Humans would survive the typical ( slow zombie ) zombie apocalypse.

Hello,I would like to clarify with everyone that while yes zombies do not exits as my opponent has mentioned we are talking about a situation in which such a virus was made to exist ( you can be imaginative as to how that happened ). There is good reason that this is located in the Entertainment section. This is merely a debate in which we investigate real world defences and fiction zombie viruses.1. True, warlords and those like them are very much criminal and would be unlikely to directly assist the government forces. But as you said they would be in it for themselves. This means they would still fight and defend " their territory " ( or at least land the believe is theirs ). Many third world towns and villages are patroled and even used as bases by armed militias and rebel forces who are likely to act as an immediate response to an outbreak. most of these militants answer to phycopaths who would have them tortured and killed for abandoning territory. This means that the fear found there would ultimately cancel out the fear of zombies. Also don't rule out cooperation. In WW2 the communist rebels in China actually cooperated with government troops to fight of the Japanese. When people are desperate they will do anything to save themselves. Even work with those they hate. 2. I encourage everyone to look for further information on these subjects. Even typing something as simple as " London police armed response " will shoe you that the country is well capable of heavily arming even standard street cops on a moments notice if an encounter turns lethal. There are few nations in which their is no immediate armed response and the majority of these have a quick armed response that follows by around 5 minutes. The probability of patient 0 being located in this area is very low. Thank you for stating the definition of apocalypse. However I stated quit clearly the origins of a typical apocalypse in the first round and this means that before becoming a full blown apocalypse it must start with 1 infected patient and spread from person to person. It is most probable that it would start in a location with some form of armed response due to the population and transportation in and out. There is even a chance that it could ( rather typically ) begin in a government reserch facility. In that case ( unlike in the movies ) governments would have security forces on hand immediately. While yes it would be difficult ( not impossible ) to stop the apocalypse in its full blown state, it would not be that difficult for most countries to crush the outbreak before it even begin. The apocalypse dosent even need to reach that point for us to survive it. To continue I will restate many arguments that I have made that were not adressed so that everyone reading can see what is still keeping us alive. 3. Modern Militaries The Military responses are likely to end an apocalypse if millions are infected. Simply flying helicopters with mounted gunners on the side over cities would do the trick. The zombies can't even fight back against an airforce. Napalm strikes would reduce them to dust ( as we see when the zombies in the pits in " the walking dead " are burnt ). No zombie is going to destroy a tank in a confrontation so it is quite likely that a large swarm of APC's could easily sweep up and down roads and highways killing thousands of infected.4. CDC and WHO They are still a factor and could produce a successful vaccine or even find something else ( as we see in World War Z when the WHO produces a camouflage that causes humans to be invisible to the zombies ). If militaries and WHO were successfully combating the World War Z virus ( which is much more powerful than the typical zombie apocalypse ) then it should be a walk in the park eliminating the slow dumb zombies.5. We still have outer space as an existing future factor6. The doomsday bunkersWe have established that these bunkers would be the means for human survival. While yes billions would likely die, the families evacuated to these bunkers would not. Attached is a link to the definition of " extinct " . http://dictionary.reference.com...Extinct means not in existence. Even even one person survives and there are no zombies left then we have survived the zombie apocalypse as a whole ( though upon that persons death we would be extinct ). However whole families would enter these bunkers ( the families of the heads of state ) and as such humanity would reproduce and start all over again in building civilizations ( as we always have ) if we had a male velociraptor and a female velociraptor in a zoo somewhere the species wouldnt be considered extinct and we would say that it survived the ( what was pretty much ) the prehistoric apocalypse. I encourage everyone reading ( weather you believe or not ) to think about Adam and Eve. This shows that all we need to rise again is 1 man and 1 woman. From 2 people can come ( as we have now ) nearly 8 billion. As my opponent said there would be mass devestation ( and if it made it that far ), billions might die. But from the survivors would come billions more. like I said it would not take long for the zombies to decompose. I placed a link and more information about Decompossure of zombies in the comments. of course TV shows and movies don't show the true rapid decomposition of zombies. If they showed that then the movie would be quite boring because the zombies would all be dead withing 3-4 weeks. Humanity would easily survive but if a movie showed that then it would be a pretty boring movie. Here in the real world however decomposition is a natural occur acne and would still take place. Even if the apocalypse reached its full fledged state it would only be like that for a week or two before everything returned to normal. My opponent also failed to disprove ( my apologies if that sounds rude ) my theory that some major cities would be massively walled off and no zombie would be capable of entry. These walls would only have a couple entrenched and these would be heavily guarded by military troops. Anyone atempting entry would have to submit to CDC or WHO medical testing to ensure that they are not infected. ( for those who have watched world war z, if you remember the wall built around Jerusalem then you know that a typical zombie wouldn't be able to scale it ). My opponent is correct in saying that some terrorist organizations would attempt to involve zombies in their attacks but many of these attacks would likely be thwarted and many terrorist groups might not even attempt this. It probably would not be the first think coming to mind for them when a zombie attempts to eat them to capture it. They would probably think more along the lines of " Shoot! " Isolated island nations and micronations also remain in play. As do countries like North Korea With huge military fortified borders and very few people ever entering. There are many more of my arguments that have not been successfully put down as well. I encourage readers to reach read my arguments from round 2 and think these through. My oponent has agreed that there would likely be at least a few survivors. In the last round my opponent adressed you and said " would you consider 6 or 7 billion deaths to be victory ". Here is my response for all of you. I would considered 1 or 2 billion survivors to be victory, yes. If we lose 6-7 billion then we have aproximatly 1-2 billion people left. Those people can rebuild and repopulate. If the survival of 2 people is all we need then 2 billion is a huge added bonus. With 2 billion survivors we might not even have to revert to the stone age. So, that my opponent agreed that there would be a number of human survivors and given that many of my arguments still stand, it is resonance to say that humanity would survive ( keyword survive, I never said there wouldn't be huge losses ) a zombie apocalypse. Thank you for your arguments thus far and your respectful nature. My apoligise for my slow response time.