>>>> a balanced diet.
In article <48ad58b5$0$28802$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*.
>>>what are they worried about, anyway,
>>>enough to ride it out in their well-stocked and secured shelters?
>>
>> 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 subsistance survival for long term. Even then, so much
>is uncontrollable... Maybe New Zeeland...
My friend Richard's book on the topic points out that a substantial
number can be and are urban. That's more a rural oriented thinking, but
the US has so lost so much of its rural orientation that its no longer
funny. And it's no longer just the US.
A friend's kid got her BS in biology and started to run a farm. She made
$8K the first year of hard work. She never did that again.
Another friend, an emeritus Stanford prof., inherited part of what's
left of a major wine empire (despite what's told about Mondavi). The
problem is that his kids and his nephews have careers of their own. He
now has to contract to have his vinyard run. The kids (2nd order) all
think they would not mind but they aren't full time farmers.
>> 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?
Heaven.
Some people think there will be a non-instantaneous transition period
(i.e., expect to suffer some first: hence short term fall out shelter
provisioning should be sufficient; you heard a little bit about some of
these people when James Watt was in office "there's no need for
conservation or preservation"; you might find some of this in the Left
Behind series or other Rapture tales).
>> 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. Nutrition will matter into the
>months, as will basic medical care.
>
>They are caching food and supplies. Are they caching information,
>too?
Yeah, they usually have a library, commonly US Army field manuals (FMs),
other books on things like basic first aid. Likely weapons manuals in
some cases (but not all). They read, go lurk in m.s.
Ask the Stormin' Mormon what he thinks. Get under his skin.
>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.
I think your simplest answer to your first question is like a high bar
(threshold) that they hope they can do. I think they are all mostly
intelligent enough to think: if they are at Ground Zero (think WWIII for
a moment) they are toast. Easy. Harder is if they aren't. Then it
becomes what's BSI?
Periods can be from 72 hours, to 2 weeks (50-60s fall out shelter), or
longer (UK and US Survivor series).
2001 was just air. It was more problematic for those on the ground
(short term). We all handled it in different ways.
I'm personally a little clueless about Katrina. I was out of the
country in Tokyo and going up Fuji between a departing typhoon and an
arriving new typhoon. New Orleans is a city of which I have really no
interest. It shouldn't be there. Ask the Dutch. They have 1 side of
water to deal with, New Orleans has 3 sides. It should be abandoned as
a city. Make Apocolypse movies there. Why have sympathy? A lot of
other storms were happening around the world. I won't go into the
typhoon I caught the tail end. So I can't see why the big deal about it.
It's one of 3 sections of the book The Control of Nature by McPhee:
1) it was known these walls were going to fail, 2) it is going to happen
again. 3) the cost should be taken out of the hides of climate change
deniers.
If you see some of the various post-Apocolyptic films, read certain books,
various people think that a new world order will emerge to save (having
seen the Postman twice I should really read what Brin wrote, also having
flown near Smith Rocks recently).
>> 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.
No, not quite.
The B-ark people survived a short time on the proto-Earth.
That was the basis for So Long and Thanks for All the Fish.
Arthur and Ford and the others deduced that the B-arkers, barkers,
weren't the precursors to Earth's modern humans. But this is fiction.
We would never quite know, because Dent was catepulted to our present
(that story's future).
Adams only got as far at HG Wells in mentioning microbiology.
So we know about microbes.... as a society. We don't yet know enough
about them. We are more interested in studying and in particular
funding the study of our genome vs. the millions of the small unseen.
So we know they exist, we have crude tools to mostly dispose of them:
cleaners and antibiotics. etc. A few know and have an idea about
resistance (comprehend something of evolution). But the bacteria, the
rickettsia, the virii don't possess intelligence, but they have to
adapt. So who knows what the next stage is?
But that's merely disease. That's just one problem. It could be another
dimension.
It's amusing to me to look back at the SARS and bird flu Cassandras
(knowing a couple).
We'll have something, but they don't quite view the situation right
(waste resources early). But then who does?
--
|
