Goings on in Oz (now with 100% more Zombie Armageddon!)

By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics and access other forums reserved for members. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today by clicking here.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:05 am

I thought Craig was dead Very Happy

but he is still posting. I think that means he is a zombie now

Thanks for starting a zombie armageddon.

Hey Craig... armagetoverit already.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:37 am

Irish,hi!

We are on topic. Basic science (grade 7) taught me that water/ice expands upon freezing. Hence the formation of potholes in our roadways. It actually takes up less space when liquid. I think you chided me last time I used wkikpedia as source material during a previous discussion. Good point as it can be arbitrarily edited by just a about anyone.

As for collecting co2 data from fossilized remains...we do know carbon 14 data is not reliable after a certain time frame, right? That being established as a criteria, normal co2 has a shorter life span than it's radioactive counterpart thus making it's detection in fossil material (primarilysediments deposited as organic material decays) barely plausible and subject to skeptcism.

@ Yastreb - martyrdom? It was a jibe at a comment made earlier relating science to religion.

How is our intrepid farmer? News blockade and all. I hope he starts eating again and looks to more viable solutions than the apparently fruitless path he is currently on.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:25 am

I want 100% zombie armageddon, NN knows, it's already happening where he lives. Wink

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:03 am

I came here for the zombie apocalypse.
i'm also already prepared for when it happens. With a zombie plan and testing my friends and family members on how high they score on their survival rate. Its just to identify the difference between bait and the people around me.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:29 am

If Milla Jovovich comes to rescue me, a zombie armageddon would be worth it.

@Ima - I believe the term Craig used was he won't have "pie" on his face again. However if he goes back on his word just to get his two cents in, then he will have egg on his face.

Craig - I still don't understand why you think you are so special that you feel you can ask and fully expect a thread you don't like to get locked. I know, I know, someone stated an opinion as fact. What nerve. Do you remember when you stated as fact that animals are incapable of feeling emotions? Same thing, and didn't you once mention to me that you are all about consistency.

If you read a thread that ruffles your feathers, just let it go. Just like I did when you said that silliness about animals.

What worries me, is when the thread wasn't locked like you demanded, you made a post specifically to try to force the thread to get locked. This is the same as trolling in my book. Keep it up and you may end up being dealt with as a troll.

So to recap, if you cannot control yourself, just ignore the threads you don't like (like you promised in the past). Think of the positive it will create for you as you will have that much more free time to play on your flight simulator and prepare for the day when there is no more room in hell and the dead walk the earth. There is a series of good survival books explained HERE

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:49 am

It's not difficult to empathise with Craig.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:07 am

The planet will do what it likes, whatever the bloody internet thinks about it. It always has, always will. To quote Scottie in Star Trek, 'You cannae change the laws of physics'.

You also can't argue with a thermometer. Global average temperatures have risen steeply. Fact. It is snowing here, but that is utterly irrelavent. Its probably also stupidly hot somewhere it shouldn't be.

Whether we can do a damn thing about it I seriously doubt. The planet will do what it pleases whether I buy a Prius or not. What bugs me is that because money and jobs are involved, the fact that building a Prius will use infinitely more energy than my old gas guzzler will ever use, seems to be completely ignored.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:10 am

Roycropper wrote:

the fact that building a Prius will use infinitely more energy than my old gas guzzler will ever use, seems to be completely ignored.

Hybrids will be redundant come the Zombie Armageddon anyway. I mean, your basic undead cannibal prefers to shuffle around on foot in search of brains rather than use a motor vehicle.

Be warned though - they are getting smarter and are using some technology to their advantage as this clever trap illustrates.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:54 am

Badgerbait wrote:

Basic science (grade 7) taught me that water/ice expands upon freezing

the problem with basic science is that it is very basic Wink

water is at its densest at 4degrees, and it expands when it gets cooler or warmer than that.
try [this] or hundreds of other sites if you don't trust wikipedia

Quote:

As for collecting co2 data from fossilized remains...we do know carbon 14 data is not reliable after a certain time frame, right?

yes, carbon 14 dating is not very reliable beyond 50,000 years, but i'm not sure why you mentioned it
- i don't think it is relevant to this discussion, unless i'm missing your point.
for dating ice cores, oxygen isotopes can be used, looking at the ratios of H2(16O) and H2(18O) [there are several other methods].
for dating materials (fx, rocks, volcanic ash in ice cores, etc) over geological time (millions or billions of years),
geologists can use other radioactive isotopes, such as 235-U, 238-U, 87-Rb, 40-K and many many others.

@roycropper - you are absolutely right.
should we spend the money on fixing the problem or dealing with the consequences?
that's the serious question, in my opinion.

@all mods - thanks for your interventions on this thread Thumbs up

the farmer is up a gum tree, if he won't engage in dialogue with anyone.
but it may be possible to float him off his platform, if we wait long enough.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 11:02 am

The stable door was left unbolted, the horse has had his brains eaten by a zombie already, so what can you do? Damn, I needed that horse to pull my Jag around when the petrol runs out.

Seriously, the 'deniers' need to talk to an alpine climber. They have been watching the glaciers slowly pack up and bugger off back up the mountainsides for years. Glaciers are clearly reading the wrong newspapers, it's supposed to be a hoax.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 11:03 am

@Slightlyoutofit

i'll see your personal adds and raise you a zombie dating service...
And add that i'm already stockpiling.
http://mingle2.com/zombieharmony/free-dating-sites

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 11:55 am

I have raised the Zombie Armageddon thresh-hold of this thread from 20 to 40% to reflect the increase in Zombie Armageddon related material.

Baiting Guru Joined: 04 Jan 2006 Posts: 3193

@Badgerbait, If you don't believe that water expands when heated, why don't you carry out an experiment? It seems the sort of thing you could do in the kitchen. Also note that the floating Artic ice does not affect the sea levels whatever it does. (A floating body displaces its own mass of water.) The ice that matters is that on land, eg Greenland and Antartica, where it isn't in the sea until it melts.

I'm a believer... mostly. Having read up yesterday I'm not so sure - a few of the points the unbelievers make do (IMHO) need explaining, while the fanatic hockey stick brigade do seem to have gone too far in "proving" their point. It seems to me that both camps are using bad science to win over those who cannot tell the difference, maybe as a reaction to the BSE fiasco when proper scientific words produced political inaction.

Someone here said "You either believe or you don't." In a scientific discussion, that frankly scares me to death. Science, good or bad, can not be carried out as a jihad.

So in the interests of a polite and balanced discussion, is it true that the CO2 levels trail the temperature curve?

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:16 pm

I'm sorry. But before that question is addressed, I believe mine must be answered first:

During the Zombie Armageddon, is it ethical to "dispatch" an infected family member or should one get a friend to do it? Is it morally acceptable to expect a friend to decapitate one's own mother or should one undertake that responsibility one's self?

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:23 pm

I've thought this one through a lot. You cannot ask a friend, but if you feel uncomfortable a stranger is perfectly suitable. However, I would feel better knowing if I had to axe my own mother, I would do it with the love and care only her child could give.

This does raise another ethical zombie related argument, how does one handle the awkward situation of picking up a girl/guy the night before and waking up with a zombie. What do you say right before you bury the lamp in his/her cerebellum?

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:28 pm

I think the rules for HackMaster* state it most succinctly; "When in doubt, HACK!"

*See Knights of the Dinner Table for clarification.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:40 pm

Global Warming To Increase Zombie Attacks!

Quote:

A new study by scientists has suggested that zombie attacks might increase if the current projections of global warming are realized. “If the earth gets warmer, it means longer springs, summers, and falls, and shorter winters,” said John Carpenter-Romero, Ph.D., a zombie-ologist who co-authored the study. “And shorter winters means more time for the undead to prey on the populace.”

Quote:

The good news is that zombies have a significantly lower carbon footprint than living humans. For example, if Al Gore became Zombie Al Gore his utility usage and air travel would go from several hundred tonnes of carbon per year to zero tonnes of carbon per year. . . .

Generalize these figures across the population and we can see an inverse relationship between zombie attacks and carbon emissions leading in time to a reduction or reversal of warming trends and consequently of favorable zombie habitat. A new stable state might be brought about within a matter of decades provided zombie outbreaks can be encouraged in heavy emitting states including mainland China.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:54 pm

@ NN
"no strings attached".
I don't know , your getting pretty close to the description of a perfect one night stand.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:58 pm

thud419 wrote:

So in the interests of a polite and balanced discussion, is it true that the CO2 levels trail the temperature curve?

yes, that's correct for recent ice ages, and it's discussed in the article i've referenced a couple of times so far Wink

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/after88.htm#L_1988

temperature affects the ability of the oceans to absorb co2, and the ability of permafrost to temporarily lock away co2 and methane.
so a rise in temperature (eg, initiated by a milancovitch cycle) will cause a rise in co2, and a rise in co2 will cause a further rise in temperature.
this feedback process which will continue until all the locked-up co2/methane has been released,
after which other processes (fx, subduction, coal/peat formation, chalk/limestone deposition) start to bring co2 levels down again,
causing temperatures to decline again.

what is different in modern times is that humankind has the ability to release vastly more carbon into the biosphere than any natural process could ever do,
while at the same time we are reducing the biosphere's ability to absorb excess co2, by chopping down forests, etc.

about the situation with the farmer on his platform, i read that he owned the land since 1980,
and the laws restricting vegetation clearance were introduced in 1995 [or earlier] along with provisions for compensating those affected,
so it seems that the latest dispute is not about some recent action by the australian government.
i suspect that anyone who refuses to budge unless the prime minister visits him personally may be slightly unhinged.
he's been in court 200+ times, so it seems he is well known to the authorities.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:37 pm

I am not afraid!

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:37 pm

r2d2 wrote:

it's discussed in the article i've referenced a couple of times so far Wink

And which nobody has read.

Because this:

is more awesome than this:

Not only that, but it's probably a more pressing matter. For when the Dead roam the Earth, there won't be time for niceties such as batheing using only tofu shower salts, manually stimulating gay Pandas or working out wether brown bottles can go into the green bottle bin at the local bottle bank. No. It will be every man for himself.
Sounds harsh but that's the way it's gotta be. If we're being chased by a hoarde of zombies during the Armageddon, I'm even prepared to trip up one of my fellow mods so I gain that extra 10 yards.

Which brings me to my next question:

Zombie Speed: Dawn of the Dead the Original or Dawn of the Dead the Remake?

Baiting Guru Joined: 19 Apr 2007 Posts: 3123

@Thud - That would be me, and that would be correct. The argument had boiled down to a case of belief or not, as we all know that with our conflicting scientific evidence (I again point here: http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html), we will get nowhere. It's down to interpretation of evidence, as there is ample evidence for both sides of the argument.

So it comes down to your judgement. Which evidence has swayed you the most? It's all accurate.

Baiting Guru Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 7103 Location: Yes

Based on my returning to my favorite avatar, I think the zombie quotient has been raised even further --- I say at least 44%.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:56 pm

You ask all the right questions slightly.

R2, this thread started out as a conspiracy theory on some media black-out about a farmer up a pole, while incorrect, clouded the original issue. Somehow we've moved to global warming and is now discussing the dangers, the ethical dilemmas and self-preservation when the zombie armageddon begins.

This thread could save your life.

I prefer the zombie amble of old. You can get away easier, but it's the sheer number -vs- bullets issue. The zombie/rage virus of '28 days later' scares the crap out of me, but they only lasted 28 days and then it's over.

Look I'm going with shuffle and slow, but greater numbers.

Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 2:02 pm

@Slightlyoutofit
That depends entirely on how these zombies came to be.

Now if we are talking fully blown walking dead , i would be able to believe a slow speed with a high resistance against any form of injury. This would all be the result of a necromancing virus (resident evil) or the resurrection. (Its in the bible...).

Of course since the whole topic seems to be that CO² will be the cause of zombies , it will react more like an airborne virus. (alà Black sheep or Doom). These zombies tend to be alot more intelligent , vicous and fast.

Also because a slow zombie apocalypse tends to be boring and only works in a movie.
@ NN
I personally can't believe in a zombieapocalypse where you can outwalk a zombie. Especially if the shuffle so slowly but suddenly find enough energy to smash in windows... If you can't even walk at a decent pace , i'll sleep in a locked room. You shouldn't be able to get the momentum needed to smash in the door.

This of course leads to a new question. Alot of people tend to believe that zombies will freeze stiff on Antartica due to no body heat. They claim that this would therefor would be the best place to hold out against a zombie apocalypse.
What is you place you will hole up when the apocalypse comes and why ?
Someone else go first. I'm not telling anybody mine in case you all turn into a zombie and tell the others.

Goings on in Oz (now with 100% more Zombie Armageddon!)	View next topic View previous topic