gut;1114387 wrote:Again...No hope??? That's GOOD news - it's not some sort of plague that is going to kill you. It's good news that it's dormant until you die. Hopeless would be "you all have it, and will turn within weeks". Your #1 fear would be you get bit by a mosquito or something and get the disease and turn zombie. The virus doesn't affect the living - practically the first real break they've had.

sherm03;1114074 wrote:I like this idea A LOT!

It'd be pretty awesome if the baby dies inside of her, revives as a walker, and then kills her by eating her from the inside.

hoops23;1114395 wrote:SMH. I said the scientist had "no hope" because he couldn't find the cure, especially since everybody is already infected. He offed himself. Other's may have as well if they knew they were already carriers and basically just a ticking time bomb. In that world, the next minute could be your last.

dwccrew;1114442 wrote:I'm not sure she's far enough along to have the baby be able to eat her from the inside. But it would be an interesting concept and a good debate for pro-lifers and pro-choice crowds! Lol

gut;1114448 wrote:Haha, hadn't thought of that angle. Also, the baby wouldn't have teeth, so it would have to [try to] gum her to death.

But assuming said baby would no longer grow or develop, it wouldn't really be a threat (with no teeth). So it would be a sort of circus act and could provide comic relief.

gut;1114447 wrote:Gee, I don't want to become a zombie, so I'm going to off myself...and become a zombie. Makes no sense.

hoops23;1114396 wrote:Just because

Automatik;1114767 wrote:I just watched the last episode. Pretty solid all around. I like how Rick took out Shane.

Just one question....the zombies rising up or whatever at the end. What brought that on?

gut;1114447 wrote:But "ticking time bomb" implies a premature end. That's not the case here - you don't turn until you're, you know, actually dead. Gee, I don't want to become a zombie, so I'm going to off myself...and become a zombie. Makes no sense. They were at the CDC at least one night, so there's no rational reason to think if they were infected that they would suddenly turn.

I would agree with you if they had reason to believe they would just wake-up one morning and be a zombie. Maybe that's how they'll reconcile it - the scientist knew they were infected and thought it was just a matter of time, but he was wrong. That would explain why Rick kept it a secret, but now knowing what they do he can share realizing that the scientist was wrong about them turning overnight.

hoops23;1114799 wrote:The scientist got blown up, doubt he became a zombie.

gut;1114865 wrote:Not the point.

It's completely illogical to lose your will to LIVE because you become a zombie AFTER you die. They don't have a death sentence, so there's no reason to give up hope.

gorocks99;1114900 wrote:I wanna know how the zombies survive in cold climates. Like, weather drops below 0 degrees ... are they still motoring around? Or are they frozen? Are there zombie Eskimos feasting on baby seals in northern Canada? The world must know.

gorocks99;1114900 wrote:I wanna know how the zombies survive in cold climates. Like, weather drops below 0 degrees ... are they still motoring around? Or are they frozen? Are there zombie Eskimos feasting on baby seals in northern Canada? The world must know.

hoops23;1114891 wrote:I'd imagine living in a zombie infested world is a death sentence. Again, the next minute could be your last.

For example, even without knowing she has the virus, Andrea was contemplating suicide at the CDC with the scientist. If she had known, she probably goes ahead with it.

Not real sure what is so hard to understand... You're arguing in circles about something you have no control over.

gut;1114927 wrote:You make THAT argument and then accuse me of circular logic?

Being infected does nothing to change their situation today or tomorrow - it has NO impact on the living, so why would it change any of their decisions or choices about how to live? You're not making the connection between hopeless in the sense of an early demise completely out of their control vs. something that happens after you die, which doesn't matter to you, ultimately, as a living person.

There's no more coke or pepsi - they're going to kill themselves!

gorocks99;1114900 wrote:I wanna know how the zombies survive in cold climates. Like, weather drops below 0 degrees ... are they still motoring around? Or are they frozen? Are there zombie Eskimos feasting on baby seals in northern Canada? The world must know.

hoops23;1114937 wrote:Ok, this is my last post on this. For the last time, if you know you turn with death, you may choose to go out on your own terms. Blowing your brains out does not turn you into a zombie. Dying just about any other way does.

It DOES have a psychological impact on the survivors. You're not fully grasping the situation, it seems.

gut;1114954 wrote:They are going to kill themselves because of something that happens after they die? This is illogical. And the only scenario that happens is if they die naturally, alone. They already know the most likely outcome is to die in a zombie attack, in which case they would become one. So it makes no sense to believe if they've already chosen to live in that world that having the "disease" would change their decision in any meaningful way. They've already accepted a much greater risk of becoming a zombie by choosing to live. This information would not change anything.

hoops23;1114959 wrote:Andrea was about to kill herself to begin with. Had she known she was already infected, she'd most likely would have done it (from a character standpoint). The scientist took his own life because there was no hope. People like control. In a dire situation it's definitely logical that some, knowing that they'd become a zombie with death, would take matters into their own hands and blow their brains out.

People kill themselves in real life without an impeding zombie apocalypse approaching.

Do you just not understand this?

dwccrew;1114442 wrote:I'm not sure she's far enough along to have the baby be able to eat her from the inside. But it would be an interesting concept and a good debate for pro-lifers and pro-choice crowds! Lol

gut;1114448 wrote:Haha, hadn't thought of that angle. Also, the baby wouldn't have teeth, so it would have to [try to] gum her to death.

But assuming said baby would no longer grow or develop, it wouldn't really be a threat (with no teeth). So it would be a sort of circus act and could provide comic relief.

bigkahuna;1114572 wrote:I think they'd never go with this angle in any way shape or form. If a baby burst out of Lori's stomach, it would probably turn off a lot of people; too edgy. It reminds me of something you'd see in A Serbian Film. Now, the next Zombie flick could do this however.

gut;1114969 wrote:They've already accepted a much greater risk by choosing to live, so why does something that only impacts that risk very marginally, and only after death, going to have any impact? What is so difficult to understand?