John

[capncnut]

"We don't believe in what you're doing here, Sarah.

Hey! You know what they keep down here in this cave?

Mon, they got the books and the records of the top five hundred companies. They got the defense dept. budget down here and they got the negatives for all your favourite movies. They got microfilm with tax returns and newspaper stories. They got immigration records and census reports and they got all official accounts of all the wars and plane crashes and volcano eruptions and earthquakes and fires and floods and all the other disasters that interrupted the flow of things in the good ol' US of A.

Now what does it matter, Sarah, darling? All this filing and record keeping? We ain't ever gonna give a shit. We ain't ever gonna get a chance to see it all.

Now here you come with a whole new set of charts and graphs and records. What you gonna do? Bury them down here with all the other relics of what once was?

I'ma tell you what else. You ain't ever gonna figure it out. Just like they never figured out why the stars are where they're at. It ain't mankind's job to figure that stuff out. So what you're doing is a waste of time, Sarah, and time is all we got left, y'know?

There's plenty to do. Plenty to do. As long as there's you and me and maybe some other people, we could start over. Start fresh. Get some babies. And teach 'em, Sarah, teach 'em never to come over here and dig these records out."

Discuss.

[AcesandEights]

Discuss.

Where do you guys think he was hiding his stash? :p

I think there's something to be said with leaving the past behind and building anew, but I am one to try and not throw out the baby with the bath water. Tax records we can do without, the accumulated knowledge of mankind (or some portion thereof), however...shouldn't just be spurned.

So yeah, elements of truth and wisdom in what John says, especially focusing on the idea that the things we hold onto from the past all too often aren't without their own problems and baggage.

[strayrider]

The first thing some of those "babies" would do, once they were old enough to think for themselves, would be to go over there and dig those records up.

:D

-stray-

[snowwarrior]

Of course in order to lower the chance of genetically defected inbred babies Sarah would have to mate with all of the men down there. Even Rickles and Steele. God help humanity!

[JDFP]

Coward.

And that's part of the reason why humanity collapsed in the first place in Romero's flicks. Instead of standing together with the best and brightest, too many had the mentality of: "Oh, guess the world is over, I'll just run off and do my own thing and let the rest of the world fall apart." -- we're all in this together. Like The Fixx says: "Stand or Fall, make your peace tonight."

Would John have felt the same way about the many military/scientists/and others who helped get their little troupe together and supplied them with the necessities to reach the Seminole Facility? "Well, we could work together to try and send this team down there, or just say forget it, it's hopeless, and move on without caring...". Apparently John didn't always feel that way either, because he took the job.

Say what you will about Rhodes and Logan, but at least they had conviction and attempted to do something about the situation instead of pulling a Monty Python and "run away! run away!". Personally, I would have been interested in seeing how far Logan would have gone in his work if allowed.

As far as Rickles and Steel having children, Rickles was a genuine idiot but I've always been mixed in my feelings on Steel. We only saw most of one side of Steel, Rhodes' little golden child that followed him around everywhere. He was a sexist nasty-mouthed soldier. At the same time, his escape was within his sarcasm and dark sense of humor. I crack up every time I see the: "Bang! You're Dead!" line. I honestly don't know that he would have shot Sarah, it's obvious that he didn't want to do it, while at the same time had a sense of duty to his C.O. Unlike Rhodes, Steel was not a masochist, rather I think he was intelligent and I think there could have been so much more depth to his character (look at the pain within his eyes throughout the film). I would have liked to have seen more of Steel in the flick.

Anyway, just my two cents on my favorite horror flick ever...

j.p.

[Trin]

Time is all I have left!! And I'm spending it on hpotd!! Nooooo....

Time to go make some babies... bom-chicka-wow-wow

[MoonSylver]

Coward.

I don't see John as a coward at all. He had the courage to stand up to Rhodes & his men. He's rather die than fly them out of there with out Billy & Sarah. He had the courage to fight back & procure weapons & go after them. He simply is a man who DOES NOT BELIEVE IN WHAT THEY'RE DOING. In John's opinion "you ain't nevva gonna figure it out."


And that's part of the reason why humanity collapsed in the first place in Romero's flicks. Instead of standing together with the best and brightest, too many had the mentality of: "Oh, guess the world is over, I'll just run off and do my own thing and let the rest of the world fall apart." -- we're all in this together. Like The Fixx says: "Stand or Fall, make your peace tonight."

But isn't that the point of Romero's movies? That really, at the end of the day, humanity is pretty well screwed BECAUSE we can't or won't work together? That we're our own worst enemy? "Dat's de trouble wit da world Sarah dah-lin', people got different ideas 'bout what dey want outta life."

I see John as a realist...he knows that what they're doing down there is a waste of time, and that even if there WAS a chance of success they've blown it anyway as the military and the scientists (and humanity in general) are too deeply divided & refuse to set aside their differences to work together.

[JDFP]

[QUOTE=MoonSylver;202575]I don't see John as a coward at all. He had the courage to stand up to Rhodes & his men. He's rather die than fly them out of there with out Billy & Sarah. He had the courage to fight back & procure weapons & go after them. He simply is a man who DOES NOT BELIEVE IN WHAT THEY'RE DOING. In John's opinion "you ain't nevva gonna figure it out."
QUOTE]

I see what you're saying. I don't think John was generally a coward, he did stand up for what he believed in as a person and I respect that, but I think the idea of "running away" is a cowardly action in general.

No matter how hopeless the cause, I think there should always be a fight to try no matter. Like my hero Captain Kirk, I don't believe in a no win situation.:):):)

I can definitely see where you are coming from though.

j.p.

[krakenslayer]

[QUOTE=MoonSylver;202575]I don't see John as a coward at all. He had the courage to stand up to Rhodes & his men. He's rather die than fly them out of there with out Billy & Sarah. He had the courage to fight back & procure weapons & go after them. He simply is a man who DOES NOT BELIEVE IN WHAT THEY'RE DOING. In John's opinion "you ain't nevva gonna figure it out."
QUOTE]

I see what you're saying. I don't think John was generally a coward, he did stand up for what he believed in as a person and I respect that, but I think the idea of "running away" is a cowardly action in general.

No matter how hopeless the cause, I think there should always be a fight to try no matter. Like my hero Captain Kirk, I don't believe in a no win situation.:):):)

I can definitely see where you are coming from though.

j.p.

I know what you're saying, and I agree to an extent, but the bottom line is that John was running away from a fight he didn't believe in. He believed they were wasting their time and risking their lives. Although I don't agree with his "who are we to question the Lord's work?" argument, it was his belief that the best way to save mankind was to find a safe island and start the race anew. In a sense, he was doing what he believed in, and that takes courage.

[MoonSylver]

I don't see John as a coward at all. He had the courage to stand up to Rhodes & his men. He's rather die than fly them out of there with out Billy & Sarah. He had the courage to fight back & procure weapons & go after them. He simply is a man who DOES NOT BELIEVE IN WHAT THEY'RE DOING. In John's opinion "you ain't nevva gonna figure it out."


I see what you're saying. I don't think John was generally a coward, he did stand up for what he believed in as a person and I respect that, but I think the idea of "running away" is a cowardly action in general.

No matter how hopeless the cause, I think there should always be a fight to try no matter. Like my hero Captain Kirk, I don't believe in a no win situation.:):):)

I can definitely see where you are coming from though.

j.p.

Gotcha. I can generally agree with where you're coming from as well. I don't think he's advocating running away out of fear though, but just because he doesn't believe in what they're doing & that there is ANY chance of success AT ALL.

It does beg the question when IS enough enough? In Day it certainly felt like "game over". Pretty bleak & nihilistic, but it does seem by that point the world has ended, the war is over, the zombies have won, & humanity is done. If only we'd worked together SOONER, at the BEGINNING....;) (which I think is the point GAR is trying to make...?)

If the situation was different between the military & the scientists, if they were working together & the military weren't on the verge of flipping out then I wouldn't be as understanding of John's attitude? Though I wonder if he WOULD feel exactly the same under those circumstances...?

Which leads me to ANOTHER question: IF this WAS the case (every one is RATIONAL, LOGICAL & COOPERATING) then WOULD their mission be hopeless? IS their any chance they could ever succeed? How long would/could/should they stay down there before they call it a day?

Good stuff. Thank you!

---------- Post added at 11:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:29 AM ----------


it was his belief that the best way to save mankind was to find a safe island and start the race anew.

Hmmm...never really considered that either. That's a good point.

[sandrock74]

There was no "starting over" the human race with the people who were in the Seminole base. There was only one woman, it's not enough of a gene pool there. The human race was dead there.

The Green (from Land) had the best chance of carrying on the human race, as they had many men and women there. A diverse gene pool. John's logic about going to an island and having babies to start over doesn't make any sense.

I do agree thou, that any future generations would definitely head back to dig up whatever records of "the old world" that they could find. It's just natural curiosity. John was half right and half wrong: they couldn't just chuck everything...tax records, business models, corporate strategy...that kind of stuff could be pitched and never missed.

JDFP: Good points about Steele. I always felt the same way.

[Trin]

Keep in mind that John could've taken the whirlybird at any time and headed off to that island. At the start of the movie he had exactly one soldier to contend with inside the chopper, and at one point that guy was on the ground hundreds of yards away quickly getting surrounded by zombies. If John had been a running coward he had ample opportunity to run.

John may have been defeatist, just sitting waiting to die. Or he could've been biding his time waiting for the others to figure out the hopelessness of their situation and begin to look for alternatives. Note that at the first sign of hopelessness in Sarah, John immediately implores her to consider leaving and starting what he figures is the only hope for humanity - repopulation. Which, has to happen in any case.

[krakenslayer]

There was no "starting over" the human race with the people who were in the Seminole base. There was only one woman, it's not enough of a gene pool there. The human race was dead there.

John's logic about going to an island and having babies to start over doesn't make any sense.


Well - duh - obviously he wasn't thinking he and Sarah could have millions of babies who would all have incestuous relations with each other and produce a race of one eyed, hair-lipped monsters to rule the world. :lol:

But if they find somewhere secluded where they can hide out for a few more years, maybe raise a couple of kids in a relatively safe and healthy environment, and by the time the kids are grown up enough to head out into the world by themselves then hopefully the worst of the zombie plague will be over and said offspring will hopefully meet up with other scattered survivors here and there and have babies of their own... and the circle of life... etc. etc.

[AcesandEights]

Well - duh - obviously he wasn't thinking he and Sarah could have millions of babies who would all have incestuous relations with each other and produce a race of one eyed, hair-lipped monsters to rule the world. :lol:

But if they find somewhere secluded where they can hide out for a few more years, maybe raise a couple of kids in a relatively safe and healthy environment, and by the time the kids are grown up enough to head out into the world by themselves then hopefully the worst of the zombie plague will be over and said offspring will hopefully meet up with other scattered survivors here and there and have babies of their own... and the circle of life... etc. etc.

Thank you for saving me the trouble of typing a similar response Kraken, as I was on the verge of peeling my eyeballs out of my skull. :)

[octo7]

That little speech of his is one of my favorite moments in any movie. Especially the look on her face as she starts to come to the realisation that he is 100% right but follows that up with another realisation which is that she needs to keep occupied or go insane.

[AcesandEights]

That little speech of his is one of my favorite moments in any movie.

Gotta love the echoing "Tombstone! ... own...own..." and zombie moan that can be heard off in the distance afterward.

[darth los]

Rhode's tirades, john's speech. That movie has some of if not the best dialouge of any horror film I've seen.


:cool:

[Trin]

... and in a movie that was criticized for having too much talking and not enough action. I loved the dialogue and introspection as well.

[bassman]

That movie has some of if not the best dialouge of any horror film I've seen.


Hell....I would drop "horror" out of that sentence and it still rings true. Most people claim Dawn, but I claim Day as Romero's masterpiece...

[JDFP]

Hell....I would drop "horror" out of that sentence and it still rings true. Most people claim Dawn, but I claim Day as Romero's masterpiece...

I completely agree. It's not my most favorite Romero flick, it's my most favorite horror film PERIOD. It just has the ability, even after seeing it for about 19,000 times now, to scare the piss out of me. It actually seems as fresh today as it ever has (perhaps more so now with the state of affairs the world is within).

I used to have a recurring nightmare of walking around the facility after everyone is dead and all the ghouls are rotted away. Nothing but all that empty space and eerie hallways and me. Somehow the notion of the emptiness and loneliness of it all really terrifies me.

Hell, think about it for what it would realistically be like for the 12 of them there at the beginning of the flick. As far as they know they are the last humans on earth. Imagine that loneliness and fear and sadness and pain all mixed together? I don't know how they held up like they did for as long as they did without going insane personally. I would have been like McDermott drinking everything I could get my hands on and hoping for a quick death.

j.p.

[krakenslayer]

Romero himself always cites Day as his favourite of the trilogy. When I saw him introduce Land at the Edinburgh Film Festival a few years ago, he said he's always stunned at how well it holds up given the fact that the script was basically thrown together in a desperate rush after Laurel said "no" to the epic version.

Personally, I think a little more action wouldn't have hurt it. Maybe a guns blazing zombie-gauntlet rush back to the chopper at the start, or the appearance of a dying and gun-toting and very pissed Rhodes at the helipad at the end (with the "choke on em" scene taking place afterwards). But I think it stands up the best out of the trilogy.

[octo7]

Day was definitely my favorite romero flick and one of my favorite movies of all time. for me the lack of action was fine because the pay off at the end was just so over the top and insane and all the more fucked up because of it, sort of like Miike's Audition except a million times better.

I also thought it had the best cast, best script and best cinematography of all of his movies still to this day.

[strayrider]

Of course in order to lower the chance of genetically defected inbred babies Sarah would have to mate with all of the men down there. Even Rickles and Steele. God help humanity!

Imagine Rickles as quintuplets.

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:tTWgbPzE2wIznM:http://www.filmdope.com/Gallery/ActorsM/11136-4498.gifhttp://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:tTWgbPzE2wIznM:http://www.filmdope.com/Gallery/ActorsM/11136-4498.gifhttp://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:tTWgbPzE2wIznM:http://www.filmdope.com/Gallery/ActorsM/11136-4498.gifhttp://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:tTWgbPzE2wIznM:http://www.filmdope.com/Gallery/ActorsM/11136-4498.gifhttp://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:tTWgbPzE2wIznM:http://www.filmdope.com/Gallery/ActorsM/11136-4498.gif

:hyper:

-stray-

[octo7]

Lol!!!

[Trin]

Day is my favorite as well. There was a long period where I simply couldn't watch it because it scared me so bad. At the end where they have to run through the caves to escape. Dark, zombie filled caves, with no weapons...

I also loved the whole setup and atmosphere. The semblance of safety with the crushing claustrophia of living under ground, combined with the eerie notion of having zombies throughout the living areas. Oh, and a mad scientist conducting experiments just down the hall.

The discussions were the best. We learned more about the world in Day than we did in either Land or Diary. We also learned more about the zombie phenomenon. It made great use of the dialogue.

[AcesandEights]

Preach it, Trin! Preach it!

I agree on all points, as Day has always, and still is, utterly disturbing, yet enthralling to me.

[bassman]

It's strange how so many people come here with Day as their favorite while most hated it when it was released. Makes you wonder how Romero's new films will be regarded in 20 years time.:shifty:

[Neil]

"We don't believe in what you're doing here, Sarah.

Hey! You know what they keep down here in this cave?

Mon, they got the books and the records of the top five hundred companies. They got the defense dept. budget down here and they got the negatives for all your favourite movies. They got microfilm with tax returns and newspaper stories. They got immigration records and census reports and they got all official accounts of all the wars and plane crashes and volcano eruptions and earthquakes and fires and floods and all the other disasters that interrupted the flow of things in the good ol' US of A.

Now what does it matter, Sarah, darling? All this filing and record keeping? We ain't ever gonna give a shit. We ain't ever gonna get a chance to see it all.

Now here you come with a whole new set of charts and graphs and records. What you gonna do? Bury them down here with all the other relics of what once was?

I'ma tell you what else. You ain't ever gonna figure it out. Just like they never figured out why the stars are where they're at. It ain't mankind's job to figure that stuff out. So what you're doing is a waste of time, Sarah, and time is all we got left, y'know?

There's plenty to do. Plenty to do. As long as there's you and me and maybe some other people, we could start over. Start fresh. Get some babies. And teach 'em, Sarah, teach 'em never to come over here and dig these records out."

Discuss.

One of my favourite bits from any of the films!

[SymphonicX]

its a great speech and I'm glad someone has gotten the debate going....

I think it's necessary to look at John's attitude earlier in the movie....first with his statement "I won't leave my seat, and I'll keep the engine running" - also with his discouragement of Billy using the radio to contact survivors "forget it, Billyboy, it's a dead place..."

John is seen, throughout the movie, to simply be performing his task of "flying the whirly bird" - he doesn't want involvement in the politics of the military/scientist conflict. He even goes as far to exclaim to Sarah (after she accuses him of being prepared to ditch it all without a "second thought") "shit man, I could do this even if all this wasn't going on".

John simply doesn't believe in what the scientists are trying to achieve. Why? Because it seems that he sees the cyclical nature of humanity - he sees a world broken by inner conflict, to the point of humanity dying, and spends the last days of humanity's existence seeing more and more of this inner conflict - it all happens again albeit on a smaller and more isolated ground.

The reason, I think, of why John's statement of "teaching them never to come here and dig these records out" is prominent in the movie is simply testament to him trying to avoid this cyclical nature transferring to the "new children" that he is theorising. ie: they don't come down here and make exactly the same mistakes that humanity has consistently made since it's inception. It's his way of "wiping the slate clean"

[octo7]

It's strange how so many people come here with Day as their favorite while most hated it when it was released. Makes you wonder how Romero's new films will be regarded in 20 years time.:shifty:
that's exactly what i have been thinking lately about recent movies being slated. even john carpenters vampires might be a future classic. perhaps ghosts on mars may even be revered as mediocre some day too

[Trin]

It's strange how so many people come here with Day as their favorite while most hated it when it was released. Makes you wonder how Romero's new films will be regarded in 20 years time.:shifty:
I wonder what the real demographics are. That is, what percentage of the original Day haters are Day lovers now? Were the Day haters GAR fans, horror fans, movie reviewers, etc.? How many of us Day lovers were originally Day haters? And how long did it take to convert? Was it really 20 years?

I don't think mainstream horror has changed its opinion. Day is (and has always been) thought of as the mediocre final movie in the iconic trilogy. Even when Land came out you didn't see mainstream horror going back in time and extolling the virtues of Day.

I think the biggest change is that the Internet has given the cult following for Day a media outlet it never had before.

[bassman]

Yeah, the internet has definitely helped Day out, but I think the biggest problem was that most people expected another romp like Dawn. When they were given a seriously dark film, they weren't expecting it or welcome to it. Only after the passage of time could they look at the film for what it is on it's own two feet.

And I think you may be a bit off on your assumption that Day isn't as highly regarded as Dawn. Okay...maybe not AS highly regarded, but Day often makes the "best of" lists and that sort of thing. So I definitely think it has the same lating power as Dawn...

[BillyRay]

All this is hindsight, though I suppose.

Folks didn't cozy up to Day because they were expecting another Dawn.

Isn't that the basis of a lot of the criticism of Land and Diary?

"We didn't get the same thing, but different. No Sir, don't like it, not at all."

Personally, I first saw Dawn & Dead on VHS within months of each other in the late 80's. Enjoyed both of them on their own merits.

[octo7]

yeah they are very diffrent films, i think i liked Day more because it scared me more and i am into being scared but as you said they have their own merits.

[Trin]

Yeah, the internet has definitely helped Day out, but I think the biggest problem was that most people expected another romp like Dawn. When they were given a seriously dark film, they weren't expecting it or welcome to it. Only after the passage of time could they look at the film for what it is on it's own two feet.
The phrase "another romp like Dawn" is the perfect description too. Dawn was fun, with cameraderie between the characters and victories and woohoo moments. Day was just a mess. Characters at each other's throats and tension and claustrophobia. It was a brutal transition. I left with a serious "wtf did I just see" vibe.

But after a few viewings I started to get into it.


And I think you may be a bit off on your assumption that Day isn't as highly regarded as Dawn. Okay...maybe not AS highly regarded, but Day often makes the "best of" lists and that sort of thing. So I definitely think it has the same lating power as Dawn...Hmmm... I don't recall ever seeing Day mentioned in best of lists. I usually check for the trilogy whenever I see mention of horror best ofs. And I usually am happy to see either Night or Dawn (or both) and irritated to not see Day. Are you talking through the 90's or more recently?

I'll be interested to see how Land progresses. I think its atmosphere and character elements will stand the test of time. It's not going to look dated 10 years from now. And it has some plot points and glimpses into the world that might be endearing to those watching the 4 movies start to finish and thirsting for more info on what's happened over time. Plus there is closure in Land. So, in that, I think it has a shot of gaining wider acceptance.

Diary... boy, I'd be shocked if it is on anyone's radar 5 years from now. Or now.

[JDFP]

I'll be interested to see how Land progresses. I think its atmosphere and character elements will stand the test of time. It's not going to look dated 10 years from now. And it has some plot points and glimpses into the world that might be endearing to those watching the 4 movies start to finish and thirsting for more info on what's happened over time. Plus there is closure in Land. So, in that, I think it has a shot of gaining wider acceptance.

Diary... boy, I'd be shocked if it is on anyone's radar 5 years from now. Or now.

That's interesting considering that DIARY is a far superior film to LAND. :rant:

Oh wait, wrong thread... :elol::elol::elol:

To me LAND has always been the weakest of the series, and I certainly hope to still feel that way after seeing SURVIVAL. I'm still keeping my fingers crossed that SURVIVAL will blow everything I've seen out of the water so far, but I seriously doubt it would have the ability to knock DAY from my # 1 position.

j.p.

[capncnut]

That's interesting considering that DIARY is a far superior film to LAND. :rant:
Then JDFP woke up... ;)

[AcesandEights]

Folks didn't cozy up to Day because they were expecting another Dawn.

Isn't that the basis of a lot of the criticism of Land and Diary?



That's certainly what some folks like to claim :D

[SRP76]

I don't think John's really suggesting all that crap about run off and start repopulating. It's a lot simpler than that: he was just using the "records prop" to illustrate the basic point that the "research" isn't going to matter in the end; the zombies are there, you're not going to "cure" them, so stop trying and find something else to do - anything else (such as "blow the piss out of them", even), not just run away to an island.

He could have said, "Sarah, you're just pissing up a rope with this bullshit", and saved about 5 minutes. But it wouldn't have been as dramatic.

[DubiousComforts]

Folks didn't cozy up to Day because they were expecting another Dawn.

Isn't that the basis of a lot of the criticism of Land and Diary?
I've got news for you: folks didn't cozy up to DAWN either because they were clearly expecting another NIGHT. But even though nobody ever admits that it's a matter of failed expectations, you'd probably be hard pressed to find anyone who didn't like DIARY simply because they were expecting LAND.


That's certainly what some folks like to claim :D
How about you keep track of that for us, and we'll check back to see how you're doing, thanks.

[AcesandEights]

How about you keep track of that for us, and we'll check back to see how you're doing, thanks.

I'm a strictly tag and release sort. :D

[DubiousComforts]

I'm a strictly tag and release sort. :D
Oh please? :D

[darth los]

Hmmm... I don't recall ever seeing Day mentioned in best of lists. I usually check for the trilogy whenever I see mention of horror best ofs. And I usually am happy to see either Night or Dawn (or both) and irritated to not see Day. Are you talking through the 90's or more recently?




So those lists are a farce because outside of the GAr films what's better than DAy? Opinions might vary but I know one thing for sure, there aren't 5-10 films better than it that should be preceeding it.


:cool:

[Mike70]

no reason to discuss because unless they find about 75 or 80 other couples (the most accepted number for a viable human starting population is about 160 people), their colony would be doomed through lack of genetic variation. if you were able to employ social engineering, weeding out people with bad dominant genes, ensuring no one in the group were related in any way with a few generations, etc. this number could be reduced to about 80.

in short, no matter where they go or what they do, they are doomed (as far as having any future beyond their own lives) unless they find other people. period.


even if sarah had children by every one of the men in that bunker it would be to no avail. they'd all be half-siblings at best. so everyone would start out being everyone else's brother or sister. that would not be good at all.

[darth los]

no reason to discuss because unless they find about 75 or 80 other couples (the most accepted number for a viable human starting population is about 160 people), their colony would be doomed through lack of genetic variation. if you were able to employ social engineering, weeding out people with bad dominant genes, ensuring no one in the group were related in any way with a few generations, etc. this number could be reduced to about 80.

in short, no matter where they go or what they do, they are doomed (as far as having any future beyond their own lives) unless they find other people. period.


even if sarah had children by every one of the men in that bunker it would be to no avail. they'd all be half-siblings at best. so everyone would start out being everyone else's brother or sister. that would not be good at all.


I'm not a particularly religious person or anything and there are alot of smart people here.

So maybe someone can explian to me how At minimum atleast 160 Homo Sapiens just sprung up and started reproducing. According to the bible one man and one woman is enough. Now did some children die due to birth defects and other ailments related to having a gene pool that was too small? The answer certainly has to be yes but what gives?


:cool:

[Mike70]

I'm not a particularly religious person or anything and there are alot of smart people here.

So maybe someone can explian to me how At minimum atleast 160 Homo Sapiens just sprung up and started reproducing. According to the bible one man and one woman is enough. Now did some children die due to birth defects and other ailments related to having a gene pool that was too small? The answer certainly has to be yes but what gives?


:cool:

please let's not go down this religion road. i have no desire to talk about a subject so vacuous as judeo-christian creation myths.

[Rancid Carcass]

I don't think John was seriously considering his repopulation plan - Lets face it, men will say anything to get some action, (I'm sure we've all done it!). I mean, they're running away to a desert island and as far as they know they're the last three people left alive and one of them's McDermot... He's going to be using every god-damned trick in the book! :lol:

[AcesandEights]

Not wanting to to promote a digression, but I happen to think the Judeo-Christian mythology, especially the creation aspects are quite beautiful. Nonsensical when not looked at from allegorical standpoint, but very interesting, at least.

Where else would I have received license to refer to women as a 'rib'? I ask you! :D

[darth los]

please let's not go down this religion road. i have no desire to talk about a subject so vacuous as judeo-christian creation myths.


Not going down that road because it seems far fetched to me but none of us here can disprove it either.

I just wish the people who believed in it would admit the same thing. That they don't have a single shred of evidence to back up what they're saying.


But the question still stands and it's an eternal one. How did we get here and how are you are any scientist so sure that those numbers you listed are what hapened?

As a matter of fact most human beings are useless, not going to invent shit resource hoggers. Maybe that's because there were only two in the beginning and most people after that just came out retarded because of the reasons you mentioned?


:cool:

[AcesandEights]

Additionally, let me just say, I don't think re population is some sort of far-fetched notion, but rather a pretty natural inclination once the dust of any disaster scenario settles.

No, it's not going to happen in the bunker, which makes getting out of the bunker, setting up for long term survival and maybe...maybe...finding others who did the same vital. But the first step would always be survive, then get to someplace else where long term survival can be maintained. John's whole mind set seemed to be about moving on, primarily due to a lack of faith in the current situation (this echoes his despondency over and morbid attitude towards the 'old' system).

Anyway, If we can survive whatever super-eruption caused the massive de-population (i.e. genetic bottleneck) way back when, then who knows what else we can survive.

I am assured at any rate
Man’s practically inexterminate.
Someday I must go into that.
There’s always been an Ararat
Where someone someone else begat
To start the world all over at.

That is, until we reach a point we can't come back from, but you don't come back from a massive die-off without making an effort.

[Mike70]

The first thing some of those "babies" would do, once they were old enough to think for themselves, would be to go over there and dig those records up.

:D

-stray-

indeed. tell a young person not to do something and the second they get the chance, that's what they'll do.

i don't think you could keep people from finding out about the past anyway. everything would simply be laying around for anyone to take a gander at.

i'd approach it this way:

i would tell the children that follow on about the past, about america, about everything. then i would make sure that that history is ridiculed for the death trip that it was and by using education, attempt to make the past look like nothing you would even begin to consider emulating. the message would be: this is what happened in the past and look where it got us. those systems of govt., culture, etc. are nothing to look back on fondly.

it would be time to sweep everything away (without destroying or forgetting) and start completely over. i also would not labor under the ridiculous notion that the area i was living in was the "united states." it wouldn't be and that would be living in the past, which is utterly pathetic and psychologically dangerous.

[darth los]

i would tell the children that follow on about the past, about america, about everything. then i would make sure that that history is ridiculed for the death trip that it was and by using education, attempt to make the past look like nothing you would even begin to consider emulating. the message would be: this is what happened in the past and look where it got us. those systems of govt., culture, etc. are nothing to look back on fondly.


I agree. If we don't know our history so that we may learn from it the same things are going to end up happening.

There would also be collateral damage if the good was buried with the bad as well. Is that worth it?


When kids discover the elders have been hiding something it makes them want to partake in it even more.

Furthermore, once they find they've been being lied to all those years the elders would lose all credibility.


:cool:

[strayrider]

i'd approach it this way:

i would tell the children that follow on about the past, about america, about everything. then i would make sure that that history is ridiculed for the death trip that it was and by using education, attempt to make the past look like nothing you would even begin to consider emulating. the message would be: this is what happened in the past and look where it got us. those systems of govt., culture, etc. are nothing to look back on fondly.

I believe you would be hard-pressed to come up with a "new" way of running things. Everything has already been tried -- for better or worse.

Plus, even with education, you just cannot change human nature. Whatever the mistakes mankind has made in the past, will be made in the future. Every generation believes that theirs will somehow be "different" but it never seems to work out that way.

Survivors start out to repopulate the world with loving, caring, and wise offspring. Tribes first. Then communities. Followed by nations. Clans become countries. Countries become rivals. Conflict ensues. Nothing you can do will stop this.

The Dead win. They don't kill each other.

:D

-stray-

[JDFP]

please let's not go down this religion road. i have no desire to talk about a subject so vacuous as judeo-christian creation myths.

Personally, I have no desire in going where people make comments like this attacking another person's faith, whether I agree with it or not. And using terminology such as "myth" to describe a belief system I do consider to be inappropriate. I don't attack others for their religious ideology, or lack thereof, and in a message board where people have different theological ideologies from different paths of life I don't think it's asking too much for equal respect.

If it's a religious or political ideology, keep it to yourself or post on a different forum. I come here to read about flesh eating zombies and Romero, who people enjoy regardless of religion or creed, not to have a theological diatribe or to espouse philosophical drivel.

We do have a general forum section as well.

Nothing personal against you, Mike, anyone who uses the word "vacuous" has my vote of confidence, even if I disagree with the subjective way in which you used it, but I just don't think comments like this are appropriate here.

Let's get back to the myths of Romero, or are they only myths? :skull:

Thank ya kindly...

j.p.