Comment on I'd have to hear her argument, but...
kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
That would imply that 50 percent of the snapped people’s biomes remained behind. All of the produce in the grocery stores would be covered in airborne E. Coli, and snapped surgeons mid-operation would give their patients staph infections, assuming the suriviving surgery team was able to stablize and close them up before they died anyway. Neat.
Also when those snapped people returned with the half of their biomes that also got snapped, you would get a sequel to the diarrhea. Diarrhea 2: Electric Boogapoo.
Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
Do viruses get snapped too or na
Boxscape@lemmy.sdf.org 14 hours ago
And da babies in-utero? Did the Infinity Gauntlet go by conception or 24-weeks?
partial_accumen@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
There were zero reports I’ve heard from any TV, movie, or comic reference to the snap of unborn (but possibly viable) babies being left behind (by any species even) when the pregnant mother disappeared in the snap. That suggests the Infinity Gauntlet doesn’t consider the unborn as a separate individual until birth.
Boxscape@lemmy.sdf.org 12 hours ago
This scenario didn’t even enter my head when I posed the question. That’s some Stephen King-level imagery though—a snapped mother disappearing only for an amniotic sac to drop in her place.
AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee 13 hours ago
Following that logic conjoined twins would either both be snapped or neither would.
partial_accumen@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
Now you got this idea in my head, if it would have been possible to know if the Infinity Gauntlet considered conception, couldn’t a species, lets say humans, knowing “the snap” was a possible risk, create massive stores of zygotes kept on ice? Lets say 10 zygotes to every 1 living human. After the snap of “half” that would mean that instead of 50% of humans disappearing it would only have been 2.5%.
Moreover, since every other species would have lost 50% and been in chaos it would have been prime opportunity to conquer other species still in disarray.
Cryophilia@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
Now I’d love to see a story about a species that has huge numbers of young but also incredibly high infant mortality. So in the snap they mostly lost a bunch of kids who were going to die anyway. Then they decide to take advantage and invade their neighbors, and Captain Marvel comes to help.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 6 hours ago
Why would zygotes get dusted at a higher rate than adults?
kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
Finally someone asks the real question. Is there an objective definition to life that Virus may or may not fall under? Or would it depend on Thano’s subjective opinion on the matter?
BenReilly97@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
The scientific definition of life changes constantly, but viruses more often than not fall under “not alive.”
Source
Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 14 hours ago
You’ve opened your inbox to a scientific debate that has raged since virology began.
Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
I’m aware ;)
HonkTonkWoman@lemm.ee 8 hours ago
I’m just here to remind you we’re all makin’ durty with your inbox this evening [bowchickawowow…].
Kyle_The_G@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
technically viruses aren’t alive. They just use cellular machinery to replicate and thats it.
Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
Eh, it’s not really that cut and dry. You could debate either way with plenty of evidence, in the end it’s really a limit to the semantics of language
Kyle_The_G@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
Thats pretty neat “you cant kill something thats not alive”. Can viruses respond to stimuli? We consider bacteria alive but viruses are debated, wheres the line? are enzymes alive? Are prions alive? cool article.