Friday, November 4, 2011

Dissecting the Plausibility of a Zombie Apocalypse

Hey guys! We're back from our unintentional two week hiatus! Aren't you excited? I know I am. Today I'm going to be talking about the remarkable implausibility of a zombie apocalypse. And I'm not talking about the presence of zombies. Assuming THAT were possible, I still have serious issues with things like The Walking Dead, or Zombieland. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy both of those things (despite the continued impressive stupidity of TWD, expertly chronicled by Gabe at Videogum - a must read for any TWD fan). My problem with these shows and movies is the spread of the zombie epidemic. All of America gets overrun by slow-moving, essentially brainless undead people? I don't fucking think so.
You know what would defeat these guys?
THIS.
That's right, a muthafuckin' TANK, bitches. And it doesn't stop there. Soldiers in Kevlar. Snipers. Helicopters. MISSILES. We spend trillions of dollars on our military. They could handle an invasion of slow-moving targets that don't understand the concept of taking cover. Even if it spread fast, I am confident we would be able to contain it. When discussing this with resident zombie expert Emerson, he brought up a couple of counterpoints. Let's dissect them one at a time.

People would be hesitant to simply kill other people - especially loved ones - even if they were zombies. This is an interesting point, one TWD addresses, though I'm not sure I agree. While the concept of shooting a friend or loved one in the head is indeed a difficult one with which to come to grips, I think that once ZOMBIES start happening, convention goes out the window. I don't own a gun, but if I did, and out of nowhere my roommate starting legitimately trying to eat my brains, I'd like to think I would have it in me to cap his ass. I know he'd shoot me. And deep down, that's comforting. Fully accepting the reality that a zombie outbreak is upon us is the most difficult part, but once we get there, I have no doubt that we would be able to make the tough decisions regarding the destruction of our infected brethren. Which brings me to Emerson's next point...

Congress would be reluctant to nuke large infected areas because there would still be some uninfected people there. Bull. Fucking. Shit. Congress has been royally shafting most of America for years already over lower taxes for rich people. Do you really think they would hesitate to nuke an overrun Dallas simply because there might still be a few thousand survivors left? Not a chance. Sorry Texas. You had a good run. But if turning you into a (more) barren wasteland is what it takes to save the country, well, we're down to 49 states. If you are betting on politicians to start getting moral once zombies show up, you're going to lose that bet.

It spread due to multiple simultaneous outbreaks throughout the land. Well, this is never specified, but it certainly makes things trickier. There is no way in hell the military would not be able to handle a singular outbreak, even if it were quite large. But hundreds, even thousands of simultaneous outbreaks in different parts of the country? That would cloud things. This, however, strikes me as impossible, even from a zombie apocalypse standpoint. It always seems to start with one pissed off monkey, or one crazy corpse, or something like that. How could a spontaneous zombie outbreak occur all over? Too many people eating the McRib? Well maybe, with those ingredients. Yikes. But even then, not buying it. People have been eating the McRib for years, and no zombies. And even if it did occur that way, they would never infiltrate military bases, or houses with, you know, WALLS. These zombies can barely get up steps. Critical thinking is not a strong suit. Even if multiple outbreaks did occur at once, and it spread fast, and it affected a LOT of people, tanks, guns and missiles would eventually win.

While I don't have much faith in our government, especially when it comes to how they deploy the military, if zombies started springing up, I think they would get the job done. Let's just hope it never comes to that.

7 comments:

  1. This is so preposterous. You cannot think the military will send a NUCLEAR WEAPON off in a major US city just like that, no matter what was happening there. Even if Dallas was 90% zombies, that would still leave over 100,000 civilians living there. There is no shot that the military, as it currently operates could ever do something like that. And that is the point. Things have to get so catastrophically bad before you can use something like nuclear weapons that by the time it gets to that point it is already too late.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dallas being 90% zombies is bad enough to use nukes, dude. Or at least legit missiles/bombs. That 10% is doomed anyway. We're talking zombies here. Convention goes out the window.

    ReplyDelete
  3. My point is that you'd have to wait until 90% for it to even be considered, and once things get to 90% infected, IT IS TOO FUCKING LATE.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Also, The Walking Dead is fucking horrible.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don;t think it would ever get that far. Everyone in Dallas has like 9 guns. And yes, TWD is pretty dumb. Watchable, but not good.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I totally agree about military eventually getting things under control. I really really doubt that slow-moving stupid undead could counter tanks, attack helos, even a simple soldier with an M4. The one thing I don't agree with is the nukes part. Nuclear weapons would probably not be used at all. conventional hardware would reign supreme and eventually win the battle.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I prefer thinking about the plasuibility of a virus that leads alive people to go into a murderous rage, much like a running zombie. Fearless and immune to the feeling of pain they would pose a slightly higher threat than walking stiffs.

    As for the government nuking an area. They would only if they couldn't just control the issue with guns. Also, you talk about Texas, probably one of the most gun infested places in the world. Zombies would be cut down there as every hillbilly has a field day indiscriminantly shooting everything they see, comparing counts with their fellow brethren.

    To the question of how it could spread? Infection getting into local water supply or indeed any kind of food or water, rats or other wildlife get infected, float through the sewer system or wander through vast forests, dumped out to sea or "killed" by other wildlife, end up wherever over time and get licked by or sniffed by another animals, maybe flies carry the disease after laying eggs in the corpses. Humans wouldn't be the only carriers. You don't have to be infected to aid the spread.

    ReplyDelete