. Even if a "zombie" apocalypse broke out, it would either barely spread or the world would merely become inhabitable due to the untended nuclear reactors all around the world failing.

The definition of a "Zombie" doesn't necessarily mean a Dead corpse walking and devouring the living.The Movie "28 days later" offers a realistic portrayal of zombies in which a rage virus turned people into cannibals.My point is that a disease or a zombie like virus can eventually spread causing an outbreak.Zombies are probably non-existent but you can't say the same for a "Zombi".

You're still not addressing the fact that humans have so many weapons that we very well could handle a situation like that ourselves.

That's true,however the average civilian would not engage in combat with them and mostly panic (depending on the person).A virus can spreads quickly.You said Cracked providing an articles listing why one would fail quickly.However cracked is a humor website and is not a reliable source.Check the comment section and you will see people pointing out flaws and wrong information within the article.You know guys,your making me want to contradict what your saying by genetically engineering my own zombie virus and disposing of it in the sewer system to cause an outbreak.Don't think I won't do it (:

I'm pretty sure due to the massive media exposure, the general public would realize what to do in a situation where someone attempted to devour their flesh. In films, the difference is obvious due to the sheer stupidity of the plot. As mentioned, there are an insane amount of drugs that could compel one to lose their sense of reality and do something absolutely absurd like this. PCP comes to mind almost instantly.

LOL.

@ZombieBigfoot said:

Oh bloody hell.. the world isn't ending in 2012, people. Quit being so damn fascinated with it and go back to your zombie apocalypse fantasies (which will also not happen).

This.

Sigh

This again there is more chance that Galactus himself will show up to devour our world.

So soon?!?, dude I could enjoy a few year more but not now please

@FIash said:

@Glitch_Spawn said:

No. Don't watch the history channel.

LOL I agree. The history channel lost credibility long ago.

Why it's even called 'History' Channel? It shouldn't, at least not anymore, before it deserved it, now.....

@mrdecepticonleader said:

Sigh

This again there is more chance that Galactus himself will show up to devour our world.

Stop Bullsh!ttin...................For real? :O

@utotheg38 said:

@mrdecepticonleader said:

Sigh

This again there is more chance that Galactus himself will show up to devour our world.

Stop Bullsh!ttin...................For real? :O

For real.

@mrdecepticonleader said:

@utotheg38 said:

@mrdecepticonleader said:

Sigh

This again there is more chance that Galactus himself will show up to devour our world.

Stop Bullsh!ttin...................For real? :O

For real.

@utotheg38 said:

@mrdecepticonleader said:

@utotheg38 said:

@mrdecepticonleader said:

Sigh

This again there is more chance that Galactus himself will show up to devour our world.

Stop Bullsh!ttin...................For real? :O

For real.

lol