On 02/15/2014 09:45 AM, Malcolm Adams wrote:
Well, to some degree the tongue would flop out for zombie who may be older and undergoing the process of putrefaction. Gas within the body would push the eyes and tongue out, making them protrude forth and be more likely to be bitten. This is part of why various deities and other beings associated with death have protruding tongues (Maha Kali, Medusa etc), as it mimics the human body after a period of putrefaction. For those which exhibit a greater degree of decomposition, it could be that the tongue has rotten away far more than usual- this is in reference to zombies that have decomposing eyes, though I sadly don't know the exact rate of decomposition for the various organs of the human body.
Whilst on the topic of zombie putrefaction etc, surely those who were bitten by other zombies would be more likely to die first, unless there is something in zombies that stops sepsis developing. This is because if you have a septic wound, your corpse decays far more quickly in general. Thus those first infected by other means will live the fastest, whilst newer zombies should die more quickly, or at least rot to a point where they are no longer really a threat- therefore the whole "zombie apocalypse" scenario is flawed.
Also, whilst fast zombies are certainly somewhat scarier, there is rigor mortis which proves the slow zombies to be more realistic.
You are making a LOT of assumptions there, most of then unsound.
The fact that zombies move implies that they have a nervous system that
works, so rather than zombies being "dead" it would be more plausible to
infer that it is only their higher reasoning ability that is no longer
functioning. If the nervous system functions to the point where the
motor functions work, then most of the body, including the
cardiovascular immune systems would still function in the usual way.
That means no rot or spontaneous tissue damage over and above that which
is caused by whatever agent destroyed their higher reasoning function
(e.g. a viral or bacterial agent). If the said agent consumes tissue or
causes necrosis and is not containable by the immune system, then any
zombie apocalypse would be short lived; zombies would die from the
effects of the agent long before they starved to death in the
traditional sense, and extensive tissue necrosis would become fatal long
before the body got to a state of a rotting walking corpse.
Ergo, the most reasonable hypothesis would be that for the traditional
vision of a zombie apocalypse to occur the agent would only have the
effect of completely destroying higher reasoning in a human (i.e. very
selective brain damage), and leave the rest of the body more or less
intact (over and above the "flu like symptoms" that would be exhibited
during any serious infection).
Therefore - fast zombies, no rigor-mortis and no rot (over and above
that occurring from infected injuries due to lack of medical treatment).
Unless, of course, you are happy to just go with the "it's magic!"
option in which case any science based discussion is deprecated anyway.
Gordan
