Sign in or 

|
PedroAsani |
Latest page update: made by PedroAsani
, Dec 5 2009, 1:43 PM EST
(about this update
About This Update
No content added or deleted. - complete history) |
|
Keyword tags:
a priori
cognitive
communications
conclusion
events
evolution
function
future
government
industry
infection
instutional
line
logic
military
organised
organized
origin
peak
police
rage
reasoning
resistance
service
settlements
speculation
time
timescale
turning points
unfold
virus
More Info: links to this page
|
| Started By | Thread Subject | Replies | Last Post | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FrenchLegion | Believability of "Rage" virus (page: 1 2) | 39 | Jan 8 2011, 2:59 AM EST by RUPREPARED | ||
|
Thread started: Oct 27 2009, 10:25 AM EDT
Watch
I don't see how the Rage virus is any more realistic than other Z-viruses. There is no way a virus can take hold that fast without at least a minimal incubation period. Look at Morningstar, the virus that creates Sprinters and later Shamblers. The least amount of time it takes to take effect is 45 minutes, and that's if someone is traumatically introduced to the virus. Otherwise, it usually takes a week.
In fact, there is no zombie that is the most "realistic". Although I understand that living people "raging" infected by a virus is more believable than undead, nearly-indestructible zombies, the Rage virus is, to me, the LEAST unrealistic of any Z-virus. If you really think that a virus like Rage can happen that fully infects people within 5-30 seconds, than I can say that undead zombies can happen. |
|||||
| PatientZeroSurvivor | On credibility | 2 | Oct 29 2009, 8:05 PM EDT by spamanninen | ||
|
Thread started: Oct 29 2009, 12:42 PM EDT
Watch
This article isn't concerned with the believability of any virus. It assumes that a particular virus IS true, and HAS happened, and then describes the course of events that follow, using as much logic as possible and in other places giving reasons why.
Everyone has their own opinions about how realistic the scenarios are, but that's discussed in another article! ;) |
|||||
| Chicago_Ted | Mental compacity | 6 | Oct 26 2009, 5:04 AM EDT by Chicago_Ted | ||
|
Thread started: Oct 26 2009, 3:50 AM EDT
Watch
This article is very good. I think you make quite accurate judgments about the consequences of a large-scale outbreak.
However, jmc95's statement about us using only 10% of our brain capacity is mis-informed. It is a myth that we use a fraction of our brains. All parts of the brain are always being used (at variable levels) even during sleep. |
|||||