In Case of Zombies

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Can we pick australia, if it existed?

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:29:53 AM

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Can we pick australia, if it existed?

I was going to pick perhaps the continent that contributes the most to Malaira deaths, AIDS deaths, genocides, and all around crapping up of the world.

Quote from: Jack1704 on April 27, 2010, 11:20:38 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:29:53 AM

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Can we pick australia, if it existed?

I was going to pick perhaps the continent that contributes the most to Malaira deaths, AIDS deaths, genocides, and all around crapping up of the world.

Genocide is fun!

Quote from: Jack1704 on April 27, 2010, 11:20:38 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:29:53 AM

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Can we pick australia, if it existed?

I was going to pick perhaps the continent that contributes the most to Malaira deaths, AIDS deaths, genocides, and all around crapping up of the world.

Australia second then

Quote from: Jack1704 on April 27, 2010, 11:20:38 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:29:53 AM

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Can we pick australia, if it existed?

I was going to pick perhaps the continent that contributes the most to Malaira deaths, AIDS deaths, genocides, and all around crapping up of the world.

Whose fault is that though

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:43:07 PM

Quote from: Jack1704 on April 27, 2010, 11:20:38 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:29:53 AM

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Can we pick australia, if it existed?

I was going to pick perhaps the continent that contributes the most to Malaira deaths, AIDS deaths, genocides, and all around crapping up of the world.

Whose fault is that though

I didn't assign fault, but I'm pretty sure the continent I'm hinting at has had all of those problems for thousands of years, so... weather, primate population, tribal religion and outlooks on life. In that order of course.

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 28, 2010, 07:23:48 PM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:43:07 PM

Quote from: Jack1704 on April 27, 2010, 11:20:38 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:29:53 AM

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Can we pick australia, if it existed?

I was going to pick perhaps the continent that contributes the most to Malaira deaths, AIDS deaths, genocides, and all around crapping up of the world.

Whose fault is that though

I didn't assign fault, but I'm pretty sure the continent I'm hinting at has had all of those problems for thousands of years, so... weather, primate population, tribal religion and outlooks on life. In that order of course.

3 quarters of the US fits the bill by those standards too.

Tell me, how much could you contribute if you were poor, starving and lived in the middle of a desert in a virtually ungoverned badland without acess to clean water, food, health, police or anything.

Tell me, how much could you contribute if you were poor, starving and lived in the middle of a desert in a virtually ungoverned badland without acess to clean water, food, health, police or anything.

Given the option, a lot more than most trailer trash would. Didn't you hear about the guy in Ghana (citation needed) who built a walking robot out of old TV parts, having received no formal education in the matter?

"the price we paid was the price men have always paid for achieving a paradise in this life ? we went soft, we lost our edge." - Herbert 1:251

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 28, 2010, 07:23:48 PM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:43:07 PM

Quote from: Jack1704 on April 27, 2010, 11:20:38 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:29:53 AM

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Can we pick australia, if it existed?

I was going to pick perhaps the continent that contributes the most to Malaira deaths, AIDS deaths, genocides, and all around crapping up of the world.

Whose fault is that though

I didn't assign fault, but I'm pretty sure the continent I'm hinting at has had all of those problems for thousands of years, so... weather, primate population, tribal religion and outlooks on life. In that order of course.

Not really. Small tribal societies have been succeful on their own throughout history. It's the wave of colonialism that followed that did most of the damage.

Quote from: Raist on April 29, 2010, 12:11:11 AM

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 28, 2010, 07:23:48 PM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:43:07 PM

Quote from: Jack1704 on April 27, 2010, 11:20:38 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:29:53 AM

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Can we pick australia, if it existed?

I was going to pick perhaps the continent that contributes the most to Malaira deaths, AIDS deaths, genocides, and all around crapping up of the world.

Whose fault is that though

I didn't assign fault, but I'm pretty sure the continent I'm hinting at has had all of those problems for thousands of years, so... weather, primate population, tribal religion and outlooks on life. In that order of course.

3 quarters of the US fits the bill by those standards too.

3/4 of the US is full of AIDS Malaria and genocides?

I'm not assigning worth to people, I'm simply stating that these problems exist there and we'd be better off without the problems.

Quote from: General Douchebag on April 29, 2010, 04:06:54 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 29, 2010, 12:11:11 AM

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 28, 2010, 07:23:48 PM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:43:07 PM

Quote from: Jack1704 on April 27, 2010, 11:20:38 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:29:53 AM

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Can we pick australia, if it existed?

I was going to pick perhaps the continent that contributes the most to Malaira deaths, AIDS deaths, genocides, and all around crapping up of the world.

Whose fault is that though

I didn't assign fault, but I'm pretty sure the continent I'm hinting at has had all of those problems for thousands of years, so... weather, primate population, tribal religion and outlooks on life. In that order of course.

3 quarters of the US fits the bill by those standards too.

3/4 of the US is full of AIDS Malaria and genocides?

I'm not assigning worth to people, I'm simply stating that these problems exist there and we'd be better off without the problems.

No, but they've got deadly weather, primate population and tribal culture.

Quote from: Raist on April 30, 2010, 09:52:20 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on April 29, 2010, 04:06:54 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 29, 2010, 12:11:11 AM

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 28, 2010, 07:23:48 PM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:43:07 PM

Quote from: Jack1704 on April 27, 2010, 11:20:38 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:29:53 AM

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Can we pick australia, if it existed?

I was going to pick perhaps the continent that contributes the most to Malaira deaths, AIDS deaths, genocides, and all around crapping up of the world.

Whose fault is that though

I didn't assign fault, but I'm pretty sure the continent I'm hinting at has had all of those problems for thousands of years, so... weather, primate population, tribal religion and outlooks on life. In that order of course.

3 quarters of the US fits the bill by those standards too.

3/4 of the US is full of AIDS Malaria and genocides?

I'm not assigning worth to people, I'm simply stating that these problems exist there and we'd be better off without the problems.

No, but they've got deadly weather, primate population and tribal culture.

RACIST.

Quote from: Raist on April 30, 2010, 09:52:20 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on April 29, 2010, 04:06:54 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 29, 2010, 12:11:11 AM

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 28, 2010, 07:23:48 PM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:43:07 PM

Quote from: Jack1704 on April 27, 2010, 11:20:38 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 27, 2010, 09:29:53 AM

Well then we are in agreement.

(Except I see this as a scenario to help cure overpopulation that should be taken full advantage of. Dropping a few off on continents other than our own might not be a bad idea either)

Can we pick australia, if it existed?

I was going to pick perhaps the continent that contributes the most to Malaira deaths, AIDS deaths, genocides, and all around crapping up of the world.

Whose fault is that though

I didn't assign fault, but I'm pretty sure the continent I'm hinting at has had all of those problems for thousands of years, so... weather, primate population, tribal religion and outlooks on life. In that order of course.

3 quarters of the US fits the bill by those standards too.

3/4 of the US is full of AIDS Malaria and genocides?

I'm not assigning worth to people, I'm simply stating that these problems exist there and we'd be better off without the problems.

No, but they've got deadly weather, primate population and tribal culture.

So? I said those are the causes of the problems, not the problems. Obviously there are other factors not present here in america. Please debate logically, not pedantically.

I think it's kind of unfair to simply say "Argh Africa sucks, therefore nukes" because it's kind of like seeing a content child minding his own business, beating the shit out of him and crippling him for life, taking his ice cream away, and than yelling at him 10 years later or not contributing enough to society. The world needs to take responsibility at some point.

I think it's kind of unfair to simply say "Argh Africa sucks, therefore nukes" because it's kind of like seeing a content child minding his own business, beating the shit out of him and crippling him for life, taking his ice cream away, and than yelling at him 10 years later or not contributing enough to society. The world needs to take responsibility at some point.

No, it's more like seeing a spot in the world so unsuited for living in that it is impossible to sustain agriculture and disease is so rampant that it is affecting the rest of the world and saying "nuke it."

I didn't blame the poverty, the social situations, etc for what is wrong with it, I named the problems that are inherent in the environment and culture.

also, don't forget Defib, Pills, Medkits, Adrenaline, mollies, and pipebombs.

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 30, 2010, 10:08:52 PM

I think it's kind of unfair to simply say "Argh Africa sucks, therefore nukes" because it's kind of like seeing a content child minding his own business, beating the shit out of him and crippling him for life, taking his ice cream away, and than yelling at him 10 years later or not contributing enough to society. The world needs to take responsibility at some point.

No, it's more like seeing a spot in the world so unsuited for living in that it is impossible to sustain agriculture and disease is so rampant that it is affecting the rest of the world and saying "nuke it."

I didn't blame the poverty, the social situations, etc for what is wrong with it, I named the problems that are inherent in the environment and culture.

What about our culture that created nukes in the first place? The one that, in its constant search for ever cooler ways to annihilate ourselves, is probably going to end up creating the zombie-virus in the first place?

Lots of old threads popping up.

Must be that Zombie Virus: it's now a zombie COMPUTER virus.

Quote from: Raist on April 30, 2010, 10:28:49 PM

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 30, 2010, 10:08:52 PM

I think it's kind of unfair to simply say "Argh Africa sucks, therefore nukes" because it's kind of like seeing a content child minding his own business, beating the shit out of him and crippling him for life, taking his ice cream away, and than yelling at him 10 years later or not contributing enough to society. The world needs to take responsibility at some point.

No, it's more like seeing a spot in the world so unsuited for living in that it is impossible to sustain agriculture and disease is so rampant that it is affecting the rest of the world and saying "nuke it."

I didn't blame the poverty, the social situations, etc for what is wrong with it, I named the problems that are inherent in the environment and culture.

What about our culture that created nukes in the first place? The one that, in its constant search for ever cooler ways to annihilate ourselves, is probably going to end up creating the zombie-virus in the first place?

So with your logic africa's jungles are just going to spawn worse and worse viruses due to their nature and produce a jungle zombie virus.

Quote from: General Douchebag on July 16, 2010, 03:38:44 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 30, 2010, 10:28:49 PM

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 30, 2010, 10:08:52 PM

I think it's kind of unfair to simply say "Argh Africa sucks, therefore nukes" because it's kind of like seeing a content child minding his own business, beating the shit out of him and crippling him for life, taking his ice cream away, and than yelling at him 10 years later or not contributing enough to society. The world needs to take responsibility at some point.

No, it's more like seeing a spot in the world so unsuited for living in that it is impossible to sustain agriculture and disease is so rampant that it is affecting the rest of the world and saying "nuke it."

I didn't blame the poverty, the social situations, etc for what is wrong with it, I named the problems that are inherent in the environment and culture.

What about our culture that created nukes in the first place? The one that, in its constant search for ever cooler ways to annihilate ourselves, is probably going to end up creating the zombie-virus in the first place?

So with your logic africa's jungles are just going to spawn worse and worse viruses due to their nature and produce a jungle zombie virus.

...
*rereads post*
What?

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 30, 2010, 10:08:52 PM

I think it's kind of unfair to simply say "Argh Africa sucks, therefore nukes" because it's kind of like seeing a content child minding his own business, beating the shit out of him and crippling him for life, taking his ice cream away, and than yelling at him 10 years later or not contributing enough to society. The world needs to take responsibility at some point.

No, it's more like seeing a spot in the world so unsuited for living in that it is impossible to sustain agriculture and disease is so rampant that it is affecting the rest of the world and saying "nuke it."

I didn't blame the poverty, the social situations, etc for what is wrong with it, I named the problems that are inherent in the environment and culture.

So we should nuke an entire continent simply for those reasons? Why don't we nuke Australia than?

Quote from: Raist on April 30, 2010, 10:28:49 PM

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 30, 2010, 10:08:52 PM

I think it's kind of unfair to simply say "Argh Africa sucks, therefore nukes" because it's kind of like seeing a content child minding his own business, beating the shit out of him and crippling him for life, taking his ice cream away, and than yelling at him 10 years later or not contributing enough to society. The world needs to take responsibility at some point.

No, it's more like seeing a spot in the world so unsuited for living in that it is impossible to sustain agriculture and disease is so rampant that it is affecting the rest of the world and saying "nuke it."

I didn't blame the poverty, the social situations, etc for what is wrong with it, I named the problems that are inherent in the environment and culture.

So we should nuke an entire continent simply for those reasons? Why don't we nuke Australia than?

I've been suggesting this for ages!

It already doesn't exist.

Quote from: Raist on July 16, 2010, 09:02:28 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on July 16, 2010, 03:38:44 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 30, 2010, 10:28:49 PM

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 30, 2010, 10:08:52 PM

I think it's kind of unfair to simply say "Argh Africa sucks, therefore nukes" because it's kind of like seeing a content child minding his own business, beating the shit out of him and crippling him for life, taking his ice cream away, and than yelling at him 10 years later or not contributing enough to society. The world needs to take responsibility at some point.

No, it's more like seeing a spot in the world so unsuited for living in that it is impossible to sustain agriculture and disease is so rampant that it is affecting the rest of the world and saying "nuke it."

I didn't blame the poverty, the social situations, etc for what is wrong with it, I named the problems that are inherent in the environment and culture.

What about our culture that created nukes in the first place? The one that, in its constant search for ever cooler ways to annihilate ourselves, is probably going to end up creating the zombie-virus in the first place?

So with your logic africa's jungles are just going to spawn worse and worse viruses due to their nature and produce a jungle zombie virus.

...
*rereads post*
What?

We invented nukes, we are completely satisfied with them. We have no reason to make a virus that kills everyone and is uncontrollable yet you claim it is logical that if we make one thing that kills we will automatically progress to something else that you see as worse.

I used your same progression logic to assume that the african continent will continually produce worse and worse viruses, as it has been shown to do, until it produces the same zombie virus.

Quote from: General Douchebag on July 16, 2010, 09:43:57 AM

Quote from: Raist on July 16, 2010, 09:02:28 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on July 16, 2010, 03:38:44 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 30, 2010, 10:28:49 PM

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 30, 2010, 10:08:52 PM

I think it's kind of unfair to simply say "Argh Africa sucks, therefore nukes" because it's kind of like seeing a content child minding his own business, beating the shit out of him and crippling him for life, taking his ice cream away, and than yelling at him 10 years later or not contributing enough to society. The world needs to take responsibility at some point.

No, it's more like seeing a spot in the world so unsuited for living in that it is impossible to sustain agriculture and disease is so rampant that it is affecting the rest of the world and saying "nuke it."

I didn't blame the poverty, the social situations, etc for what is wrong with it, I named the problems that are inherent in the environment and culture.

What about our culture that created nukes in the first place? The one that, in its constant search for ever cooler ways to annihilate ourselves, is probably going to end up creating the zombie-virus in the first place?

So with your logic africa's jungles are just going to spawn worse and worse viruses due to their nature and produce a jungle zombie virus.

...
*rereads post*
What?

We invented nukes, we are completely satisfied with them. We have no reason to make a virus that kills everyone and is uncontrollable yet you claim it is logical that if we make one thing that kills we will automatically progress to something else that you see as worse.

I used your same progression logic to assume that the african continent will continually produce worse and worse viruses, as it has been shown to do, until it produces the same zombie virus.

Why would you assume the same progression? A virus that drives its host species to extinction is genetic suicide, it would take a completely retarded virus for that to happen, and the odds of it surviving this far would be astronomically slim, unless you expect it to evolve in a single generation from another entirely different disease and catch on from there. Your claim makes absolutely no evolutionary sense.

Quote from: Raist on July 17, 2010, 10:23:53 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on July 16, 2010, 09:43:57 AM

Quote from: Raist on July 16, 2010, 09:02:28 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on July 16, 2010, 03:38:44 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 30, 2010, 10:28:49 PM

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 30, 2010, 10:08:52 PM

I think it's kind of unfair to simply say "Argh Africa sucks, therefore nukes" because it's kind of like seeing a content child minding his own business, beating the shit out of him and crippling him for life, taking his ice cream away, and than yelling at him 10 years later or not contributing enough to society. The world needs to take responsibility at some point.

No, it's more like seeing a spot in the world so unsuited for living in that it is impossible to sustain agriculture and disease is so rampant that it is affecting the rest of the world and saying "nuke it."

I didn't blame the poverty, the social situations, etc for what is wrong with it, I named the problems that are inherent in the environment and culture.

What about our culture that created nukes in the first place? The one that, in its constant search for ever cooler ways to annihilate ourselves, is probably going to end up creating the zombie-virus in the first place?

So with your logic africa's jungles are just going to spawn worse and worse viruses due to their nature and produce a jungle zombie virus.

...
*rereads post*
What?

We invented nukes, we are completely satisfied with them. We have no reason to make a virus that kills everyone and is uncontrollable yet you claim it is logical that if we make one thing that kills we will automatically progress to something else that you see as worse.

I used your same progression logic to assume that the african continent will continually produce worse and worse viruses, as it has been shown to do, until it produces the same zombie virus.

Why would you assume the same progression? A virus that drives its host species to extinction is genetic suicide, it would take a completely retarded virus for that to happen, and the odds of it surviving this far would be astronomically slim, unless you expect it to evolve in a single generation from another entirely different disease and catch on from there. Your claim makes absolutely no evolutionary sense.

a) I was using your logic.

b) I was assuming an animal host where the virus behaves differently.

c) zombie viruses do not kill their host.

c) zombie viruses do not kill their host.

You really have no idea what your saying lol.

Quote from: General Douchebag on July 17, 2010, 12:20:00 PM

Quote from: Raist on July 17, 2010, 10:23:53 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on July 16, 2010, 09:43:57 AM

Quote from: Raist on July 16, 2010, 09:02:28 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on July 16, 2010, 03:38:44 AM

Quote from: Raist on April 30, 2010, 10:28:49 PM

Quote from: Areweonfiya on April 30, 2010, 10:08:52 PM

I think it's kind of unfair to simply say "Argh Africa sucks, therefore nukes" because it's kind of like seeing a content child minding his own business, beating the shit out of him and crippling him for life, taking his ice cream away, and than yelling at him 10 years later or not contributing enough to society. The world needs to take responsibility at some point.

No, it's more like seeing a spot in the world so unsuited for living in that it is impossible to sustain agriculture and disease is so rampant that it is affecting the rest of the world and saying "nuke it."

I didn't blame the poverty, the social situations, etc for what is wrong with it, I named the problems that are inherent in the environment and culture.

What about our culture that created nukes in the first place? The one that, in its constant search for ever cooler ways to annihilate ourselves, is probably going to end up creating the zombie-virus in the first place?

So with your logic africa's jungles are just going to spawn worse and worse viruses due to their nature and produce a jungle zombie virus.

...
*rereads post*
What?

We invented nukes, we are completely satisfied with them. We have no reason to make a virus that kills everyone and is uncontrollable yet you claim it is logical that if we make one thing that kills we will automatically progress to something else that you see as worse.

I used your same progression logic to assume that the african continent will continually produce worse and worse viruses, as it has been shown to do, until it produces the same zombie virus.

Why would you assume the same progression? A virus that drives its host species to extinction is genetic suicide, it would take a completely retarded virus for that to happen, and the odds of it surviving this far would be astronomically slim, unless you expect it to evolve in a single generation from another entirely different disease and catch on from there. Your claim makes absolutely no evolutionary sense.

a) I was using your logic.

b) I was assuming an animal host where the virus behaves differently.

c) zombie viruses do not kill their host.

a) You're not using my logic not any other, you're just copying what I say, and replacing people with nature. They don't work in the same way, it's stupid to try and make them and we both know that.

b) So you're looking for an entirely different virus then. In that case well done, there's loads of those in Africa. I'd like to point out, however, that there's hundreds of thousands of other viruses that also fit the bill of affecting animals in ways other than destroying their minds and driving them to cannibalism.

c) They do eventually.