Morbid for Zombie Apocalypse lovers. I ran the math and I was sad.. The population of the world is 6, 894, 594, 844. Assuming that a zombie virus was airborne,  Zombie apocalypse morbid dissapoint
Click to expand

Morbid for Zombie Apocalypse lovers

Morbid for Zombie Apocalypse lovers. I ran the math and I was sad.. The population of the world is 6, 894, 594, 844. Assuming that a zombie virus was airborne,

I ran the math and I was sad.

The population of the world is 6, 894, 594, 844.
Assuming that a zombie virus was airborne, waterborne, and spread through bites and
scratches then only the few who were immune would survive.
A reasonable percentage of humans who are immune to an apocalyptic virus would be 3. 1%.
This means that 6, 894, 595 people would be immune to the virus.
This means to eliminate Every zombie each person would have to kill 999 zombies.
If each person killed one zombie per day it would take less than three years to eliminate Every
last zombie.
After this event was over it would take 17 generations of repopulating to bring the worlds
population back up to 6, 894, 594, 844.
  • Recommend tagsx
Views: 64494
Favorited: 374
Submitted: 07/08/2012
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to chrisisok Subscribe to morbid-channel submit to reddit


What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#73 - pinta **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#187 to #73 - furrytoes (07/08/2012) [-]
pandemic 2?
pandemic 2?
#577 to #73 - meganinja ONLINE (07/09/2012) [-]
Hey Diseases,
My name is Madagascar, and I hate every single one of you. All of you are weak, highly detectable viruses who spend every second of your day looking for ways to spread. You are everything bad in the world. Honestly, have any of you ever infected a water supply? I mean, I guess it's fun trying to make everyone vomit, hemorrhage and become depressed, but you all take to a whole new level. This is even worse than wasting evolution points on increasing your heat, moisture and cold resistance to level 4.

Don't be a stranger. Just hit me with your best epidemic. I'm pretty much healthy. I’m the fourth largest island in the world, and only have one port. What symptoms do you have, other than "fatigue" and "sores"? I also get no reports of infections, and have a banging hot port (She just shut down; **** was SO closed). You are all faggots who should just be vaccinated. Thanks for listening.
Pic Related: It's me and my port.
#89 to #73 - gimmeyobrain (07/08/2012) [-]
only to find hordes of zombie lemurs
#3 - ainsley (07/08/2012) [-]
I could totally kill 999 zombies
even more if I pack-a-punch my ray gun
User avatar #208 to #3 - MasterManiac ONLINE (07/08/2012) [-]
I'm gonna get thumbed down hard for this (cos everybody knows the FunnyJunk community hates COD), but playing Black Ops zombies with 3 friends is awesome.
User avatar #211 to #208 - ainsley (07/08/2012) [-]
Multiplayer sucks cock mostly because of the community,
Zombies, however, is awesome.
User avatar #332 to #211 - captainrattrap (07/09/2012) [-]
Zombies is great, until they **** it up and make it too stale/ ********** like they did with moon (I can still enjoy moon, it's just very full of ******** ).

Black ops two is gonna have 8 player zombies... So you can understand my skepticism
User avatar #404 to #332 - spacefield (07/09/2012) [-]
I'm afraid to get over excited for 8 player zombies. If they don't **** it up too much, it should be awesome.
User avatar #409 to #404 - captainrattrap (07/09/2012) [-]
I heard a faint whisper about vehicles. But I know such a thing couldn't be possible... I hope not. It seems like it would be fun, but I highly doubt it would work.

I WOULD like to play multiplayer on zombies maps, because I have no gaming pc.
#417 to #409 - potatoezx (07/09/2012) [-]
I heard they were keeping the old zombies style for Black Ops 2, but also adding in 8 player, so if you don't like 8 player, you can still do old fashioned, "regular" zombies on the newer maps.
User avatar #415 to #409 - spacefield (07/09/2012) [-]
Multiplayer on zombies maps would be legit. I haven't heard crap about black ops 2, but if they can make 8 players and vehicles work in zombies that wouldn't **** it up, I will happily protect my virginity gaming for the majority of my days.
User avatar #422 to #415 - captainrattrap (07/09/2012) [-]
Treyarch would **** it up. I'd rather them just not even try to do that... More zombies maps would be nice, though.
User avatar #425 to #422 - spacefield (07/09/2012) [-]
Dammit Treyarch... I probably won't care... I'm addicted to the game. Unless they royally **** up. I agree, many more maps.
User avatar #427 to #425 - captainrattrap (07/09/2012) [-]
Do you have xbox? I want someone good to play with.
User avatar #431 to #427 - spacefield (07/09/2012) [-]
I wouldn't consider myself good. Yes I have an xbox, but I actually just got it. I don't own black ops. I am with my friends A LOT playing. I don't have xbox live yet.
User avatar #434 to #431 - captainrattrap (07/09/2012) [-]
Oh... Well then... Never mind.
User avatar #440 to #434 - spacefield (07/09/2012) [-]
OptimusCrime33 is my gamertag if you wish. I just won't see it for a while.
User avatar #512 to #440 - captainrattrap (07/09/2012) [-]
If you don't have xbox live you can't get friend requests.
#613 to #208 - stlassassinfhc (07/09/2012) [-]
Am I the only one who thinks zombies was so much better on cod waw
User avatar #193 - ColeTheUber (07/08/2012) [-]
Assuming .1% are immune, you are missing one important point.
No zombie will bite a human and say "Oh damn, he's immune, let's go somewhere else, guys." There will be casualties, and a lot of them.
I'm going to go ahead and round the world's population to 7 billion, since it's all speculation.
That means that ~7 million will be immune.

It is safe to assume that 20% will die in the initial attacks. In fact, that is probably being too generous. This leaves us with 5.6 million immune survivors.

People that won't be as efficient in fighting:
Elderly: ~14% are age 65+
Children: ~24% are ages 0-17
So that means that 2128000 survivors won't be as efficient in fighting zombies, meaning that the adult survivors (3472000) will have to take that load, increasing the strain.

Some other facts to consider:
1) These are survivors all around the world. They are not united. They have no government. They have no leadership, and no contact. They will not be as efficient.
2) They are not necessarily "survival" types. Most survivors will die off due to malnutrition.
3) With hospitals closed down and medical supplies scarce, there will be an increase of other diseases.

In an ideal world, all survivors will be giant, Russian Bear Calvary type men and women, from ages 18-30, who are able to fight, and are willing to unite to defend themselves. In reality, you're going to get a **** load of hippies, businessmen, grandmothers, and idiots who will leeroy jenkins themselves to hell.
User avatar #653 to #193 - pokemonstheshiz (07/09/2012) [-]
Also a point that's being missed is the initial spread. Even an airborne or waterborne disease would be quickly dealt with, and the area closed off. A disease spreading massively around the entire world is quite unlikely.
#625 to #193 - Rascal (07/09/2012) [-]
Yeah, but the most realistic zombie apocalypse to date seems to be the Max Brooks World War Z apocalypse. Nobody is immune, but it ONLY transmits through vital fluid contact. Therefore smart, capable people will survive. And although this may come as a surprise, there are more than you would think. Governments would not collapse, more likely the opposite. Humans are social creatures, we would bond together. Governments would unite their military forces and quickly train them on the weaknesses of the supposed zombies. In a few years or so, zombie levels would drop to the point where we could start to take back land, perhaps even cities.
In about 10 years, the zombies would either have rotted or we would have united to the point where we could unite trade lines again. Wouldn't take long after that.

Humans are highly underrated.
#225 to #193 - simoon **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #235 to #225 - ColeTheUber (07/08/2012) [-]
Not saying that you'll be useless, but you don't have access to materials that older people would. A plan doesn't mean much if you aren't prepared ahead of time.

Good preparation questions:
What weapons do you have stockpiled?
How much ammunition do you have stockpiled?
How proficient with those weapons are you?
Do you have easily preserved food?
What about spare medical supplies?
What about transportation?
What about a guaranteed safehouse in a safe location, away from civilization?

I'm 19, and I have already accepted that I will probably be infected early on and devour everyone I care about. Yeah, I have plans, but that doesn't mean that I will survive.
#273 to #235 - simoon **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#680 to #273 - Qweeaf (07/09/2012) [-]
About the gun; if the gun was silenced it wouldn't typically draw any attention in your direction, and bullets are far more common and are smaller and thus easy to carry. Also, guns can fire multiple shots before needing to be reloaded, which isn't the case for most crossbows.
#685 to #680 - simoon **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#277 to #273 - simoon **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #301 to #277 - ColeTheUber (07/08/2012) [-]
I didn't necessarily mean guns when I said weapons and ammunition, but here are a few weapons-related questions you still would need to answer.
1) Do you have a crossbow?
2) Do you have an ample supply of bolts?
3) Crossbows aren't as simple as point-and-shoot, so do you have training with one?
4) Do you have the skills with a knife to fashion new bolts?
Also, why would you stay in or near a city, and why would you want a large group of survivors? An average city has several million people living in it in close quarters, leaving a lot of room for infection. If you keep emergency supplies, even basic supplies like you would keep for a hurricane or being snowed in, you can grab those and get out, once the initial shock wears off.

Some other points:
Food will be a primary target for looters. Why would you assume that there would be any left in stores? Same for medical supplies. Those are easily purchased now, so why wait for any disaster to happen. No sense waiting until after the world has gone to hell to have a stockpile of medical supplies or preservable foods.
Also, you may be a qualified mechanic, but that doesn't mean that you ejaculate gas and car parts. Again, that means preparation.

I'm not trying to argue. I'm just saying that raiding the nearest wal-mart and running isn't a sensible plan.
#547 to #301 - mdauch (07/09/2012) [-]
2) about 12 good ones 16 useable ones
3)about a good 5 years hunting
4) wouldn't need to they are reusable and i keep good care of them
do I pass?
#319 to #301 - simoon **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#336 to #225 - Rascal (07/09/2012) [-]
#341 to #336 - simoon **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #231 to #193 - thephantur (07/08/2012) [-]
Not to mention survivors will be killing each other for supplies. Roving bands of raiders will do a **** ton of damage to other survivors.
User avatar #282 to #193 - dadukesta ONLINE (07/08/2012) [-]
Best place to set up.

Theres already a garden, theres materials to set up defense, you have enough supplies to build a windmill ontop of the lowes. There is a parking lot that can easily be made into a walled off courtyard where work can be done. The plumbing could work for a week maybe and typically Lowes is surrounded by other hardware stores and clothing outlets and occasionally restraunts and general stores. Not to mention the gas station down the road.

When the apocalypse happens immediately alert everyone you know to head to one of these lowes, take all supplies possible in your vehicles, block off the front entrances to only allow 1 person in at a time and check every person head to toe for bites. Lack of privacy is ensued but protection is garaunteed.

Plenty of melee weapons for everyone and plenty of materials to turn into important devices in normal life. And not to mention, security.

User avatar #550 to #282 - mdauch (07/09/2012) [-]
or Cabelas just saying
User avatar #215 to #193 - Trrave ONLINE (07/08/2012) [-]
lol! I almost choked to death when I read the last bit.
#212 to #193 - pmilooo (07/08/2012) [-]
This guy knows his ****
#200 to #193 - cartrman (07/08/2012) [-]
**cartrman rolled a random image posted in comment #34 at post apocolyptica... **
This made so much sense, it scared me.
User avatar #335 to #200 - runtybeaver (07/09/2012) [-]
Relevant roll is relevant.
#164 - PenguinsOfMars ONLINE (07/08/2012) [-]
The odds are 1 in 1000 that I will survive?
#261 to #164 - Rascal (07/08/2012) [-]
No. OP doesn't know much about medicine. Once the virus enters ones's system, they are screwed. Naturally immunity to a virus is more like one in million, and about the same for bacteria. Bacteria can be fought with antibiotics and viruses by antivirals, but this won't save many people due to the chaos and lack of information on the disease. Immunity and treatment will play a very minimal role in who survives; rather, (considering it's multitude of routes of infection) isolationism and self sufficiency will determine survivors. People who have stockpiles of drugs, purified water through intense boiling and condensation, barricades, and air seals would survive. We will take my incredibly generous number of naturally immune people (7000) and couple it with people in the world who meet the isolation requirements before the breakout (10000 tops) to leave us with 17,000 survivors and 6,999,983,000 infected. You have to remember that this is before suicide and panic. We could fairly reasonably say that anyone not bunkered down before the outbreak would die. The human race would likely never recover, and any shred of social order will be obliterated. There would be no chance at all.
#269 to #261 - PenguinsOfMars ONLINE (07/08/2012) [-]
We're all gonna die Lloyd...
User avatar #656 to #164 - pokemonstheshiz (07/09/2012) [-]
If the disease managed to hit everywhere in the world at the same time, yes.
User avatar #170 to #164 - wacemindu (07/08/2012) [-]
That you'll be immune to the virus, not that you'll survive.
#229 - rnchampagne (07/08/2012) [-]
What if the immunity gene is also the ginger gene
#247 to #229 - mrgreatnames **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#85 - boobboobs (07/08/2012) [-]
so i have 3 years of zombie killing and and have a **** ton of time to have sex
#340 to #85 - laxdevil has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #98 to #85 - kanatana (07/08/2012) [-]
That being said... 0.1%? I like those odds.
#102 to #98 - boobboobs (07/08/2012) [-]
there comes a time in every mans life when he has to ask "do i feel lucky" and i do
User avatar #103 to #102 - kanatana (07/08/2012) [-]
Bringing those "last man on earth" questions into a while new light.
User avatar #120 to #98 - commontroll (07/08/2012) [-]
One in a thousand really isn't that bad... don't know if you were being sarcastic.
#496 - theninjakai (07/09/2012) [-]
Kill one zombie...a day?

**** THAT.


We'll be done in 2 months.
#61 - rickmac (07/08/2012) [-]
why the hell would we want to restore the population back to 6,894,594,844
User avatar #253 to #61 - zehutit (07/08/2012) [-]
because you touch yourself
User avatar #92 to #61 - ultrarobbie (07/08/2012) [-]
Because I like that number
User avatar #6 - shinigamigod (07/08/2012) [-]
It is not a virus it makes more sense to be a parasite.
A virus would require you to be alive and warm to survive, a parasite however does not always require this.
A parasite will live inside you feasting on the food you ate in your stomach, then once you die it will dig its way to your brain and take control of you, and reviving your basic human needs such as eating so that it may continue to survive.
The transition of the parasite can either be airborne spores, or it lays eggs which it then plants into its victims through the saliva when it bites.
So, the surviving population will start off quite high and slowly drop at first and then topple out of control once they begin to swarm all over.
#227 to #6 - Rascal (07/08/2012) [-]
You forget about weather conditions. Certain weather in certain areas will cause the parasite to be stuck in an area. It would be like a fish out of water if it were to spread.
#316 - Larousse (07/08/2012) [-]
Comment Picture
#196 - Tyranitar (07/08/2012) [-]
This, however, fails to calculate the amount of survivors who would die from zombie attacks, natural disasters, and other reasons, as well as those incapable of fighting off zombies, such as small children, or the sick or elderly.
This, however, fails to calculate the amount of survivors who would die from zombie attacks, natural disasters, and other reasons, as well as those incapable of fighting off zombies, such as small children, or the sick or elderly.
User avatar #175 - zagnorathh (07/08/2012) [-]
nobody would have to kill any zombies because eventually they would just rot and nothing can move without muscles, not even the dead.
#1 - blackcorsair (07/08/2012) [-]
Manbearpig's the real problem, not zombies, i'm cereal
User avatar #413 - Ivandrago (07/09/2012) [-]
Reasons a zombie apocalypse would fail horribly:
1: Their main prey is their biggest predator. Not a good idea ever.

2: If zombieness is like AIDS in that it is acquired through bodily fluids, then that's a terrible medium for a virus. It's not that contagious that every cut ever will automatically make them a zombie. There is a shocking low chance of infection for any virus through bodily fluids.

3: What else would they eat aside from humans? They can barely access any preserved foods, and the meat in walmart only lasts so long.

4: They would be retarded. Simple traps would be able to kill vast amounts of them. Who's to say they wouldn't be like lemmings and mindlessly jump off cliffs?

5: Their flesh is decomposing. After so long, their muscles would be useless and they would be physically unable to move.
User avatar #458 to #413 - wobblyloo (07/09/2012) [-]
#444 to #413 - Rascal (07/09/2012) [-]
4. What if zombies are as smart as normal humans and they would use weapons and stuff, that would mean 1. predator vs heartless predators with no moral.
User avatar #446 to #444 - Ivandrago (07/09/2012) [-]
Well think about it. We take about 20 years to fully gain control of our bodies. Why would a virus that just walked into town have fully perfected movement of the human body?
#507 - deiusion (07/09/2012) [-]
**deiusion rolled a random image posted in comment #6502586 at FJ Pony Thread **
#539 to #507 - zombieginger (07/09/2012) [-]
... God dammit Deiusion.... I just broke up with my girlfriend too...
User avatar #690 to #507 - deiusion (07/10/2012) [-]
This roll fit in with Original post a little too nicely. XD
#487 - baniggernom ONLINE (07/09/2012) [-]
Or we could all just go to Madagascar where we're safe forever.
#520 to #487 - Rascal (07/09/2012) [-]
why not hawaii _(..)/
User avatar #543 to #487 - zombieginger (07/09/2012) [-]
But what about infectious diseases we could possibly get from the forest itself? Sure the zombie infection won't get there... but rabid animals sure as **** can...
#492 to #487 - telfyr (07/09/2012) [-]
yep, once there's a virus that has no symptoms they shut down everything and distribute water
User avatar #501 to #487 - gaussglenn (07/09/2012) [-]
anon down there doesnt get the joke
User avatar #502 to #487 - neonthethird (07/09/2012) [-]
you're right
you're ******* RIGHT
sorry boys, i'm moving to Madagascar!
#488 to #487 - Rascal (07/09/2012) [-]
Or somewhere cold like Svalbard... What if the polar bears eat the zombies and we get polar zombie bears! We'll stick with Madagascar.
#439 - toefoo (07/09/2012) [-]
that population is quiet old. the world pop. exceeded 7 billion in march, and the task of rebuilding a stable society capable of supporting consistent re-population would take way more than 17 gens. Also the .1%  would be scattered and many died off anyway. So your math is undoubtedly wrong and did not account for many other variables
that population is quiet old. the world pop. exceeded 7 billion in march, and the task of rebuilding a stable society capable of supporting consistent re-population would take way more than 17 gens. Also the .1% would be scattered and many died off anyway. So your math is undoubtedly wrong and did not account for many other variables
#286 - thekittykat (07/08/2012) [-]
at least these things would be gone
#297 to #286 - Kabutops (07/08/2012) [-]
what if they are immune also?
User avatar #299 to #297 - warzon (07/08/2012) [-]
its simple
you kill them too
User avatar #298 to #297 - thekittykat (07/08/2012) [-]
Then god help us all I will sacrifice myself and bite them all
User avatar #345 to #297 - fnordyy (07/09/2012) [-]
just shoot the ******* pointblank with a ******* 12g
User avatar #349 to #345 - Kabutops (07/09/2012) [-]
what if they're ******* terminators and they fix themselves
User avatar #350 to #349 - fnordyy (07/09/2012) [-]
nuke them from orbit with 100 hydro bombs, that would destroy the whole ******* planet but still worth it
User avatar #353 to #350 - Kabutops (07/09/2012) [-]
User avatar #354 to #353 - fnordyy (07/09/2012) [-]
User avatar #355 to #354 - Kabutops (07/09/2012) [-]
You have no after you..
User avatar #358 to #355 - fnordyy (07/09/2012) [-]
no i dont
User avatar #289 to #286 - aretard (07/08/2012) [-]
you deserve a cookie for saying that... i wish i had a cookie to give you.
#294 to #289 - thekittykat (07/08/2012) [-]
it's ok just keep the cookie for yourself you deserve something nice every once in a while
#230 - wrigcon (07/08/2012) [-]
and if that many are immune and repopulate then there wouldn't be another zombie virus again because the following generations are immune :(
#237 to #230 - snowboardingengie **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #238 to #237 - wrigcon (07/08/2012) [-]
true, but it would be a lot easier to cure because its similar to what your already immune to
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)