Resolved: the Zombie Apocalypse Will Happen

Thanks Con, Preface I would like to begin by offering a massive thanks to Con for instigating this awesome debate, I have very much enjoyed participating and am pleasantly surprised by Con's argumentation. Best of luck to her in voting! II. Death This, clearly is one of the main bones of contention, it is true that viruses cannot infect dead tissues, but I have maintained the notion that dead individual's do not necessarily have dead body tissue. A virus that selectively kills the conscious brain (induces brain death), and induces (primitive) control via the neural network is my main suggestion for a putative zombie outbreak. This is not the only way it could physically occur without falling back onto black magic, of course, but the method I have provided seems the most plausible, and therefore most likely. Pro's definition of death has come from a Yahoo! web page where as mine has come directly from the 'UNIFORM DETERMINATION OF DEATH ACT', which is the legally accepted criteria of death in 50 states of the US. I don't think Con's assertion should be taken seriously, as the criteria I gave doesn't appear to be disputed in medical circles.[1] If we had to accept that every single cell in the body must be dead in order to correctly qualify for a zombie then I will quickly concede that zombies are essentially impossible as I have suggested, and most certainly would require supernatural means of occurrence, which is beyond the scope of this scientific debate. I have already defended why it's logical to consider one dead once the brain dies, as all sense of 'you' or self is tied to the brain. You die when your brain does, which is what is supported by the statutes now in wide use throughout world. This angle has also pretty much undermined half of Con's objections, as Con's objections regarding decay and decomposition are largely irrelevant to this debate. Con's other objections regarding muscular dystrophy and trisomy 23 are also completely irrelevant, as both conditions do not influence whether or not the brain is alive, or even consciousness. Behavioural defects does not mean the person is dead, I agree, but I never made any such claim. III. Biology: Pro drops my points regarding the plausibility of such an infection being developable, and also drops my points on the evolutionary capabilities of such a viral outbreak. Therefore we can conclude as much that an evolvable viral outbreak, spreadable by biting is indeed very much possible in the (probably near) future. Going back to my point on evolution, viral strains that are better at transmission are going to be the ones that will quickly dominate the pandemic, and disfavorable effects, such as decomposition, sluggishness, and 'obviousness' will be bred out of the outbreak. We can expect a more stealthy, less physically disabling viral strain to emerge over the course of the pandemic, which is the opposite of what Con is arguing against. Con also doesn't address my points on zombie durability due to their lack of pain perception. Making them great candidates for attacking other humans, and the effects of pain suspension I have already evidences with the reference to Zulus. IV. Biting: This seems to be the other most important objection Con has raised, so I will spend a bit more time to address it. First much of Con's objection is made with the assumption of the zombies being decaying, decomposing walking beings, but I have already argued that this is not necessarily the case. Moreover symptoms need not arise immediately after infection, which is one of the problems with HIV/AIDS, the disease is carried for a period before the symptoms become significant. Admittedly in the case of zombification this will be much more abrupt and rapid, since it involves brain death, but in many cases of abrupt deadly diseases, there is a lag period for the infection to multiply before it's effects become obvious, even in rabies. Rabies has a 2-12 week incubation period before symptoms are obvious, by which time it's too late for the patient. Given a latent period, and the fact zombies are going to be prima facie indistinguishable from their uninfected counterparts until their mental abilities are tested, then there is ample opportunity for infected individuals to mingle/pass unnoticed by their uninfected counterparts. Much like how HIV & HCV does today. V. Societal Response As I have already demonstrated in round 1, any response to a zombie outbreak would require rapid, and powerful military/armed response in order to mitigate the outbreak. Con has suggested that many people carry arms in the states - ignoring the fact that arms are prohibited amongst civilians across much of the world, and the states might not be the place that the ones releasing the zombie outbreak would choose to stage their apocalypse. Remember from my round 1, the entire world is linked into a large infrastructure, with trade, internet, utilities, food etc all intimately interlinked. There is a reason why the US uses sanctions in order to derive political effect. Trade sanctions impacts the economy, and yes, the lives. A zombie outbreak, which would induce mass panic and hysteria would as I argued literally bring all trade and utilities to a halt. The effect would essentially set the world back 200 years. Borders would close, hospitals would close, civilians would starve and anarchy would result. One only needs to look as far as Somalia[2] and Albania[3] to see the effects of essentially, anarchy. .... In fact I find it very worrying how dismissive Con was of the economical and sociological implications of a zombie outbreak, these are real concerns not just for a zombie apocalypse, but also for nuclear wars[4], solar flares and boloidal impacts. Society, which is essentially a big house of cards, with progressive tiers and layers of infrastructure and technology which allow for us to thrive in such large populations, will readily collapse the moment a few cards are pulled from the bottom. VI. Concentration: The way a society responds is critical to how a zombie pandemic will play out, responses that concentrate humans into one place (defensively) will mitigate essentially all of Von's points regarding being able to catch their victims. This seems to be the most likely response however to a zombie outbreak, and places like hospitals, schools, etc which require concentration of humans are going to be counter-productive, it makes the problem worse! In a disorganised response you have free zombies reigning unchecked, hidden amongst the uninfected people that are scattering to safety, etc. obviously this type of response will fail as I argued, which Con has not addressed. VII. Conclusion: I have set the stage for societal anarchy, self destruction and a zombie apocalypse. Be prepared, and good luck. Vote Pro! VIII. References: [1] [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com... [2] http://www.hdcentre.org... [3] http://www.basicint.org... [4] http://atomicarchive.com... [5] http://todaysfacilitymanager.com...