[sandorski]

andyt andyt:

Funny. I thought they were saying the same thing, yet you give one a thumbs up, one down. What Sandorski is pointing out is there's no correct way for he natural world to be. Our planet could be dominated by slime molds, and it would be just as "correct." There is no inevitable drive to produce intelligence, there are no higher and lower species.

Exactly.

[Canadian_Mind]

andyt andyt:

We're caught in a trap. Economists tell us we need more and more people to feed the economic engine. We have an aging population and need more young people to support the old. Except those young people will in turn get old and need even more young people to support them.

Ecologists tell is this isn't a scenario that can possibly turn out well.

As for the survivalists, I think they might be in for a rude shock. Survival will probably depend on adaptability, being able to deal with new situations, not hoarding old tech to try to stay alive. It will also probably favor the co-operative, as it always has since we became human, rather than those holed up in their little bunkers.

I think we need a balance. You do need a certain amount of people who are contributing to the economic engine to sustain those that are receiving from it. In a perfect world there would constantly be 2.1 children born to every mother. This way, accounting for losses due to illness, falling out of trees, car crashes, etc. you basically have the same number of people in every age group, from 2 year olds to 20 year olds to 50 year olds. This would be sustainable, but it isn't how nature works. Like everything else in nature, population ebbs and flows, waxes and wanes, etc.

As for survival bunkers, I'd feel safer being in a neighbourhood full of survival bunkers than one without. Being adaptable is very important, but even more so is safeguarding the life-sustaining resources you already have.

[martin14]

They are bringing the 2 infected Americans back to the U.S.


http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/31/healt ... ?hpt=hp_t1

[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Yup. It'll work out in the end. As much as we think Bart is a little odd for being over-prepared for any sort of catastrophe, he and his family are the ones who'll come out alive and well.

That said, I think we'll do well here in the great white north... Although I still believe we are rather ridiculous when it comes to the lengths we go to to preserve life.

He's not odd for being prepared - there's nothing wrong with that. A smart person prepares for the worst and hopes for the best.

Thanks...I think.

I live in California where being prepared for disaster is just something everyone should do. My house sits in a fire zone, a flood zone, a flash-flood zone, an earthquake zone, and we live near the flight path of a major airport. Preparedness comes pretty easy not to mention that our liberal Democrat city government goes to admirable lengths to try to prepare people for the possible realities of the region. In their emergency preparedness meetings of the past year they're even encouraging people who own firearms to help defend their neighbors in the absence of police.

If I lived in California, I sure as hell would have some decent supplies to make sure my family would be okay in the event of a disaster - I wouldn't go all prepper, but I'd have a month or two worth of supplies. In California, that would include considerable supplies of food, water and even a couple firearms (a long rifle for hunting and a shotgun for self-defence).

Even living here in Canada, I make sure we have some decent supplies on hand in case of a natural disaster - I'm particularly worried about dealing with a prolonged power outage in the winter. I've even thought about owning a firearm again, but I have decided against it for the time being. If things ever begin to get crazy, that would be one of my next purchases.

I've always been kind of interested in the end of the world - probably because of my passion for reading (I have read all sorts of TEOTWAKI stories). Just last weekend, I bought a book on survival tips.

Being prepared to deal with a natural disaster is no different than having a savings account - it's all about having a way to deal with whatever life my throw at you.

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

bootlegga bootlegga:

It's his blanket generalizations (and near hatred) about muslims, liberals and anyone else who doesn't line up with his world view that makes him 'odd.'

Yet not a day passes lately without some tool justifying my opinions of Wahabbist moslems, liberal socialist slack-assed losers, and anyone else who thinks it's a wonderful idea to predate on others.

I guess that's the difference between you and I.

I see similar predation from the other side of the spectrum and I while I often vent about it here, that's about the extent of my activism. Oh, I always vote and I sign petitions and donate to causes I think are worthwhile, but for the most part, I feel that it's really beyond my control and just try to go on living my life as best I can and not worry too much about it. But that's because I'm a pretty laid back kind of guy and I don't let too many things really bother me.

[bootlegga]

andyt andyt:

We're caught in a trap. Economists tell us we need more and more people to feed the economic engine. We have an aging population and need more young people to support the old. Except those young people will in turn get old and need even more young people to support them.

Ecologists tell is this isn't a scenario that can possibly turn out well.

As for the survivalists, I think they might be in for a rude shock. Survival will probably depend on adaptability, being able to deal with new situations, not hoarding old tech to try to stay alive. It will also probably favor the co-operative, as it always has since we became human, rather than those holed up in their little bunkers.

Proper survivalists don't hoard old tech so they can live a 21st century lifestyle. They may stock food and weapons, but that is just to get them through the initial chaos of a major disaster.

The smart ones hoard things like tools and seeds and learn skills that would again become useful if modern civilization collapsed (farming and blacksmithing for example). They also don't go it alone, but cluster together in groups of like-minded individuals so they can pool critical skills and techniques.

[BRAH]

martin14 martin14:

They are bringing the 2 infected Americans back to the U.S.


http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/31/healt ... ?hpt=hp_t1

Yes they are.

[BartSimpson]

BRAH BRAH:

martin14 martin14:

They are bringing the 2 infected Americans back to the U.S.


http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/31/healt ... ?hpt=hp_t1

Yes they are.

Sanjay Gupta is wrong. Again.

Ebola has been in the USA before:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ebola_outbreaks

[herbie]

You've seen the movies, you know how it ends. Nip it in the bud and send the B-52s to sterilize West Africa now or it will be Springfield....

[BRAH]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

BRAH BRAH:

martin14 martin14:

They are bringing the 2 infected Americans back to the U.S.


http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/31/healt ... ?hpt=hp_t1

Yes they are.

Sanjay Gupta is wrong. Again.

Ebola has been in the USA before:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ebola_outbreaks

Regardless wouldn't it make more sense to treat these patients on a US Navy medical ship?

[Strutz]

$1:

A small private jet based in Atlanta has been dispatched to Liberia where the two Americans work for missionary groups. Officials say the jet is outfitted with a special, portable tent designed for transporting patients with highly infectious diseases.

The U.S. State Department and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are helping to arrange the evacuation.

"The safety and security of U.S. citizens is our paramount concern," said the State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf, in a statement released Friday morning. "Every precaution is being taken to move the patients safely and securely."

http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/plans-underway-to-retrieve-two-americans-with-ebola-1.1942263
Let's hope that all goes well and that they are able to keep both patients contained.

[martin14]

Strutz Strutz:

Let's hope that all goes well and that they are able to keep both patients contained.

Funny, that. They already are contained.

Someone has decided that containment isn't good enough.

Not surprising, but still.....

[saturn_656]

BRAH BRAH:

Regardless wouldn't it make more sense to treat these patients on a US Navy medical ship?

I don't know if a ship (confined space) is the best place to introduce something like the Ebola virus.

Infectious diseases seem to rip through ships like wildfire.

[Strutz]

martin14 martin14:

Strutz Strutz:

Let's hope that all goes well and that they are able to keep both patients contained.

Funny, that. They already are contained.

Someone has decided that containment isn't good enough.

Not surprising, but still.....

Ok... let me rephrase that.

Let's hope that all goes well and that they are able to continue to keep both patients isolated as to not allow the possibility of anyone else to be exposed to the point of becoming infected.

[DrCaleb]

Strutz Strutz:

Let's hope that all goes well and that they are able to continue to keep both patients isolated as to not allow the possibility of anyone else to be exposed to the point of becoming infected.

Let's hope, but let's also get some perspective. Samonella killed 6,000 Canadians in 2013. Ebola hasn't killed anyone in Canada. And Samonella is pretty easy to contract.

[BartSimpson]

Strutz Strutz:

Let's hope that all goes well and that they are able to keep both patients contained.

They'll keep the patients contained but it will not surprise me in the least if the virus gets loose.