Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
PlayStation

The Walking Dead Thread

3,642 posts in this topic

I don't understand the logic of these people the more people u have the better chance you have to survive. Also the zombies are decaying but it stops at a certain point, I was thinking about this when the one zombie rips his hand because its decaying but somehow their brains dont turn to mush.

It also has to do with the fact that the zombies can't feel pain.

Thus 'it' has the strength and want to rip its hand off without the consequences of the pain from doing so.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand the logic of these people the more people u have the better chance you have to survive. Also the zombies are decaying but it stops at a certain point, I was thinking about this when the one zombie rips his hand because its decaying but somehow their brains dont turn to mush.

it's harder to control a larger group, especially with people who already have tried to kill you.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It also has to do with the fact that the zombies can't feel pain.

Thus 'it' has the strength and want to rip its hand off without the consequences of the pain from doing so.

there is no way i could rip your arm off, especially with 1 hand. unless you were rotting away, and if one piece of you was rotting off all of you would be including your brain, which is the thing that keeps them alive.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found it funny how those people locked up are all nicely shaven and such:P

Great episode!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why Carol is "practicing" on a zombie. there is NO way a decomposing uterus is a valid analogue for a c-section surgery.

Was wondering the exact same thing. Also, the zombie's uterus would not be as stretched and pushed outwards like a pregnant woman's. Although, I guess you work with what you got? Maybe it's more just a psychological thing, so that she feels more in control in what she has to do?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was wondering the exact same thing. Also, the zombie's uterus would not be as stretched and pushed outwards like a pregnant woman's. Although, I guess you work with what you got? Maybe it's more just a psychological thing, so that she feels more in control in what she has to do?

she could always shove something up there to try to make it more like a baby inside there, but she clearly didn't. and it probably wouldn't hold up without ripping anyway.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, what's with the spoiler thing? If someone does not want to know what's going on in the series. DO NOT CLICK ON THE DAMN THREAD!!!!!!!

How taxing is it for you to click on a spoiler tag?All I can picture is someone looking like Cartman playing WoW.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is a typical internet mentality, you'd just have no problem at all killing other people in cold blood then go make a sandwich. Trained soldiers who are prepared for killing can end up traumatized by having to kill people, yet you think it would be easy peasy.

Many people, put into the situation that Rick and the others are in, wouldn't be able to adjust and do those things to survive. Cutthroat killers would have no problem of course. Look back at the Katrina disaster and within a few days you had a small percentage of scum, killing others, looting anything and everything, and shooting at rescuers. Most of the people did not adopt that mentality.

Yes you're correct, most people will not adopt a survival at all costs philosophy during a zombie apocalypse. They are called zombies.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand the logic of these people the more people u have the better chance you have to survive. Also the zombies are decaying but it stops at a certain point, I was thinking about this when the one zombie rips his hand because its decaying but somehow their brains dont turn to mush.

People require food. Something they do not have enough of to share

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you're correct, most people will not adopt a survival at all costs philosophy during a zombie apocalypse. They are called zombies.

People in serious disasters don't all become rambo. Katrina was a very eye opening situation where, of the people that stayed in the city, a small percentage became entirely predatory (even attacking rescuers) while the majority were sheep to be herded, abused, and killed... The general populace, placed in an extreme and unfamiliar situation won't all convert into cold blooded killers and survival experts, most of them will be victims - whether that means eaten by zombies or abused/killed by killers, it's the far more realistic scenario.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People in serious disasters don't all become rambo. Katrina was a very eye opening situation where, of the people that stayed in the city, a small percentage became entirely predatory (even attacking rescuers) while the majority were sheep to be herded, abused, and killed... The general populace, placed in an extreme and unfamiliar situation won't all convert into cold blooded killers and survival experts, most of them will be victims - whether that means eaten by zombies or abused/killed by killers, it's the far more realistic scenario.

Not to discount Katrina, but there is a difference between that type of disaster and a zombie apocolypse. A full 'end of the world' situation will result in more people becoming ruthless as there would be no hope otherwise.

As you said though - either people become ruthless or will be killed off. So by you saying it's a far more realistic situation, is contradicting, as Rick is alive BECAUSE he has turned into this and is protecting his herd, and there is a reason why the other people have been killed off.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to discount Katrina, but there is a difference between that type of disaster and a zombie apocolypse. A full 'end of the world' situation will result in more people becoming ruthless as there would be no hope otherwise.

As you said though - either people become ruthless or will be killed off. So by you saying it's a far more realistic situation, is contradicting, as Rick is alive BECAUSE he has turned into this and is protecting his herd, and there is a reason why the other people have been killed off.

You can tell that to the people who were starving and being victimized during Katrina that - for them it was an end of the world situation.

You're missing the original point which was every internet superstar automatically decrees that he would just turn into a stone cold killer, killing people in cold blood, no problem. That isn't the case. If the person is already a violent criminal then yes, if the person is trained to kill when needed (military or police) then yes, but every plain old guy sitting at his computer screen, no.

Edited by Jester@wraiths.ca
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can tell that to the people who were starving and being victimized during Katrina that - for them it was an end of the world situation.

:picard:

As I already said - I am not discounting what happened with Katrina. BUT it was not the end of the world, there was people trying to help them, save them, feed them, and get the out of the 'danger' zone.

How this differs from a zombie apocolypse is that THERE IS no way to get that type of help or support AS NO ONE ELSE IS ALIVE.

You're missing the original point which was every internet superstar automatically decrees that he would just turn into a stone cold killer, killing people in cold blood, no problem. That isn't the case. If the person is already a violent criminal then yes, if the person is trained to kill when needed (military or police) then yes, but every plain old guy sitting at his computer screen, no.

You are correct.

But you are also missing the point - that because most people wouldn't have the mentality, they would be dead. So given that, the majority of people alive WOULD have that cutthroat mentality, as that is the ONLY way to survive.

Which is WHAT I was arguing - that there would be MORE people (per capita) like this due to the situation.

I am not even going to touch the fact that you are arguing, that just because someone is a cop or military trained that they are trained to kill would make it easier to kill people.

Edited by Squeak
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I already said - I am not discounting what happened with Katrina. BUT it was not the end of the world, there was people trying to help them, save them, feed them, and get the out of the 'danger' zone.

I am not even going to touch the fact that you are arguing, that just because someone is a cop or military trained that they are trained to kill would make it easier to kill people.

People were shooting at the rescuers that came to help people in Katrina...

Police officers and military personnel are more prepared for the possibility of having to take another human being's life than a typical civilian, it doesn't mean it's easy but it does make them more prepared than the internet warriors are.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Killing zombies I'd have no problem with, killing other survivors to protect my group/family would definitely be harder to do. I'd still do it, because family comes first, but I'd certainly be scarred/upset by it, though If I had been through as much as rick had to that point, it probably would be a lot easier.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People were shooting at the rescuers that came to help people in Katrina...

Police officers and military personnel are more prepared for the possibility of having to take another human being's life than a typical civilian, it doesn't mean it's easy but it does make them more prepared than the internet warriors are.

You are using one specific natural disaster, and one specific group of individuals, to generalize all people.

Don't recall hearing anything about that in Haiti or Japan.

(FYI - I am not arguing your point against 'internet' warriors - as I agree with you there)

Edited by Squeak
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are using one specific natural disaster, and one specific group of individuals, to generalize all people.

Don't recall hearing anything about that in Haiti or Japan.

Haiti the widespread problem is violence and rape of women and girls...

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/18/world/americas/cnnheroes-haiti-rape/index.html

And while the Japanese culture does seem to be more respectful in general, they too have had sexual attacks against women/girls following local disasters

The few ruthless people do what they want while the majority would fall into the victim category.

Then we have the Congo where 1100 women are raped daily, and who knows how many are killed. That may as well be a post apocalyptic scenario, people are being killed just trying to harvest their crops. Huge numbers of victims dominated by the smaller numbers of cold blooded attackers being a daily event.

It is a hard switch to flip for most people, even when their life is on the line, and it's fight or flight, not everyone can go in the "fight" direction.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haiti the widespread problem is violence and rape of women and girls...

http://www.cnn.com/2...rape/index.html

And while the Japanese culture does seem to be more respectful in general, they too have had sexual attacks against women/girls following local disasters

The few ruthless people do what they want while the majority would fall into the victim category.

Then we have the Congo where 1100 women are raped daily, and who knows how many are killed. That may as well be a post apocalyptic scenario, people are being killed just trying to harvest their crops. Huge numbers of victims dominated by the smaller numbers of cold blooded attackers being a daily event.

It is a hard switch to flip for most people, even when their life is on the line, and it's fight or flight, not everyone can go in the "fight" direction.

I meant specifically shooting at the 'rescuers' - but again you used a generalization to categorize people. (which is exactly what I set-you-up to do, and you did)

This is argument is off topic.

Back to the Walking Dead.

Edited by Squeak
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.