Wordsmoker

First a bit of the background as to why I chose this Halloween to explore the age-old question about which is the greater threat: werewolves or zombies. I didn’t have any other ideas and a couple of my friends were arguing about it on Facebook.

It started with the status update of a colleague of mine:

“Thor Youngblood is still hoping to avoid werewolves this weekend, but it doesn’t look good.”

And then a comment by Wordsmoker favorite, Greyson Stone:

“Thor, if you see one werewolf for every hundred zombies I’ll be surprised! Now get with it. We’re going to need you to focus.”

Thor then came back with this argument:

“It will only take one werewolf to deal with 500 zombies, Greyson. Fear the Lycans, my friend.”

Greyson then became flustered, as is evidenced by his multiple exclamation marks:

“This entire werewolf scare is just a ploy to drive up silver prices and divert attention from the real problem. Zombies!!!”

So, naturally I decided that it would be a good time to explore this burning debate. Before we start a few assumptions must be made:

• All monsters are of the standard variety for their species. No super werewolves that can change during the daytime or flying zombies.
• All battles take place with the combatants in their monster form. Werewolves generally have to wait until there is a full moon or at least nighttime. For the purpose of this treatise, both types of monsters will be in their fully altered state.
• All monsters are of a legal age to do combat in the state of occurrence.
• Any weapons that are used have to be something that is natural to that particular monster. For instance, a zombie could pick up a stick or a loaded gun, but it is not likely to be able to reload or acquire silver bullets.
• It will be assumed that zombies can’t convert werewolves and vice versa. They can destroy each other by biting to death, ripping apart, silver bullet (in the case of werewolves), burning, etc.

This paper will measure the combat effectiveness of werewolves and zombies against humans and each other. It will take into consideration a number of factors. Each of those factors will be scored. Although some may argue that the scores are subjective, a great deal of consideration has been given to the weighting of the score. Disputes may have to be settled by future analysts as new data becomes available. A total of ten points can be awarded for each category. The loser of the category is assumed to receive the remainder of the points.

Strength of Numbers: This clearly goes to the zombies. In any document that we have regading zombies, the numbers have been overwhelming. Although it would appear that werewolves have equal powers of replication, there seems to be a reluctance on their part to take advantage of this ability. This may also be attributed to their voracious appetite. In any event, Greyson Stone was correct. There will be hundreds of zombies for every one werewolf. That means that the werewolf could be overwhelmed by the mass of the zombie attack. This strategy was employed by the US military when simulating tank attacks by the former Soviet Union. The results were inconclusive. While, Thor Youngblood may have had a point about a werewolf being able to battle a hundred zombies, the odds may even be worse. When it comes to the threat to humanity, zombies have a clear advantage. In every scenario, zombies eventually have the run of the world. Werewolves usually slink around the outside of a city, but rarely dominate the planet.

Strength of Numbers: 7 out of a possible 10 for zombies.

Physical Agility: One doesn’t have to have to be an expert on either species to know that werewolves are the physically abler of the two. While zombies fail to meet even human standards of physical dexterity, werewolves surpass even our top athletes. Assuming that a werewolf is confronted with a pack of fast zombies, like those that were featured in 28 Days Later, he or she should be able to outrun or out maneuver the “walking dead.” As far as human interactions go, a single person would be able to confront one or two zombies with a reasonable chance of survival. This is not the case with werewolves.

Physical Agility: 10 out of a possible 10 for werewolves.

Scare Factor: An experienced fighter will tell you that one of the most significant factors in any bout is fear. It follows that the scariness of the monster is going to be an enormous advantage in its success. The scariness of werewolves is indisputable. They are furry, dark and sport sharp claws and teeth. No one wants to find himself on a dark country road with a werewolf. However, many people associate lycans with the family beagle. While this is certainly not the case, you can’t scare people if they are ignorant of facts. Zombies, on the other hand, are universally gruesome in appearance. Their rigor mortis causes them to walk with that distinctive, yet creepy gait. However, they are still human in appearance and their swagger is not so different from a drunkard coming from the local kegger or campus rager. The bottom line is that both are scary or not scary depending on perspective. There is very little reason to believe that either creature is motivated by fear, so this is really only an advantage when it comes to the monsters terrorizing of humans.

Scare Factor: 5 points for each side. No clear winner.

Theme Music: Theme music can be used to motivate the fighter. After all, where would Rocky be without the trumpets? Werewolves of London is the anthem of the lycans. Unfortunately, for the zombies, their action music is Zombie by the Cranberries. While both pieces are outstanding in their own right, Zombie is more about the Irish Revolution than about actual zombies. However, it can still be quite uplifting. The bottom line is that werewolves are actually celebrated in the Warren Zevon piece.

Theme Music: 8 out of a possible 10 for werewolves.

Availability of Weapons: This is where the zombies really gain an advantage. The werewolves’ aptitude for handling weapons is undetermined at this time, but the fact remains that most conventional weapons are designed by people for people. A werewolf can’t fire a gun, if they can’t get their big clawy finger in the trigger. Werewolves are also not inclined to go for the weapons and this arrogance may be their Waterloo. Say a group of zombies gets a hold of a couple of hundred steak knives. Given their propensity towards meat, it’s not all that unlikely a scenario, but the point is that you can’t lunge into a group of knife wielding zombies without sustaining a lot of damage. What if the knives were made from silver? Unlikely, but possible. The werewolf would be destroyed immediately.

Availability of Weapons: 10 out of a possible 10 for zombies.

There’s no point in belaboring the results, because you are probably doing the math in your head anyway. Out of a possible 50 points:

Werewolves 26 to Zombies 24

A close, but decisive score. This is not to say that werewolves would always win in a fight against zombies. The study merely suggests that in 50 encounters, werewolves would win two more times than zombies.

How can scientists and world leaders benefit from this analysis? It is clear that if we are to survive a monster apocalypse, it is time to turn our attention from Iran and Global Warming to monster research. Please, look for next weeks article: Deadliest Geo-Political Crisis: Iran vs. Anthropogenic Global Warming.