Poll: Zombie invasion or 1863?

You’ve been unemployed for a while, and super depressed about the fact that if you don’t find a job soon, homelessness is a real possibility. Right when things seem really grim, you interview for a job and they’re really vague about what you’d be doing. But when they offer you the job, it doesn’t seem like you have much of an alternative, so you jump at the chance to keep a roof over your head and food in your belly. Besides, the pay is great, and so are the benefits.

The first couple days you’re there they’re still pretty vague about what you’ll be doing. On day three you’re brought into a room and showed a complicated piece of machinery, which is spoken about in a bunch of jargon. It slowly dawns on you that they think the thing is a time machine. That strikes you as crazy, but even though you put up a fight they lock you in the room and won’t let you back out.

According to them there’s only two ways you can get out of the room:

  1. Push the blue button and be sent to 1863. When you get there, you’ll be in the midst of the United States’ civil war. If you’re currently in the US, you’ll end up in the closest state that was involved in the war. If you’re not in the US, the machine will drop you into a US state that was in the war at random.

  2. Push the yellow button and be sent to 2013. When you get there, you’ll be in the midst of a worldwide zombie invasion.

Either way, you “only” have to stay there (then?) for seven months. Your role there will be to observe and report back your observations. Assuming that you survive the whole seven months.

If you stubbornly insist on choosing neither date, that’s fine by them. They’re not letting you out, so you can die of thirst if you choose to, and they’ll simply remove your corpse later on, and prep the room for someone a little more cooperative. Don’t even think about escape, it’s impossible.

When are you going to? Why?

From where are the zombies invading?

Well, despite of what the movies tell you, an actual zombie outbreak would most likely fail quickly and certainly not endanger most of the population (yeah, I know the OP said “worldwide invasion”, but I’m guessing that’s just scaremongering by the media, like with the bird flu). The civil war, on the other hand - well, maybe not so much. So, if this is about maximizing my chances of survival, then it’s 2013, hands down. However, I might actually be tempted to go off to 1863 anyway, just because it would be more interesting.

Either way I’d be screwed, but at least in 1863 I might escape elsewhere and avoid the war.

California was spared quite a bit of the Civil War, so I’d be pretty well set in 1863. I guess it really depends on how bad the zombie attacks get.

zombie apocalypse please.

I’m pretty sure even with zombies everywhere, being in my own time and culture is going to be a bigger advantage for me than any survival tactic I can come up with for the Civil War. At least I won’t have to wear petticoats while running from the zombies.

Zombies.

I’m the wrong color to be hanging out in pre-1960s America.

I am in Connecticut, and handicapped. I would probably end up in a workhouse though I could very easily work making fine linens and selling them. Very thankful to my Grandmother who taught me the different forms of embellishment ranging from basic cutwork to much fancier stuff. I also know a fair amount of what I guess you could call kitchen chemistry - making soaps, perfumes and such. I have even done a fat extract of lilac blossoms to get the essential oils - a very painstaking multistep process. [You have to cold extract lilac, it is a very delicate essential oil.]

Are we given some resources like money for past or guns for future? Proper clothing?

You said ‘state’ and Montana was most definitely not one in 1863. If you stretch the definition of ‘state’, well, my part of the Idaho Territory in 1863 was a pretty safe place to be, all things considered. By 1863 standards, anyway, which is why I opted for seven months in zombieland. I can’t abide the notion of spending that long in a wilderness (or close to it) without antibiotics.

Besides, you might decide to strictly interpret ‘state’ and stretch the definition of ‘closest’, in which case I would end up in Kansas, and I would be utterly screwed. Quantrill alone is more than I ever want to face.

Funny OP, because a zombie invasion starting precisely in 1863 is the premise of the RPG game Deadlands (great game, poor combat system).

I’d be likely to do fine in either time, but I picked 1863. There is no reason to put myself into the middle of a zombie apocalypse, ever. The civil war was dangerous, but I am not a soldier, nor dressed as one. Provided I’m not dropped directly into a battlefield I’ll be just fine. There are any number of wealthy people who would love to have the services of a man from the future.

Hm. American Civil War has 1) war 2) disease 3) high general mortality rate 4) politics and culture with which I am unfamiliar and 5) accents and folkways unlike my own, while 2013 has zombies.

Assuming I’m going to be appropriately kitted out, and not arrive buck naked, Terminator-style smack dab in the middle of hostilities, I’m taking 2013, for the following reasons concerning the Civil War: TB, Cholera, Tetanus, Civil War era surgery. As well there is an excellent chance of me being executed as a spy, due to my accent -now a mix of Tidewater, west coast and canadian, I’m going to sound like a yankee down south, and a southron up north-, and my lack of knowledge about the basic mechanics of life, much less current politics. There is also a small but real chance of my changing history, such that I don’t exist, or my time-travel job doesn’t exist, and I get stuck in the past, or some other disaster. Maybe I kill the guy who in our timeline heroically nipped the 1863 zombie outbreak in the bud, in which case I get to do both catastrophes simultaneously.

Tell me more about the benefits package. Hows the dental?

That’s my choice too for the same reason.

Well, in either my chances of survival are good.

Since there are no such thing as zombies, I’d be fine going to the future. But I picked the Civil War because I’m too old to be part of the fighting, and I’ve been a Civil War buff for quite some time.

The field of battle wasn’t the only big mortality factor in 1863. Seven months is a long time. What if you got sick?

Now wait just a minute, here. The zombie apocalypse is set to be in full swing in 2013? As in, within the next two years? So assuming I live through the seven months, I’m going to have to go through the zombie thing anyway?

I guess I’ll take the zombies, then. As a woman, I’m possibly more likely to survive the Civil War, although being in Maryland, it would be pretty hard to stay out of the way regardless. But if I get to do a trial-run of the zombie invasion, maybe I’ll pick up some tips that will keep me alive, and maybe even help me save others, when I have to go through it again. And I’ll have time to prepare for it, which gives me better chances.

I’m in Arkansas, would make for Illinois through Missouri, two states on the side that wins.

It isn’t extremely likely. I can avoid the worst of the water borne pathogens by boiling my water, and modern standards of hygiene and basic first aid medical knowledge from the future should be enough to ensure my safety. Immunizations should keep me safer than most from the airborne stuff as well.

From history books I know what the civil war was like, so I want a new adventure. Going to the zombies.

Definitely 2 years in the future will help. I’d buy an almanac, research the best place to build my fort when I get back to 2011, stock up on enough food and drink for all of my family with the proceeds of my 20 bet accumulators, invite a couple of presidents and prime ministers to stay along with their security, and build the finest, wireless pc/console/flatscreen network with games, media and music in the yottabytes.