One of the biggest cover ups in history

kneemos

Fast zombies or slow zombies?

CINCLANTFLT

kneemos wrote: »

Fast zombies or slow zombies?

This might help:
http://jeb.biologists.org/content/216/12/2201

Chijj

Something people might find interesting, Google the dancing plague...apparently it's victims danced until they died and couldn't help it. Seems to be well documented

CINCLANTFLT

Chijj wrote: »

Something people might find interesting, Google the dancing plague...apparently it's victims danced until they died and couldn't help it. Seems to be well documented

You're heading in the right direction - add this to it as well and you have all the answers in one place:
http://www.vice.com/read/ulak-tartysh-dead-goat-polo-kyrgyzstan-photos

wally79

Chijj wrote: »

Something people might find interesting, Google the dancing plague...apparently it's victims danced until they died and couldn't help it. Seems to be well documented

Wasn't there a film made about this.

I think Kevin Bacon was in it

CINCLANTFLT

wally79 wrote: »

Wasn't there a film made about this.

I think Kevin Bacon was in it

Yes! You see where we are going with this - this is the last piece - or is it?
http://www.nature.com/news/thousands-of-goats-and-rabbits-vanish-from-major-biotech-lab-1.19411

sally cinnamon89

9/11

Chijj

wally79 wrote: »

Wasn't there a film made about this.

I think Kevin Bacon was in it

Yeah, I think it was called the bus that couldn't slow down

jester77

The missing dinosaurs are surely a bigger cover up. Who dino-napped them, where did they hide them, where are they now :eek:

seamus

Reiver wrote: »

Thank you, very informative. Is it possible to see a resurgence of these plagues? Would they be as effective?

Any pathogen is unlikely to find itself as effective as plagues in times gone by.

Relatively simple hygiene methodologies are extremely effective at isolating a disease and preventing spread. Take Ebola as the recent example. Spreads like wildfire in areas where hygiene is poor and hygiene knowledge is poor. One American gets it and gets returned to America, and it doesn't spread from him to anyone else.

The last great pandemic - the spanish flu - was hot on the heels of World War 1 and likely was so devastating due to how badly compromised human populations were at that time.

Of course, there's always a never-say-never scenario. The right combination of factors can be deadly. If there were a disease which spread easily through multiple vectors, had a relatively long incubation period followed by a short activity period where it kills you, then a massive proportion of the population could be infected before anyone even realised it existed.

However with pathogens, there tends to be a correlation between how badly the host is affected and how easy it is to contract. So pathogens which spread easily also tend to be very severe. Think Norovirus (winter vomiting bug). Hence anything which is so severe as being likely to kill you, will also tend to confine you bed very quickly and limit its own spread.

Diseases which don't strike you down and leave you crippled don't spread as easily, so the chances of a disease having a long incubation period, spreading easily and killing you are pretty low.
This is why HIV was so scary when first discovered, as it wasn't well understood how it was contracted. However, the vectors through which HIV are spread are now know to be very limited.

CINCLANTFLT

seamus wrote: »

Any pathogen is unlikely to find itself as effective as plagues in times gone by.

Relatively simple hygiene methodologies are extremely effective at isolating a disease and preventing spread. Take Ebola as the recent example. Spreads like wildfire in areas where hygiene is poor and hygiene knowledge is poor. One American gets it and gets returned to America, and it doesn't spread from him to anyone else.

The last great pandemic - the spanish flu - was hot on the heels of World War 1 and likely was so devastating due to how badly compromised human populations were at that time.

Of course, there's always a never-say-never scenario. The right combination of factors can be deadly. If there were a disease which spread easily through multiple vectors, had a relatively long incubation period followed by a short activity period where it kills you, then a massive proportion of the population could be infected before anyone even realised it existed.

However with pathogens, there tends to be a correlation between how badly the host is affected and how easy it is to contract. So pathogens which spread easily also tend to be very severe. Think Norovirus (winter vomiting bug). Hence anything which is so severe as being likely to kill you, will also tend to confine you bed very quickly and limit its own spread.

Diseases which don't strike you down and leave you crippled don't spread as easily, so the chances of a disease having a long incubation period, spreading easily and killing you are pretty low.
This is why HIV was so scary when first discovered, as it wasn't well understood how it was contracted. However, the vectors through which HIV are spread are now know to be very limited.

Again... Do I really need to spell this out for you:
http://www.dublinpeople.com/news/nor...-major-merger/

http://www.spanishdict.com/translate/goat

Darned Sheeple!!!!

ohnonotgmail

CINCLANTFLT wrote: »

Again... Do I really need to spell this out for you:
http://www.dublinpeople.com/news/nor...-major-merger/

http://www.spanishdict.com/translate/goat

Darned Sheeple!!!!

makes as little sense the second time around.

sabat

There actually was a conspiracy here - they tried to pin it on the rats when it was just a regular airborne disease.

ohnonotgmail

sabat wrote: »

There actually was a conspiracy here - they tried to pin it on the rats when it was just a regular airborne disease.

it was the fleas on the rats that carried it, was it not?

sabat

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

it was the fleas on the rats that carried it, was it not?

That's what we were always taught but it just wasn't true :
http://m.historyextra.com/article/international-history/10-things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-black-death

I hold Denis O'Brien in no small way responsible for the Black Death.

ohnonotgmail

sabat wrote: »

That's what we were always taught but it just wasn't true :
http://m.historyextra.com/article/international-history/10-things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-black-death

every day is a learning day

CINCLANTFLT

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

makes as little sense the second time around.

You would say that - let's look at a few other comments you have made on this topic:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=94571170
and
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=94843105

Go on admit it, you know the obvious link - Goat / Cabra != Cabra / Goat!

ohnonotgmail

CINCLANTFLT wrote: »

You would say that - let's look at a few other comments you have made on this topic:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=94571170
and
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=94843105

Go on admit it, you know the obvious link - Goat / Cabra != Cabra / Goat!

i think you need to put down the whiskey bottle.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

This is nonsense, but bags I the rights for turning it into a script. Bendict Cumberbatch as the...blacksmith or something who starts to figure it all out, Mark Rylance as the priest who's all "there's no such thing as zombies, God would have told us,so fcuk off" and then when he dies he goes "You were right Benedict, I shouldn't have been so sceptical, I'm redeemed now". Marion Cotillard or someone can stand around and look worried and pretty, and Tom Hardy can go "arblegrarbe arf. Barg!"

ScumLord

Reiver wrote: »

Is it possible that the Black Death was really a cover up for a zombie outbreak, an onslaught of the walking dead? The symptoms are all there and it would help explain why the epidemic spread so fast and voraciously, the population of the world was hit hard by it. What do people think?

I don't know why people think a zombie outbreak would be fast acting based on popular media's interpretations.. Biting is a terrible way to spread a disease, from movies and TV they also show that bodily fluids aren't contagious either for some strange reason. Isolating outbreaks would be pretty straightforward, if the disease can't exist in a transmittable way outside of the zombies mouth then it's just not going to spread to fast.

The short time it takes for infected to turn into zombies also doesn't help it's spread. Quarantine could expose infected in a matter of hours, there's no sign the disease can remain dormant. People would also have become zombies before they made it to the next populated area. Without a period where the virus can spread unnoticed even medieval people may have been able to stop it.

The so called "rage virus" is physically impossible. It breaks to many basic laws of physics to even consider.

A more realistic and plausible zombie disease that spreads through bodily fluids and basically hijacks a body for a limited amount of time probably wouldn't have been great at spreading in a time before rapid public transport. It would have been noted as isolated incidents of the dead rising rather than a plague.

CINCLANTFLT

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i think you need to put down the whiskey bottle.

Yeah - that's what Hitler would say!

wexandproud

Chijj wrote: »

Something people might find interesting, Google the dancing plague...apparently it's victims danced until they died and couldn't help it. Seems to be well documented[/QUOTE

thats correct . it was referred to in father ted . Fr liam finnegan '' the dancing priest '' had it