On 19 Jan 2004 03:25:52 GMT, Frank White wrote:


In article et,
says...

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:02:33 GMT, Gunner wrote:

neighbors and friends?

alanc is obsessed with the idea of running for the hills and living
off the land. In fact he's claimed that's what he and an unspecified
group have already done, setting up a defensive parameter that
includes boobytraps and poison gas generators, as well as trying

No booby-traps, per se, and no poison gas generators.

Or perhaps you'd like to post the article where I said that?

I thought not.

alanc...

Never

Ever

argue facts with me. My interpretation of those facts, yes.
My sanity, sure. Opinions, of course. Other facts I may not
be aware of, glad to have them revealed to me. But I seldom say
things I am not sure of. See beheath your signature below for
the posts I am referring to. Carbon monoxide IS a poisonous gas.

But your statement above implied a lethal intent and use, which you
perfectly well know, and that is obviously not the case.


And I also still say that, to drop a hunter in the open like
you said you did, you'd need a gas release on the level of
Bhorpal. You either were not speaking the truth, or your
truth is not based in reality, or there were things going on
you did not mention.



Here's the specific quote from my post you are referring to:

--------------

The last moron like you (but he was stupider than you, because he didn't
have
the sense to just blow hot air like you do....) who came out here
found himself suddenly unable to breathe...

A lot of CO will do that to you, and it is very easy to produce.

He dropped his gun in a panic and, after he had recovered, couldn't find his
gun and ran back to the truck that was no longer there. It was never found
again, and when the countymounties came out to talk to us, we had no idea
what
happened...

-----------------------


A person that can run back to their vehicle is hardly on the verge of
death, are they?

It says he dropped his gun, not that we dropped HIM.

I should have been more careful with my phrasing.....Should have said

"unable to breathe normally"

I have been very clear from the outset that we do not kill or maim people,
ever.

I'm deleting my posts below just to save bandwidth, but anyone is welcome
look them over on your original post.


CO in an open area is NEVER lethal. Do your homework and quit telling
falsehoods.

To kill someone with CO they pretty much have to breathe a 100% mixture
for an extended period of time.



AC

On 19 Jan 2004 03:57:18 GMT, Frank White wrote:


In article . net,
says...

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 07:02:33 GMT, Gunner wrote:

Who knows?

All I am trying to do is educate people.

I've done that. You can't remove my posts from the server or from
the archives.

All you can do is continue broadcasting your immaturity and ignorance
to the world.

There are very few people on this group that will survive more than a year
after the Collapse, and taking their advice is foolish.

Hm. So which ones of us on this group do you think WILL survive more
than a year after the disaster you foresee?

FW



You probably will.


Jim Dauven.


A few others.


AC

,

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 01:33:27 GMT, Bob wrote:






Once the Grid, the Industrial Infrastructure, which is a house of cards
at best, collapses, that's it.

If you aren't prepared to live without it, you won't last long.


AC

Why don't you get started now and sit there in your lean-to up on the
mountain, all the while laughing at us poor moron's who just don't get it?


I prefer an earth-sheltered home with all the amenities, thank you.

And most of the people here are not morons, just operating on

false premises.




AC

Alan Connor wrote:

In North America at present, including Canada, there are about 500,000 square
miles of mountain forests that are removed from major population centers
and in a climate that is cold-temperate or better.

Assuming 300,000,000 people in the U.S. and Canada, and that 5% of those
people can make it to, or are already in, the Rockies (etc.), that gives these
areas a post-Collapse population density of approximately 30 people per
square mile, or about 20 acres apiece, back-to-back.

(your neighbor will be able to hit your house with a thrown rock from their
front porch)

(these areas include a lot of grasslands, too, but are predominantly forested)

In these conditions, only a survival group that can remain inconspicuous will
have a chance of avoiding continual battles with refugees or roving bandits,
or continually running from them, and the only way to accomplish this is to
have a plant-based lifestyle.

If you HAVE to run, then you had better know your wild edible plants, of
which there are more than 1800 species in North America, because trapping
and hunting will SERIOUSLY slow you down...

AC

Possibility bad location
http://unisci.com/stories/20013/0723011.htm

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 06:54:30 GMT, Bob Yates wrote:


Alan Connor wrote:

In North America at present, including Canada, there are about 500,000 square
miles of mountain forests that are removed from major population centers
and in a climate that is cold-temperate or better.

Assuming 300,000,000 people in the U.S. and Canada, and that 5% of those
people can make it to, or are already in, the Rockies (etc.), that gives these
areas a post-Collapse population density of approximately 30 people per
square mile, or about 20 acres apiece, back-to-back.

(your neighbor will be able to hit your house with a thrown rock from their
front porch)

(these areas include a lot of grasslands, too, but are predominantly forested)

In these conditions, only a survival group that can remain inconspicuous will
have a chance of avoiding continual battles with refugees or roving bandits,
or continually running from them, and the only way to accomplish this is to
have a plant-based lifestyle.

If you HAVE to run, then you had better know your wild edible plants, of
which there are more than 1800 species in North America, because trapping
and hunting will SERIOUSLY slow you down...

AC

Possibility bad location
http://unisci.com/stories/20013/0723011.htm
Takes me a while to access web documents, but I'll check it out.

Thanks.

AC

"Heynony" wrote in message
...
KB9WFK wrote:

responding to "your neighbor will be able to hit your house with a
thrown rock from their front porch"

you are saying that after the collapse, my neighbors biceps are
going to mutate into such freakishly large proportions that they will
be able to throw rocks 20 acres?

Certainly he was exaggerating, but 20 acre plots aren't all that large.
Unless I can't do math in my head anymore (quite possible): if your
house was offset 80% off center towards the neighbor's lot and his
front porch offset similarly toward yours (not totally unreasonable),
the throw would be possible, I think (I could throw a rock close to 100
yards as a kid and I was far from the best). The concept is not hugely
off. From center to center, probably more on point, it would take a
great tee shot rather than a thrown rock.

You could throw a rock "almost" a hundred yards - as a kid? Correct me if
I'm wrong but I don't think the best quarterbacks in the NFL can throw the
entire length of a football field.

Having spend a good deal of time in Durango, I can say that if I had to
live
in the Rockies to survive I would probably find a tall bridge (Royal
Gorge?)
and jump off.

SD

Good!! Could you please take Alan Connor and the rest of the cross-posting
pests with you?

Having spend a good deal of time in Durango, I can say that if I had to
live
in the Rockies to survive I would probably find a tall bridge (Royal
Gorge?)
and jump off.

SD

Good!! Could you please take Alan Connor and the rest of the cross-posting
pests with you?

I've been lurking in this thread for a while and it has given me much
interest and not a little amusement, but I have a question.

At risk of sticking my nose in from UK, What is the scenario regarding the
apparently/allegedly overdue supervolcano brewing up under Yellowstone, and
its
aftermath?

If what I've heard is correct, it might equally involve this side of the
pond.

Or is that a whole different thread? .

Steve

"shazzbat" sez:

snip
At risk of sticking my nose in from UK, What is the scenario regarding the
apparently/allegedly overdue supervolcano brewing up under Yellowstone,
and
its aftermath?

No worries mate, the Environmental Protection Agency won't allow the super
caldera to blow until its filed the required Environmental Impact Statement
and complied with all of the required paperwork. :-)

Good disasters to ya,
VLJ
--
Take only pictures, leave only bullet holes ...

At risk of sticking my nose in from UK, What is the scenario regarding the
apparently/allegedly overdue supervolcano brewing up under Yellowstone, and
its
aftermath?

Can U be more specific? What did you read.
Only thing I know is that 20 years ago, the USGS said that there absolutely
will be a huge earthquake from the San Andreas fault, but they do not know
when. It will be so big many people will die.
Is this what you are talking about?

Good disasters to ya,
VLJ
--
Take only pictures, leave only bullet holes ...


I asked in an earlier post which disaster was under discussion here, because
there are a few possibilities.

1. Global warming-which is happening now.

2. Nuclear winter which could happen if the wrong people press the button,
or terrorists somehow- hopefully not for many years.

3. Fossil fuels used up. Oil production is expected to peak in about 10
years, which will bring prices up. No big deal, but what is next?
In 250 years humans will use up all the fossil fuels that took 5 billion
years to create. I don't remember god telling us we could do that?

4. Overpopulation and diminishing food supply- But hopefully this can be
managed somehow.

So is this all loony? Maybe, but it is all real and we hope that "THEY"
whoever they are, will solve these problems. I am 43 so I think I will make
it off the planet in time, but what about the little tikes of today and
tomorrow?

Overall, a sustainable way of life sounds better to me than trying to solve
these problems with technology.

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:50:14 GMT, Me wrote:

In article ,
Gunner wrote:

Sorry Bubba, but like firearms, nuclear weapons and oral sex, the
genie is out of the bottle. Even after a Collapse..the Net will be one
of the first things to become reimplimented. In one fashion or
another.

If you only had a clue as to what you were talking about you would be
classed a bit higher than "Moroon". In an American Collapse Senerio,
the Internet would far down the list of things rebuilt.

chuckle...you do realize that the Internet started out as a hardened,
multiple routing system *designed* to be fault tolerant to a nuclear
war? And was designed to have substantial back up power systems?

and that it has only gotten more robust over the years, now that it no
longer depends on copper wire and microwave links?


First, Power would need to be available coutry wide and in mostly the
"Big Cities" for the Routers that make the Internet work ti operate.
Second, more than 75% of the links are FiberOptic these days and the
MUltiplexers and Switches would also have to have power, which isn't
going to be around country wide after a collapse. same with the cable-Tv
and DSL/Phone systems. Just who is going to run the Dams & Nuke Plants
to provide all this power nation wide?


And the newer fiber optic links take *less* power and are *much* more
resistant to things like EMP....compared to the older links...

and as Bob G points out in another post...there are folks who are
capable of going long haul wireless, abet at fairly low (but still
significant) bit rates.

ck
--
country doc in louisiana
(no fancy sayings right now)

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 08:18:27 -0500, ""
wrote:


"Heynony" wrote in message
...
KB9WFK wrote:

responding to "your neighbor will be able to hit your house with a
thrown rock from their front porch"

you are saying that after the collapse, my neighbors biceps are
going to mutate into such freakishly large proportions that they will
be able to throw rocks 20 acres?

Certainly he was exaggerating, but 20 acre plots aren't all that large.
Unless I can't do math in my head anymore (quite possible): if your
house was offset 80% off center towards the neighbor's lot and his
front porch offset similarly toward yours (not totally unreasonable),
the throw would be possible, I think (I could throw a rock close to 100
yards as a kid and I was far from the best). The concept is not hugely
off. From center to center, probably more on point, it would take a
great tee shot rather than a thrown rock.

You could throw a rock "almost" a hundred yards - as a kid? Correct me if
I'm wrong but I don't think the best quarterbacks in the NFL can throw the
entire length of a football field.

A rock is more like a baseball than a football. A major
league outfielder can throw a baseball 100 yards. In my
younger days, so could I.

--
Robert Sturgeon,
proud member of the vast right wing conspiracy
and the evil gun culture.

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 21:50:14 GMT, Me wrote:

In article ,
Gunner wrote:

Sorry Bubba, but like firearms, nuclear weapons and oral sex, the
genie is out of the bottle. Even after a Collapse..the Net will be one
of the first things to become reimplimented. In one fashion or
another.

If you only had a clue as to what you were talking about you would be
classed a bit higher than "Moroon". In an American Collapse Senerio,
the Internet would far down the list of things rebuilt.

chuckle...you do realize that the Internet started out as a hardened,
multiple routing system *designed* to be fault tolerant to a nuclear
war? And was designed to have substantial back up power systems?

and that it has only gotten more robust over the years, now that it no
longer depends on copper wire and microwave links?


First, Power would need to be available coutry wide and in mostly the
"Big Cities" for the Routers that make the Internet work ti operate.
Second, more than 75% of the links are FiberOptic these days and the
MUltiplexers and Switches would also have to have power, which isn't
going to be around country wide after a collapse. same with the cable-Tv
and DSL/Phone systems. Just who is going to run the Dams & Nuke Plants
to provide all this power nation wide?


And the newer fiber optic links take *less* power and are *much* more
resistant to things like EMP....compared to the older links...

and as Bob G points out in another post...there are folks who are
capable of going long haul wireless, abet at fairly low (but still
significant) bit rates.

ck
--
country doc in louisiana
(no fancy sayings right now)