Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Zombies.... Can it really happen?


chubs2496

Recommended Posts

Zombies are very mainstream now. TV shows movies games and more. Media and people around the weird seem to be obsessed with zombies.

But could it really happen? Is it just some fantasy for some and horror for others? Could the world really have an outbreak of some sort that would turn humans into flesh eating monsters.

It may be childish to think about but there are a lot of people out there who take this serious and think it will happen and soon.

What's your take on it actually being a possibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There already exists cases in the world of parasites that take over a host.

Is it so far past the realm of reason that something like the rage virus from 28 days couldn't exist?

Animating dead tissue is indeed a stretch, but some variation could happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ask Louis CK, they already do!

 

I say no, unless it has to do with something along the lines of "28 Days Later."  Those are the most likely type of zombies.  It would have to be viral.  The biological possibilities are limited when you look at the energetic needs of the zombie.  Highly unlikely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Max Brooks said in an interview that to him, a 'zombie' attack could be anything that affects humanity as a whole.  He thought it would likely be lack of clean water first.

 

Which, coincidentally, was his #1 weapon to fight against zombies.  You don't have water, you can't run.  You can't run, you are meat.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • lol, that second part is quite literally one of the dumbest things ever. Having or not having guaranteed contracts has absolutely nothing to do with how much these billionaires have to pay.  Because there is a hard cap and a minimum cap spend requirement, and teams either use their cap or roll it over to use it all the next year, so the owners have to pay the same amount of money in the end no matter what. Having fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL would only hurt salary cap management, and thus would end up screwing over the team and its fan base when teams kiss on signings as they take up cap room that is needed to improve the roster. Look at the Browns with Watson, they gave him the fully guaranteed deal and all it’s doing is sucking up massive cap space now.  If they hadn’t done that, the owner would still be paying the same amount of money each year as that cap space would still be used elsewhere. If you want to argue for fully guaranteed contracts because the players deserve it, that’s an entirely different argument and a fair one to discuss.  But anyone against fully guaranteed deals isn’t doing it to argue for the billionaire owners.
    • Start posting in threads in the other forums instead of just creating threads. No one comes over here so you aren't starting conversations.  Get your ass up to 100 posts. It's not that hard. Don't create 100 posts. Contribute to conversations. 
    • Ryabkin could be the steal of the draft, he was a Top 10 pick heading into last season and had a rough year.  Lots of GMs passed on him because of that and his workouts. Pick has really high upside and Svech should be able to translate Rod tearing his arse a new one for making dumb plays since Svech has had several years of it.  🤣😂
×
×
  • Create New...