A virus just wiped out 99.999% of the worlds population
01-22-2018, 10:53 AM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: 2000 Tiburon
A virus just wiped out 99.999% of the worlds population
You are one of the 72,000 people that are immune. Whats your post apocalypse strategy? (I saw this on a guitar forum I'm on so I stole the idea to post here).
I would try and at least burn the bodies around me and start a new town or community cut off from the rest of the world. Kind of like on the walking dead. You know there would be at a few hundred (or more) of those survivors, trying to invade your stuff and take anything they could for themselves. So protection would be the first thing (build some type of armory) and then start to build something that would prevent the bad people from getting in.
I would try and at least burn the bodies around me and start a new town or community cut off from the rest of the world. Kind of like on the walking dead. You know there would be at a few hundred (or more) of those survivors, trying to invade your stuff and take anything they could for themselves. So protection would be the first thing (build some type of armory) and then start to build something that would prevent the bad people from getting in.
01-22-2018, 05:54 PM
#2
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lacey, WA
Posts: 12,515
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Vehicle: Two Accents, Mini, Miata, Van, Outback, and a ZX-6
Assuming even worldwide distribution that's about 5,790 people left in all of north America.
I would assume that being optimistic at least 50% of them would be unable to survive the first few months of the aftermath even though gathering supplies would be comparatively easy. There would be a lot of bodies, water would become contaminated. Most people lack even basic survival skills and the common sense to learn them after the fact. Some survivors would be small children and the elderly. Some would be medically reliant on services that could no longer be provided.
That leaves let's say 3000 people in north America's 9.5 million square miles. Population density would be 1 person for every 3100+ square miles. Somewhere between the sizes of Delaware and Connecticut.
There would still be about 1,000 people in the continental U.S.
If distributed by population rather than area there would be about 3,200 initial survivors in the continental U.S. Following the 50% initial die-off prediction that leaves 1,600 people.
That's 2,371 square miles per person, still larger than the land area of Delaware.
At this population density it would be relatively easy to be found if you wanted to, and relatively easy to stay off the radar if you preferred.
I would initially find an easy place to live for the first couple of months far enough away from population centers to be safe but close enough to regularly investigate. There's a state park here that's a self sustaining island complete with orchards, a garden, a large enough resident population of deer, solar power, and a well. Not many people would know about it and out of all the places to look for people it would be low on people's list.
After the initial die off and decomposition phase I would likely scout the wider area and try to locate survivors. There should be something like 35 left in my state. If possible I would find and watch survivors undetected for a period of time before deciding whether to befriend, avoid, or eliminate them. I would probably do this by kayak on the Puget Sound to begin with, investigating lights or fires at night. Due to the low survival rate I would hope to find a few survivors and try to keep a semi-modern society functioning. There is a sustainable prison island in our area that could be relatively easily fortified for a larger population. I would plan on moving there if the population was high enough to warrant the effort. I am near several military bases, armament would not be an issue.
I would assume that being optimistic at least 50% of them would be unable to survive the first few months of the aftermath even though gathering supplies would be comparatively easy. There would be a lot of bodies, water would become contaminated. Most people lack even basic survival skills and the common sense to learn them after the fact. Some survivors would be small children and the elderly. Some would be medically reliant on services that could no longer be provided.
That leaves let's say 3000 people in north America's 9.5 million square miles. Population density would be 1 person for every 3100+ square miles. Somewhere between the sizes of Delaware and Connecticut.
There would still be about 1,000 people in the continental U.S.
If distributed by population rather than area there would be about 3,200 initial survivors in the continental U.S. Following the 50% initial die-off prediction that leaves 1,600 people.
That's 2,371 square miles per person, still larger than the land area of Delaware.
At this population density it would be relatively easy to be found if you wanted to, and relatively easy to stay off the radar if you preferred.
I would initially find an easy place to live for the first couple of months far enough away from population centers to be safe but close enough to regularly investigate. There's a state park here that's a self sustaining island complete with orchards, a garden, a large enough resident population of deer, solar power, and a well. Not many people would know about it and out of all the places to look for people it would be low on people's list.
After the initial die off and decomposition phase I would likely scout the wider area and try to locate survivors. There should be something like 35 left in my state. If possible I would find and watch survivors undetected for a period of time before deciding whether to befriend, avoid, or eliminate them. I would probably do this by kayak on the Puget Sound to begin with, investigating lights or fires at night. Due to the low survival rate I would hope to find a few survivors and try to keep a semi-modern society functioning. There is a sustainable prison island in our area that could be relatively easily fortified for a larger population. I would plan on moving there if the population was high enough to warrant the effort. I am near several military bases, armament would not be an issue.
01-24-2018, 07:52 AM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Santa Ana, CA
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: 2001 Tiburon
I would initially find an easy place to live for the first couple of months far enough away from population centers to be safe but close enough to regularly investigate.
After the initial die off and decomposition phase I would likely scout the wider area and try to locate survivors.
After the initial die off and decomposition phase I would likely scout the wider area and try to locate survivors.
