I consider World War Z(the Book) to be a bible on how Zombies act. Those Zombies travel in herds numbering in the millions on the ocean floor and regularly walk up on land. I say no to Islands.Originally Posted by Animeniax
And yes, I am in the Army. I'm just expecting the worst at this point. A slow creeping escalation to fullscale war in the region.
A book from 2006 can't be the definitive word on how zombies behave. Looking at it from a physiological and sociological standpoint, herd-minded zombies who can run/swim is a preposterous concept. Even if they were single-mindedly pursuing prey on an island, they would stumble over each other and bottleneck in the trenches and crevasses in the ocean floor.
You're probably right though... US military action in Syria might lead to tension and escalation with Russia and other allies of the regime.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
>.> Prezzdent. Oh, u.
Take care of the various cities in the northeast that are slowly becoming Brazilian tier slums?
Nah. Let's blow shit up. Did we not fill our war quota this year or something?
America is going to be too fatigued to fight against the inevitable zombie invasion!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Last edited by Sapphire; Tue, 09-03-2013 at 11:59 PM.
"Leaving hell is not the same as entering it." - Tierce Japhrimel
Actually, the most defensible place against a Zombie invasion, at the moment, is Baghram Airfield in Afghanistan. It's big, has an airstrip to bring in supplies, sequestered in a mountain bowl for defense, and it has huge ass concrete barriers surrounding it. This doesn't even include the various military personnel, armored vehicles, and aircraft there.
Guys, zombies are fictional creatures, their characteristics change at the creator`s every whim, if you want to go for the "bible" of zombies, I`d say its probably Romero`s story.
You cannot hope to build a better world without improving the individuals. To that end each of us must work for his own improvement, and at the same time share a general responsibility for all humanity, our particular duty being to aid those to whom we think we can be most useful. -Marie Curie
Heartily concur. I think it is absurd that a man who wrote a cheesy (but fun, he's Mel Brook's son after all) book in 2003 is allowed to somehow co-opt the man who created and popularized the genre.
Why would you want to be in the depression of a bowl? You want to be on the top of a hill, or surrounded by largely open scrubland.
------
Re. Syria: It will be interesting to see what happens with the congressional vote when the majority of Americans that expressed an opinion one way or the other oppose any military action. Everyone in the US is tired of a decade of war that largely resulted in everyone in the region hating us more.
Plus, we're not that stupid. The American people were lied to once about weapons of mass destruction. "Trust us," isn't the same thing as proof. Fool us once, shame on us, fool us twice, well we can't be fooled again!
My bet is Congress approves it, but even on the extreme off chance they don't (2014 is an election year), the president is going to go anyway.
I don't think that we have to rely on any particular author's take on how zombies behave and move. Thinking about what constitutes a zombie, physiologically and biologically, we can determine what a zombie is capable of and how they act. But we definitely want to give credit to Romero, though even he admits that zombies change from movie to movie even in his works.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
If you go through sheer science, zombies shouldn`t be able to do anything they do though. I think going through the guy that popularized them is the best way to go, even if it has a few holes here and there.
You cannot hope to build a better world without improving the individuals. To that end each of us must work for his own improvement, and at the same time share a general responsibility for all humanity, our particular duty being to aid those to whom we think we can be most useful. -Marie Curie
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24902058
what. a. total. bullshit.
I've seen few different coverages, compared them together. and i can reach only one conclusion of that: total bullshit.
the march had to organize its own protection because it couldn't trust the police(last one, and the one two years ago were obliterated by provocation by either police or anarchist groups - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1r6dotpqGf0 example of undercover policeman attacking a passer-by, later confirmed to be 100% innocent, guess what the consequences were for the policemen... none).
Whole march was peaceful, ppl waving flags and all, singing patriotic songs and occasional flares/fireworks - the rainbow arch 's mini-park wasn't even a part of the march's route -and it was always burned/destroyed down when it was repaired, so blaming this on the march is kinda retarded. the march also got attacked from squatters building - someone was throwing rocks and bottles on them. Embassy incident was retarded, but well - it was small group of ppl, 10-15 ppl maximum from what i've seen.
Also - the Warsaw's city hall decided to delegalize the march when it was very close to the end, with police blocking the other routes than forward - therefore giving the police legal reason to attack it, and no real way for the march to comply to the delegalization.
even if you count the misbehaving ppl, the ones that 'attacked' the embassy, and provocators you'll totall them at 200-300 people tops.... march had 50 thousand people in it.
oh, did i mention that police could prevent the embassy incident by putting just few guys in front of it? yep they didn't even cover/protect the march's route. they waited for people to do some retarded stuff(probably some idiot anarchists) and they did nothing to prevent that.
about guys wearing masks - well, it is legal.
Number of works of fiction that made me shed at least one tear: 3Thou seeketh soul power, dost thou not?TOX: 33524385841A92B08787EEBEBA2DB51ED293C4F15A2E292F3F C92165E82388281433A77EA8FE
What do you expect from a country that follows in the steps of New Jersey's finest?
WarsawShore.jpg
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
China to relax one child per couple policy
I think this is a bad idea. It's already crowded, over-populated, and polluted in mainland China... adding more people will just make the situation worse.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
worse for Chinese, not china's government.
It's harder to govern people in over-crowded and polluted conditions. As the population grows and resources like land and jobs get ever more scarce, there will be more discontent leading to rebellion and then revolution. Even though they are the source of the discontent, people lash out at those they can hold responsible (like the government).
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
You know what's a lot harder to govern? A country where there is a substantial disparity between the number of men and women in an age group.
Specifically due to the socio-economic problems that result. The back room abortions or outright abandonment of girls, the inherent disgruntlement that happens when a noticeable portion of their population is unable to find a wife and the ensuing problems that result from that.
Not to mention this is nothing new. The rural areas have been allowing more than one child for a long time (especially if the first is a daughter), and Shanghai has been doing it for at least a decade. It's even pretty normal to allow two children if both of the parents were only children.
It would probably help if you didn't get your news from CNN, the shittiest of all news networks. The real question is China's policy change A Good Thing or a Bad Thing?
Most other news sites carrying this story mention the things I posted above.
You got me there. Not sure why it struck me as important when I read it, since I've talked to Chinese in China and there are a lot of special clauses to the one child rule, so this isn't really that big a development. I think I posted it just so I could comment on overpopulation and crowding.
As far as citing CNN, I've been looking for a different news site to use instead (because CNN is pretty ridiculous) but MSNBC and FoxNews are definitely not candidates. I visited Al Jazeera America but their stories are more global and less focused on the US than what I'm looking for. Same problem with BBC. Any suggestions? I might try HuffPo or NPR if they have sites, but they have too liberal a cant for my tastes.
edit: it turns out it's important enough that it's also a major headline on AJA, NPR, and HuffPo, with the HuffPo article saying it would allow 10 million couples to have a second child.
Last edited by Animeniax; Fri, 11-15-2013 at 04:55 PM.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
You know I just realized, considering how obsolete inheritance laws are why were the Chinese killing their daughters anyway?
Probably a social pride/family name thing... if you can only have one child, better to be a boy so he can carry on the family name, patriarchal society kind of thing.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
This will probably help you Carnage:
Gender Equality in China. Most of the changes are very recent, and discrimination is rampant the more rural you go.
Though it isn't all bad, modern Chinese weddings.
The biggest thing that strikes out for me as a problem with China's previous policy is the sudden reduction in the working population and its economic backlashes when the current birthing generation retires. It becomes an artificially created aging population.
Last edited by Buffalobiian; Fri, 11-15-2013 at 10:02 PM.
If it's not Isuzu-chan Mii~
You know everyone brings this up as a problem, especially for Japan which is incredibly low birth rates. In the end this will be a greater positive than con, because technology will be taking away many jobs and it will be much easier to have a smaller population to support handing out jobs rather than a large one without resorting to socialism.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
