Vampires a Mathematical Impossibility, Scientist Says

I think Cyclops's's village was raided by emos when he was young. :csad:
 
Cyclops said:
Attack what? They're emo sissies. They don't attack. They just sit around and mope all day.


yeah, you're right. they would just write in their diary or something about how angry they are.
 
Yeah, this is a flawed study, vampires can feed without killing the prey.
Vampire does not equal emo by the way.
 
It had nothing to do with killing the prey and everything to do with the prey being converted after being fed upon.

And like I said, the myths have so many various interpretations of how one becomes a vampire that no one way can be discredited.
 
ah, but you aren't automaticly turned in most myths these days, some myths even say some vampires can survive for a while feeding on animals.
anyway the real story is that 'vampire' and 'scientist' should never appear on the same page let alone the same story.
 
so maybe emo equals poorly dressed vampire wannabe but vampires come from a broader range of people with nothing better to do.
 
Weiser_Cain said:
Yeah, this is a flawed study, vampires can feed without killing the prey.
Vampire does not equal emo by the way.
Lol "study". I guarantee you it took this guy 20 minutes sitting down with his calculator.
 
Weiser_Cain said:
Yeah, this is a flawed study, vampires can feed without killing the prey.
Vampire does not equal emo by the way.
Well usually they are emo, or sex-freaks from what I've seen.
 
Weiser_Cain said:
so maybe emo equals poorly dressed vampire wannabe but vampires come from a broader range of people with nothing better to do.
*sniff sniff*
I smell bloodsukka
 
alt1_blacula_big.jpg
 
"Forget what you think you know. Vampires exist."
---Blade
 
So if Vampires are the living dead... Can they give birth?
If you say yes, how can something thats dead give life to something?
So are they alive? If so, then why are they considered dead. Some call them undead, but if your undead aren't you alive. Why not just say they're alive?
 
Dope Nose said:
http://www.livescience.com/othernews/061025_vampire_debunk.html

Vampires a Mathematical Impossibility, Scientist Says

By Sara Goudarzi
LiveScience Staff Writer
posted: 25 October 2006
01:50 pm ET

A researcher has come up with some simple math that sucks the life out of the vampire myth, proving that these highly popular creatures can't exist.

University of Central Florida physics professor Costas Efthimiou's work debunks pseudoscientific ideas, such as vampires and zombies, in an attempt to enhance public literacy. Not only does the public believe in such topics, but the percentages are at dangerously high level, Efthimiou told LiveScience.

Legend has it that vampires feed on human blood and once bitten a person turns into a vampire and starts feasting on the blood of others.

Efthimiou's debunking logic: On Jan 1, 1600, the human population was 536,870,911. If the first vampire came into existence that day and bit one person a month, there would have been two vampires by Feb. 1, 1600. A month later there would have been four, and so on. In just two-and-a-half years the original human population would all have become vampires with nobody left to feed on.

If mortality rates were taken into consideration, the population would disappear much faster. Even an unrealistically high reproduction rate couldn't counteract this effect.

"In the long run, humans cannot survive under these conditions, even if our population were doubling each month," Efthimiou said. "And doubling is clearly way beyond the human capacity of reproduction."

So whatever you think you see prowling around on Oct. 31, it most certainly won't turn you into a vampire.
never believe anything a researcher does, they are all lazy bums, me included
 
Dope Nose said:
plus he's not taking vampire hunters into account.

He's also not taking into account the fact that not all vampire victims become vampires. The vampire has to "feast" on his victim multiple times BUT leave them alive after his meal for them to become a vampire too.
 
Hah, I know the author of that article. :up:
 
Wow, Costas Efthimimou is an idiot.
Vampires need to feed more than once a month.
Furthermore, their victims don't become vampires unless the vampire wishes to make them into one. A vampire could go his whole life only feeding on, then killing victims, and never creating more vampires.
What a maroon.
 
Fine! I like my steak bloody, anyway! :cmad:
 
Sloth7d said:
So if Vampires are the living dead... Can they give birth?
If you say yes, how can something thats dead give life to something?
So are they alive? If so, then why are they considered dead. Some call them undead, but if your undead aren't you alive. Why not just say they're alive?
Vampires are a mockery of life, feeding off of and destroying the living to maintain some semblance of the life they once lead. Twisted by the thing they have become and dammed for all eternity the only thing they can birth is more death, twice damming their victim in the process.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"