What is a monster?

People often consider monsters to be ugly, large, frightening beasts that cause us to reconsider where we step our feet or lay our heads, or deter us from walking in the dark or past the unknown. In reality, monsters can be considered as anything that may cause temporary setbacks or discomforts in our lives. For me, it may be inner controversies, or dilemmas that I may face in every day life that cause me to reconsider the typical behaviors or morals that I value. Such dilemmas could include struggles that many people consider to be problems; moral controversies that could determine the outcome of certain perceptions that we may have in given situations. For example, there are situations in the world that we may consider to be a monstrosity, such as terrorist attacks. The act of terrorism is an event that puts people on edge and sends fear down the spines of many people, for this is an act way out of the typical social norm that we are very frightened to consider even happening to us. One of the biggest fears in our culture is the common fear of the unknown; whether or not certain beasts (monsters) exist, what we can’t see in the dark, or what we don’t know about our future. Through this fear, we tend to find our comfort zones away from these things and lock ourselves in with what is comfortable or normal to us, and as we begin to view the unknown as monstrous or frightening. In reality, the unknown is where we will be able to learn more about things that could be beneficial to us that we just may not have discovered yet. The unknown is also intriguing to some, and its those people who tend to make advances in technology because they are simply testing the boundaries that we have placed on society. Although monsters are typically considered as scary, I believe that the biggest reason we believe that is true is because of the uncertainty about them and the fact that we do not know whether or not we could ever encounter one of these beings.

Destin Mizelle

Professor John Wares

FYOS ‘Are Monsters Real’

17 November 2015

We are Monsters

"AHHH, there is a monster under my bed" is a quote that parents in modern society hear much too often. In fact there is no such thing as monster; humans built the concept of monsters based off the harsh realities of human behavior. Monsters are known to big, scary creatures with abnormal features created for the sole purpose to kill or hurt you if you are within its range. Is it coincidence that we can find most of these features on an inmate in prison, I think not. These “monster” reflect traits of notorious criminals. The media have used qualities of wicked humans and turned it into a Hollywood myth, with intention to make to give movie viewers a thrill and ultimately make a profit.

For example, Frankenstein’s monster, which killed for vengeance, further proves my point. The monster was created by scientist Frankenstein; when the creature did not turn out how the scientist expected, he abandoned it. New to the world, the Monster didn’t know anything and unfortunately, felt the cruel nature of human because of It didn’t look appealing. As a result, the monster decide to get revenge on Frankenstein by killing everyone he loved and cared about. This story can be parallel to a young child who was abandoned at birth. This child was neither adopted nor showed any love. The child grew up and was bullied all throughout high school for big in physical size and not the most attractive in appearance. As a result, the child goes on a killing spree, murdering any and everyone that hurt his feelings. Frankenstein monster is a representation of a large in size serial killer, who lacked any emotion because of a horrific childhood. It’s sad that we as a society likes to make fun of real life situations by making them into a Hollywood films.

The closest creature that the earth has ever seen to a monster is dinosaurs. Fortunately, dinosaurs are not monsters; they were just average large animals during their time. Sid Perkins, an author for student.socieyforscience.org claims that the real sea monsters were marine dinosaurs. All In all I don’t believe that monsters are real they are just personified characteristic of wicked humans. We should just learn to deal with these problems within these individuals instead of making them in to a Hollywood film.

https://student.societyforscience.org/article/real-sea-monsters

Monsters. A “reanimated human corpse that feed on living flesh?” (Munz et al, 1) Or a scary “large primate lineage descended from the extinct Asian species Gigantopithicus blacki?” (Lozier et al, 2). Throughout the course of this class, we have taken a close look at all sorts of monsters ranging from Sasquatch to zombies to even the Neotropical Skipper Butterfly. So, the question comes into play: what exactly is a monster? Is it something that crawls and slithers, or is it something that only seems to be heard of, but never seen? From my experience in this class, I have come to one specific conclusion. In my opinion, a monster is simply something that perplexes the minds of humans while intriguing and terrifying us. These are indeed everywhere and seem to show up in the absence of definite explanation. From the very first day, we spoke of “mutated daisies”. This is where I first realized that as people we tend to blame disasters and radiation for unnatural things that we cannot seem to explain and label those things as “monsters”. Even in the absence of high radiation levels, people still chose to use that as an explanation for the cause of these “mutated daisies”. Another example popped up in an article I read called the “‘Godzilla’ Fossils Reveal Real-life Sea Monster”. This article speaks of a large skull found in the Pacific Ocean (Lovgren, 2005). Without a concrete explanation for the appearance of this enormous skull people simple chose to label it a “monster” (Lovgren, 2005). Specifically, it was labeled a “real-life” monster, which brings up the question if a monster is “real” is it really a monster at all?

However, when there is a lack of something to serve as the cause of things that are unnatural, like radiation, this is when we move toward the term “monster”. We have all heard the myths of “Big Foot,” and how it is this indescribable large creature that can never be caught. I found it extremely interesting that this creature has existed for such a long time without leaving behind any concrete evidence of its existence. We even spoke in class of the different requirements this creature would need in order to survive and provide a large enough population to support the reported sightings. So if there is little to no proof besides an old man saying that Sasquatch had some really “pretty hair”, then why do we resonate on the idea of it? People have even taken the time to carry out in-depth processes in order to explain and predict the existence of Big Foot. Ecological niche modeling was used in order to predict the distribution of Sasquatch throughout North America. Due to databases, and internet access, however, the range of error in using such a process as greatly increased. Even with this increased error and decreased reliability, people still chose to use this method in order to provide an explanation for these supposed sightings. Scientific measures were used including “auditory detections and footprint measurements” (Lozier et al). According to the article the distribution of this creature also correlated to the distribution of Black Bears (Lozier et al). So once again if most signs were pointing away from the existence of Big Foot, then why do we still bother to be intrigued by it? I believe these simple facts prove that this sort of creature does not necessarily exist, but even the slightest doubt of it existing compels us to label it as a monster, because we cannot explain it.

Once again bringing the idea that monsters are simply the things we fail to accurately explain, is the idea of a zombie. There has not been any significant evidence of zombies or an outbreak anywhere other than in the media. Yet, researches still chose to dedicate their time into producing a mathematical model of zombie infection (Munz et al). Researchers went on to even labeling separate classes of zombies including those that were susceptible, removed, or of course zombie (Munz et al). Each class was defined and an equation was formed in order to determine the likelihood of zombie infection. Models of treatment, quarantine, and impulsive eradication were all used in order to define this idea. Once again, it is easy to wonder why so much time and science would be put into something that has only been seen on TV. I believe that the idea in the back of out mind that somewhere zombies may exist, propels us to once again look for an explanation. This explanation, however, we are unable to definitively provide gives us reason into labeling this as just another “monster”.

To blatantly answer the question of monster existence, I believe this is true. Monster exist all around us, but it is the definition of monster that comes into question. Is it just something we are scared of? Is it just something we can’t see? I believe a monster is something that forces us to find explanation for, which usually cannot be found. In the existence of much evidence, monsters usher our minds to search for further explanation. This is because the explanation serves as our protection from the unknown. However, sometime we must leave some things unexplained.

Works Cited

Lovgren, Stefan. ""Godzilla" Fossils Reveal Real-Life Sea Monster." National Geographic. National Geographic Society, 2005. Web. 18 Nov. 2015.

We all think of monsters as something with big teeth, abnormal looking, and something from a scary story. Monsters are given these so called stereotypes but from my FYO course we have looked at all different types of “monsters”; some are not even defined in those stereotypes. However, how can we really know if something is a monster? There are all of kinds of monsters such as Bigfoot, Loch Ness, and chupacabras but do we know if these are monsters or even exist? These questions have boggled many over the years, especially me. I believe that monsters exist but not the ones that everyone is used too.

Monster. When I think of the monster I usually think of the basic characteristics. Monsters are something that you hear scary stories about, a creature that does not have prove of existence, or something you can see on an episode of Scooby Doo. Scooby Doo incorporated all types of monsters and, I think, did a very well job of depicting what these monsters look like. A monster is something we do not know about/foreign or have no prove of. It is created out of fear and hysteria. The monsters that always come to my mind are kind of like mythical creatures. My favorites are Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster. These two monsters are not proven to be real but there have been many eye witness accounts. There have been stories told and documented of these creatures but no real, tangible proof. This is what interests me the most is the uncertainty of existence. Although these monsters are interesting and attention catching, they are more than likely not to exist which is seen in Scooby Doo as well. At the end of all episodes the audience learns that it was a hoax and the monster was not real. This relates to the real world and the view on monsters today.

I do believe that some monsters exist. For example, Cutaneous Leishmaniasis. This is a type of parasite that causes a major skin infection. This is transmitted through bite of a sandfly (Reithinger et al.). This infection causes huge skin legions and can lead to health complications and even death if not treated. This causes several problems because it is usually symptomless, so you will not know you have it until it happens (Reithinger et al.). This monster is microscopic and can do a lot of harm which is different from a traditional monster most people think. Even though this monster isn’t big, it is definitely something to be afraid of. In contrast to traditional monsters, this parasite has proof of existence. This parasite comes with surprises and pain. After doing this research on this parasite, I am now more afraid of this parasite than any other monster.

Works Cited

Reithinger, Richard, Jean-Claude Dujardin, Hechmi Louszir, Bruece Alexander, and Simon Brooker. "Cutaneous Leishmaniasis."ScienceDirect 7.9 (2077): 581-96. Print.

The word monster can be interpreted differently for everyone. When you think of monster, do you think of the thing hiding under your bed? Or do you think of Bigfoot or the Yeti? You may think of a shark or a bear- something you are afraid of. To me, the word monster is an organism that is out of the norm, or something that hasn’t been proven to exist. They can take any shape or form- it can be as small as a microscopic bug or as big as the Yeti. A bug like lice or dust mites is a monster in my opinion, because those tiny bugs cause problems with your health. But some monsters still haven’t been proven to exist. So how can it be a monster? Some monsters are imaginary, and most are still trying to be proven exist. Cryptozoologists are people who search for legendary animals, like monsters. The believe that evidence of photographs or mysterious footprints is enough to conform a monsters existence. Daniel Loxton and Daniel Prothero are palentologists and big monster lovers. Loxton defines a cryptid as this: “A cryptid is any animal that has never been described by science, usually something very unusual along the lines of a Loch Ness monster or Bigfoot, something that stretches the limits of what is scientifically plausible. “ That is similar to my definition of a monster, something unusual like bigfoot and the yeti and that hasn’t been scientifically proven to be true. Loxton describes a cryptid as this: “t's based on the word cryptozoology, which means hidden life or animals. It implies a creature that's been recorded through folklore, something that we have reason to suspect exists.” So monsters can be created through myths or stories, and many of us do believe they exist. Many will always remain unknown and will never know of their existence, and others are seen in everyday life.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/09/130907-cryptid-crytozoology-bigfoot-loch-yeti-monster-abominable-science/

The word “monster” can have many very different meanings. It can refer to the classical beasts found in myths and fairy tales. It can indicate the creatures portrayed in movies and video games designed to scare audiences senseless. It can even be used to describe other human beings who have committed frightening acts, or nightmares we drudge up in our own minds. Personally, I have described monsters differently during varying sections of my life. However, overall, whenever I hear the word “monster” my mind tends to conjure up images of the supernatural before anything else. Ultimately, though, I do not believe it matters what form monsters take for each individual, but what the driving force behind experiences with them is: fear.

Fear of the unknown is prevalent amongst humans, and not without reason. If there is something we cannot understand well enough to explain, then how can we stand against it if it proves to be dangerous? From an early age we experience this fear, as we know next to nothing about the world. That branch scratching at the window is terrifying, and that owl’s call is haunting, so the mind tries to come up with an explanation for both, sometimes resulting in the creation of a “monster.” That branch becomes an aggressive creature trying to claw its way into your room, and that owl’s sound seems like the miserable howls of a lost spirit. Even when we learn the true causes of our discomfort, in the dead of night, alone in a dark room, our mind plays tricks on us. It tells us that the noises are different from last time somehow, so they must be from some unknown entity, a potentially threatening one. This is what monsters are, the threats we make ourselves in order to explain or justify our unease at the thought of the unknown. Thus, many authors have explored the idea that monsters are just projections of the near-universal fear of death (Bizuleanu 210). People even fabricate restrictions for such beings in order to control the “unknown” further. Vampires cannot come in contact with sunlight or garlic, werewolves fear silver, and so on.

It is difficult to determine the existence of monsters in the real world, for, even the fabrications of the mind can seem all too real sometime. Unknown creatures, however, ones that have never been discovered by humans, could very well exist, though. There are areas deep in the sea, contained in deserts, and far off in space that could very well prove to be home to all kinds of never before seen beings. Supernatural beings, though, are another matter altogether. It seems unlikely that the monsters of a supernatural origin exist anywhere but in stories and dreams. However, it is also impossible to completely discount the potential existence of such creatures. After all, just because they often do not fit into current scientific constraints, that does not mean that they do not exist at all. There are people who staunchly deny or defend the existence of monsters, even if it seems impossible to know for sure.

In the end, each person has their own idea of what makes monsters real or not for them. Often, a personal experience or lack thereof is the deciding factor on whether or not they believe. In order to have some universal agreement on the existence of monsters, a real monster would have to be found, and even then people would try to fit it into their already existing view of the world and deny any “monster-like” qualities it possesses. There is certainly no way to prove monsters do not exist, because there will always be some explanation or excuse from believers as to why they can evade detection. In reality, it does not really matter if monsters are real, because, in the absence of some full-blown zombie apocalypse, everyone will continue to have differing opinions on the subject, and even in a zombie apocalypse, there would undoubtedly be that one person still vehemently insisting that monsters do not exist. There are so many different definitions of “monster” and so few ways to go about proving their existence, so it is unlikely that we will ever be certain if monsters are real or not.

Sources

Bizuleanu, Dana. "The Monster's Myth: From Ideology To Herta Müller's Imaginary." Caietele Echinox 28.(2015): 208-217. Humanities International Complete. Web. 18 Nov. 2015.

The term “monster” takes on a frightening connotation and sparks one’s imagination. I believe monsters are organisms that have not yet been explained by science. I believe “monsters” are creatures that are scary, because they are either not understood yet or are imagined creatures based off of other known species. Therefore, I believe that some monsters exist. However, once they are explained, I no longer consider them monsters.

An example of a creatures being regarded as a monster, because it wasn’t understood yet, would be the Giant Squid. It was once regarded as a monster, but after evidence was found of its existence, it wasn't thought of as a monster anymore. In my opinion, a monster is something that evokes fear, because it is not understood yet. Another example would be Globsters. Before scientific research was done, globsters were regarded as sea monsters, because they looked very different than known species of marine life. However, many researchers found the samples to be sharks or whales. (Radford, 2014). After knowledge of what globsters really are was found, people stopped fearing them. Sharks are also thought of as monsters by many people, even by myself when I was younger. When people are unaware of the important roles sharks play in the ecosystem and our lives, it is easy for people to still regard sharks as monsters due to our fear of being vulnerable in a territory that we cannot control. Another organism to consider is the salmon. When one isn't familiar with the life cycle of a salmon, the onlooker may regard the aged salmon as a “zombie fish” or monster (Cooney, 2013). One meaning of monster that I believe is when a creature that exists isn't thoroughly understood and evokes fear or excitement.

I also think of cryptids when I think of monsters, but I do not believe they exist. Cryptids are creatures that have been recorded in folklore and that many suspect are real, but no concrete evidence exists. For instance, many reports of sasquatch sightings are actually bear sightings. “These animals look like something familiar to us because the myths grow around whatever we've already just seen” (Prothero, 2013). Trying to prove or disprove these types of monsters is quite tricky and there are many factors that must be taken into account regarding their existence. “A cryptid can't be a single animal. If there's one of them, there's got to be many of them. You can talk about their population density, the size of range they should have based on their estimated body size.” These factors support the fact that the monsters probably do not exist, because they “should have had huge ranges, and they should have been spotted a long time ago if they really did exist.” In their book, Abominable Science! Origins of the Yeti, Nessie, and Other Famous Cryptids, Loxton and Prothero use the quote: “the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.” I think this quote nicely summarizes why it is difficult to approve or disprove the existence of these monsters. Although there may not be enough evidence supporting the existence of a cryptid, it does not mean that it does not exist. However, Loxton also makes another important point: “If the claim that you are advancing implies some kind of evidence, then failing to find that kind of evidence is evidence that that thing does not exist. Take, for example, the idea that there might be plesiosaurs in Loch Ness. Well, plesiosaurs had bones. That implies that there should be bones littering the loch. Well, they've dredged the loch to see if there are any monster bones down there, any plesiosaur bones, and there aren't. That goes to the truth of the claim.”

In conclusion, I believe that monsters are either creatures we do not understand yet and will no longer consider them monsters once we do understand them or cryptids

that are hard to approve or disprove their existence.

Works Cited

Cooney, Patrick. “The Swimming Dead: Videos of Zombie Fish.” The Fisheries Blog. 11 Nov. 2013. Web. 16 November 2015.

Radford, Benjamin. “Globsters: Mysterious Marine Masses.” Live Science. 21 May 2014. Web. 16 November 2015.

Shea, Rachel. “The Science Behind Bigfoot and Other Monsters.” National Geographic. 09 Sept. 2013. Web. 16 November 2015.

What makes people feel the need to call something a monster? Fundamentally, we humans are afraid of things we can't understand. But monster is a fairly broad, open-ended term. For instance, we sometimes use the word monster to describe something like bigfoot, a massive humanoid creature, but also to describe microscopic organisms that terrorize their prey in a much different way than the brute force of bigfoot. Sometimes, we even call other humans monsters for their actions. So what then, defines a monster? Essentially, a monster is any thing that looks or behaves in a way we find frightening or don't understand. For the purpose of this paper, I will stick to discussing two types of monsters: mythical and natural.

Mythical monsters always make for a great discussion. Bigfoot, Yeti, the Loch Ness Monster, are names we are all familiar with and always seem to pop up in this field. These mythical creatures share a few things in common; they are large, solitary animals that plenty of people claim to have seen, yet there is no real proof that any of them exist , or ever did. So where did these come from? Well, creating this type of monster may actually be quite easy. In fact, you only need one person to confirm the existence of a monster. They can give a general description of its size and other physical characteristics, that other people then hear and visualize themselves. While trying to decide what exactly I defined a monster as, I read a National Geographic article, which had a section discussing that we as humans are “notoriously bad witnesses”. Basically, this means that not only does our vision often play tricks on us, but our memory can also distort what we thought we saw. These two in combination with us can turn a questionable grizzly bear sighting into a confirmed Sasquatch spotting. Again, this ties in to our human nature to want to rationalize things so we go from “I have no clue what that rustling noise outside my tent is” to “it must be bigfoot!” In reality, the jump isn't quite that drastic (hopefully), but the underlying principle holds true. So, based on these human tendencies, combined with a lack of solid evidence of these creatures, we can pretty much rule out any real possibility of their existence.

When we think about monsters, we are naturally inclined to think of the big bad ones, but some natural monsters here on our own earth can be just as interesting, if not more. Our world is teeming with natural monsters: parasites, viruses, and many other crazy plants, animals, and fungi. But we have certainly proven these things to exist, so does that mean they aren't monsters? Quite the opposite actually, they just take on a different meaning to the word. Although we can observe them in everyday life, their actions are what really creep us out. For example, in class, we discussed monsters that would essentially take over a host organism, such as the wasp and the cockroach, and use its body to promote its own survival. Again, this fear comes from our own human nature, because this kind of parasitic relationship isn't a concept that is familiar to humans, so we look as disturbing and grotesque. However, these creatures behave in this way because it is instinctive to them; everything they do is because of pre-encoded instructions in their DNA. Still, they do create some pretty bizarre situations, like rats that aren't afraid of cats, or caterpillars that protect the maggots that just devoured and crawled out of its own body. So, we can assume that these “monsters” are in fact real and living among us.

So what can we take away from this? How is it possible that imaginary beasts and real organisms can both be called monsters? Quite simply, it is because the term monster is a very abstract one. The common theme here is one of fear: mythical monsters are scary because of their size and brutish actions, whereas natural monsters are more fearsome for the way they manipulate their prey to carry out their will. Monsters can help us learn more about ourselves, such as what makes us feel fear. They can also peak our curiosity in hunting for them. Overall, Monsters Are Useful!

Link to Article: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/09/130907-cryptid-crytozoology-bigfoot-loch-yeti-monster-abominable-science/

The word "monster" has a different definition to everybody. Some use it to describe a bad human being who did something morally wrong, others use it to describe some horrifying, unrealistic creature or ghost that somebody made up in an attempt to add some fun in their lives. I personally see it as "a being that's not liked by generally everybody, whether it's because it can harm us without being stopped, or because not a lot is known about it which is just as scary." I would consider real life monsters being murderers and abusers in the human category. Other than that, the only real life monsters would be abnormally large creatures that aren't considered to fall in the cute category that whales or elephants may be in. They could also be animals that are a danger to other creatures around them because they're hard to stop if they come after you. Another thing that could be considered monsters would be the unknown, like I mentioned before. Like the sea creatures that are too deep in the ocean for technology to actually capture so that we could learn more about them, or even aliens. I personally don't think there's aliens, but I know that there are people who believe that it is possible there's life outside of our planet. Not that they necessarily fall under the monster category. Monsters have always played a role within human history since uncertainty and danger goes hand in hand with living and surviving. Monsters tend to have the concept of their main goal is to harm another species or the human race. When aliens, are just considered another type of living organism, that's in no way connected with the human race. People haven't decided whether or not aliens would want to harm us or would just ignore us, but that's mainly because there's not even solid evidence they exist. If anything though, I do believe that there are ghosts. I know it sounds silly, but when you walk into a house or place that's filled with bad memories, and can feel uncomfortable whether you even know what happened or not, it just seems to prove it to me. Also, I've had different occurrences in the past that seemed to prove it to me as well. My dad's side of the family is just as interested in horror films as I am, so it's nice having people I can talk about these things with. My dad tries to be a skeptic and not admit that he believes but he does just from the way he talks. Another time that kind of proved it to me was when my immediate family, and my dad's side of the family all stayed together in a large cabin in North Carolina. Over the course of the visit multiple strange things happened, but nobody ever mentioned it to one another in fear that they'd kill the vacation vibe or would scare the younger cousins. But at the end of the trip, the owner of the cabin emailed my mom and asked her to please fill out a review in a book that was hidden in the bookshelf. Of course that itself isn't the odd part. What's odd is that several other people had weird things happened, and some straight up claimed it was haunted. For instance, my mom kept coming to my and my friend who stayed with me room, and the glass door would always be open no matter how many times she would lock it. Another time was when we were all downstairs watching the television while my mom and aunt cooked, and there was a huge thump upstairs. Everybody went quiet, and my dad and uncle immediately ran upstairs suspecting it was an animal that got in. They never found the source of the sound, but multiple things along with those happened too. It's not anything like what they show in movies, but I think there probably are still spirits hanging around in different places. It's hard to get anybody believe such a thing, whether ghosts, demons, or monsters really exist. You might would have solid evidence but they'd still believe you were pulling their leg or had gone through a lot of effort just to trick them. Scientists have yet been unable to prove they exist, but they also haven't been able to prove that they don't exist. They have gone through many different theories and tests to try to prove it, but none of it has been concrete evidence. Like the relationship between dissociative experiences, trait-anxiety and paranormal beliefs were tested and looked into among students. According to the Dissociative Experience Scale (by Bernstein and Putname, The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 174,727-735,1986), there were significant differences between the two genders by females scoring higher than the guys. The information you could get out of this was that high scores in spiritualism and being superstitious, and a lower score in the belief of psi, "predicted the level of derealization". High scores in precognition, the belief of psi, and being superstitious predicted amnesia. It's interesting to think about this kind of stuff though. The reason someone may believe is because a loved one may have passed away, and they're still trying to find a way that they're still with them, one way or another. Another reason someone may believe is if they've personally experienced something unnatural happening, and there wasn't a solid explanation of it. But I do think that a majority of the occurrences are faked, like the ones that they film for tv. I don't see how there would be a way they could come up with technology that could capture instances of ghosts but can't provide solid evidence that scientists can prove to be true. I think they're something not meant to be understood by a normal human being. Whether you believe it's a spirit of one who lived there before, a ghost of a loved one, or an angel, they all fall under the same concept of the unknown. Just like monsters. Monsters just tend to be a little too far played out, where people know they're not real or if they are in the category of being a real life "monster", they're nowhere near what movies make them out to be. Instead it could simply be a fish that's lucky enough to not have been caught for years and has survived and mutated from polluted waters, causing it to grow to an extraordinary size.

I would not consider the salmon to be a zombie. It is still alive, its body is just changing with age. That happens to humans too. Our bodies grow old and wrinkly, our muscles become smaller, and just overall, our bodies deteriorate. The same thing is happening here. The only difference is, the salmon's physical appearance is changing a bit more and it looks a little more dead. It is not dead however, so it is not a zombie. I personally don't think there can ever be zombies. The only thing i could maybe see happening is that a virus could infect us, and cause us to look like dead people, but we still wouldn't be zombies.

Although there is something eerie about wasp larva taking over a spider host to force it to carry out the larva's bidding, and although it is unsettling that salmon begin to deteriorate even before their deaths, that does not mean these creatures can be qualified as zombies. What the spider experiences shows much more resemblance to the idea of mind control than that of the living dead. Typically, zombies are portrayed as creatures with little motivation other than the desire to attack humans, and certainly to not seem to be driven by another creature. Some might argue that zombie's are driven by a virus they host. However, even in that case, zombies are usually mindless and inefficient, while the wasp larva's control of the spider is purposeful and effective. The salmon are another matter. They may decay as they face the hardship of making it back to the place they were born, but they are not technically dead. They are still able to produce the necessary ingredients for reproduction before they cease to live altogether. They do not seem to be the living dead, just quickly deteriorating life.

Sometimes we step back and wonder what the purpose of Zombies or Sasquatch or Unicorns would be; what their place would be in the food chain, or how they would impact their environment. Would they be predators or prey? If they were real, how have we not found them for surely they (well maybe not unicorns) would be the predators and be monstrous creatures of destruction. There should be a path of broken things and destruction in their wake. But what if they have no large life altering purpose - at least in the sense that we assume. What if they exist, only they aren't taking large steps to alter the world or destroy what they find? Maybe their existence merely is and they have no ulterior plans or motives of destruction. And then, after consideration, are we, the humans, the only ones that actively seek to alter our environment and tear things down? Are we the only ones to kill for sport and not defense or survival? Would we be the only real life monsters even if these creatures did exist since we have no desire to merely be, but want to rule it all, and they have no such qualms about a simple existence. Types of creatures that have hardly any impact and therefore hardly any of our attention or consideration do exist. We simply fail to notice them. Maybe we have failed to notice these supposed monsters because they are like the creatures that we fail to notice already - the merely existing creatures. Here is a creature that merely is; have you heard about it before, or has it been beneath our notice due to its lack of world altering agendas?

So the zombies that we see in movies aren't exactly the same kind that are being dictated within those two webpages. One of the articles consist of a wasp that attaches its larvae to become parasites of spiders and to use their abilities in order to survive. That'd be the same as the zombie virus (or whatever) manipulating and using human bodies in order to function and spread. The spiders build a home for the wasps and then are eaten by them. Not a good way to say thank you, I think. Anyways, I also find that the zombie fish are pretty neat too. They go back to the place they were born in order to die and spawn. They are literally killing themselves in the process of doing so. Their muscles and flesh are softening from the change of scenery and objects they run into. It's kind of cruel to think that they're programmed to do so. Like, cruel of nature is what I'm meaning.

Zombies! This is a cool topic to dive into because we all have this image of "the walking dead" that gets portrayed through tv shows and movies, when in reality are they actually like that or are there more than just one kind of zombie? In this article, we learn how zombies came about and that they are a popular figure of pop-culture. Zombies are interesting because they are the living dead and they eat people and their brains to survive. How does this work? Hard to answer because I do not think anyone really knows because we haven't come across any zombies yet. Some believe that zombies will be the end of the world. Once the virus/disease begins it will spread and wipe out everyone in its path. This hypothesis could very well be accurate and possible. We are already dealing with major diseases and see how fatal they can be, such as ebola. Knowing these things lead me to be very worried if anything like this were to happen. In the article, they describe zombies becoming about by and outbreak or epidemic then use known biological factors from movies and make a model. However, they leave out some considerations when it comes to the model.

I thought they a modern day shark was large and scary, but not compared to the Megalodon. Megalodon is a gigantic prehistoric shark and is thought to be the largest marine creature in the history of the planet. This unrealistic creature is imagined to have weighed s much as 100 tons and grew up to 60 feet long. If size does scare you, how about the fact that they had thousands of teeth with only a few scattered bones within their body. Each of their teeth was over 10 inches long , which is about the size of a human face. With size comes power, these large animals was the king of the sea during its reign; it fed on large prehistoric whales,dolphins, squids, fish, and even giant turtles. The bite that they had was astronomical, there bite could crush the skull of a prehistoric whale as easy as a grape; it is thought to have the most powerful bite in the history of earth. These interesting facts brings the question comes into play, "how does the king of the sea lose his throne"? There is really no solid evidence on why these great sharks went extinct, besides the typical ice age death. I believe the Megalodon may be lurking in the depths of the earth waiting to make a grand appearance ( no reputable evidence to support this). The ice age is seen as a tragedy that killed off many amazing creatures, but learning about Megalodon actually made the ice age seem to be a good thing. =)

I don't think it is zombies people are afraid of, it is more so the virus that people are afraid of. Though this started off as a Hollywood movie concept, people are getting the urge that a zombie invasion could actually happen. The movie industry has changed the concept of a "zombie" many time until it transformed into what we recognize it as today; zombies are undead, flesh eating humans who do not have a conscious mind that they can control. As a result, scientist became interest in the concept of a "zombie". By creating a mathematic equation, scientist think they have a bit of an explanation for zombies. Considering I am not a science or mathematical major, the equation is gibberish to me. One thing I did notice is they assumed on a lot of variables which makes me slightly question if a zombie invasion will ever happen. They concluded from the equation that, if zombie invasion ever happened we will have to aggressively attack the virus and the undead in its early stages, even then it may still be disastrous. I would hate to see the collapse of civilization and the rise of a brave new world, but is this zombie invasion even worth fearing?