"Eugene Miya" <eugene@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:48ac540c$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> a balanced diet.
>
> In article <48ac1086$0$28874$88260bb3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> Jon <jonmein@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>I thought the survivalist answer for readily available, compact,
>>shelf-stable balanced diet was *dry cat food*. %^P But after
>>2000, what are they worried about, anyway, that's short term
>>enough to ride it out in their well-stocked and secured shelters?
>>But that's another misc.group topic...
>
> It's amusing that there's 3 different news groups ++ devoted to
> survivalism.
> They are worried about economic collapse, nuclear war with Russia (as
> opposed to the Soviet Union), or war with China (PRC). Or the Middle
> East (real problems).
For the retreatists, better move to the backcountry or rural settings
and learn susbsistance survival for long term. Even then, so much
is uncontrollable... Maybe New Zeeland...
> Or the more abstract end of the world (Gog-Magog)
> Biblical Revelation.
If the world's ending, the world's ending. What's there to
survive?
> The survivalists who view their shelters like fall-out shelters of the
> 50s and 60s are a little misguided. The long-term thinkers like the
> traditional LDS (maybe Christopher) with their year larder are probably
> doing OK because they rotate their food, etc. They will be fine for
> earthquakes, storms, etc.
Yes, the sort of bunker survivalism implied by this thread's discussion
of menus seems best suited for waiting out storms or natural disasters.
Days, weeks, or months, perhaps. Nuitrition will matter into the
months, as will basic medical care.
They are caching food and supplies. Are they caching information,
too? Are they prepared to deal with loss of basic sup****t infrastruture?
For a short period, or prolonged? Think of the disruption caused
by just the suspension of air travel in 2001. Consider communication
and organizational difficulties in the wake of Katrina.
> This is all why Douglas Adams made his whole B-ark joke in the HHGG.
> I think the serious long term problems of the future will be evolved and
> adapted past problems and a few new problems. To use Adams' analogy,
> it's neither A-ark, B-ark, or C-ark. You didn't want to be on any of
> THOSE arks.
Well, the B-ark people survived to populate another planet. The
A/C-ark designees never launched, never planned to,-- it was just
a sham to get rid of the "non-contributors". Instead the A's and C's
were wiped out by a disease trivially preventable by the B-arker's
they banished.
Jon
|
