Hypothetical Doomsday Scenario

[creekbend]

Quite simply, I took relevant parts of what you said and stated my opinion in response to them, much like people do every day. Honestly, some of your posts are one huge blob of text, and if you took the time to break them up into paragraphs, they would be much easier to read.

Sincere apologies. I forgot that I was playing Chess with a Checkers player. I have noticed that your have posted pictures in some of your posts and threads in the past. You have posted pictures of your Tractor, Truck;etc. There is even a picture of your Tractor in your Avatar. Do you not consider this to be using Modern Technology? Or is Modern Technology only appropriate when it suits your needs and benefit you personally. BTW, I don't possess the capability to post pictures.Do you rely on your local Weather forecasts in regards to impending severe weather when it threatens? Most people would include Doppler Radar as being considered Modern Technology. Sincere apologies, once again, in posting "One Huge BLOB of TEXT". Checkmate. Sincere apologies once again, I forgot that I was playing Chess with a Checkers player. Since you posted that you had difficultly in understanding my previous post, I will attempt to assist you with your understanding level. The previous text did include some intentional sarcasm, but when you throw stones, it is best to possess a Catcher's Mitt. Then again, you may think of a Catcher's Mitt as part of Modern Technology.

 

[MasseyWV]

Sincere apologies. I forgot that I was playing Chess with a Checkers player.

Oh come on, did you really take my response that personally? I wasn't trying to offend you when I pointed out that your "huge blob of text" posts were hard to read. BTW: I happen to be a very good Chess player, when I want to play.

 

[dave1949]

Have you looked around lately? People seem to be turning into zombies, becoming ever more hopelessly addicted to their precious gadgets, all the while forgetting how to actually live their lives. Opinions obviously vary, but I believe that we would be much better off without being so dependent on technology for our very survival.

++1 on the zombi-ization of western civilization

 

[riptides]

If you think about it, on a personal scale, maybe even a community scale, you and I may deal with doomsday scenarios anyday.

The recent storm, the Delrecco, that went through the mid-atlantic and hit northern va and the district turned off power for hundreds of thousands for over a week. The most powerfull nation on the planet, yet Washington DC gave two days unscheduled leave to Federal employees.

Trust me, the storm was pretty bad.

People made due.

 

[Combustix]

I for one do not worry of the crazed city people coming to the country to rob me of my food and water. They will never find there way into the country because there gps's won't work and neither will google maps, and most will be to lazy to walk

 

[patrick_g]

Surviving Katrina is NOT a valid example of how resilient we are and how well we can withstand disaster!!!

Katrina and other disasters only inconvenience a very small portion of the population. The Federal Gov would not survive a loss of all electric powered technology and continue on in a form able to offer aid to anyone. The National Guard, regular military, militias, etc would be unable to feed themselves much less distribute food to large numbers of others. Their infrastructure is dependent on electric stuff too. I'm not sure what level of anarchy might pervade the military but in such a survival situation I think I'd rather NOT see the military anywhere near me. Military... large group of armed people carrying guns and looking for food and water. This isn't Hollywood folks and you won'r see Kevin Costner delivering the mail.

Pat

 

[patrick_g]

Trust me, the storm was pretty bad.

People made due.

And what percent of the population was inconvenienced? If EVERYONE was in a disaster scenario, who would be helping out? People made do... Yeah for a little while with lots of help not for years with no help.

Pat

 

[patrick_g]

Yes, it can go on and on, but that's the point, one learns as they go. By the way, it may not be Klingons, but the universe is a big place and it's entirely possible that aliens could someday visit planet Earth, unlikely perhaps, but possible. Since we're using examples, lets look at an unlikely scenario that actually happened... Almost noone thought that 9/11 could happen, but it did.

I truly believe we have less to worry about at the hands (tentacles?) of space aliens than we do from residents of Earth. Given the extreme technological difficulties of traveling here from any other star the alien travelers would be so advanced as to want for nothing (think food replicators and other technologies as of yet unimagined.) They sure wouldn't need our resources or us for any nefarious reasons. The most likely reason I can come up with for aliens to come by our neck of the universe is curiosity. I'm open to alternate views if anyone disagrees. Stephen Hawking and I part ways on our views of aliens interacting with humans.

Chimpanzees are separated from humans by a very small percentage of our DNA and chimps use of tools hardly surpasses sticking a straw into a termite mound to get bugs. Even when chimps kill and eat one another they don't use clubs.

Those aliens might easily be as or more advanced ahead of us as we are ahead of the chimps. We would appear as chimps to them possibly if we were lucky and insects if we were not so lucky.

Losing all electric powered tech at once would cause our fellow humans to become survival competitors. There would not be enough food grown or distributed sufficiently in first world nations to keep the overwhelming majority from starvation. There would not be time to develop the infrastructure needed to successfully revert to living like in the old days before mass starvation and anarchy would make for an extremely dangerous situation.

Our fellow humans in a disastrous survival mode would be direct competition for the resources required to sustain life. Back against the wall, him or me, death or survival, would deal a severe blow to altruism.

Pat

 

[patrick_g]

The Dark Ages led to the Renaissance, which in turn, gave rise to historical figures such as Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo.



Yes, I can.

Have you looked around lately? People seem to be turning into zombies, becoming ever more hopelessly addicted to their precious gadgets, all the while forgetting how to actually live their lives. Opinions obviously vary, but I believe that we would be much better off without being so dependent on technology for our very survival.

What about the dark ages followed by the age of enlightenment? I don't see a useful connection with the doomsday hypothetical being discussed. This is two entirely different situations, not able to be equated. Comparing apples to pencil erasers is of no value. The dark ages were not entered overnight as there was time to develop the infrastructure to grow and distribute food to most of the postulation. Loosing everything electrical overnight is an entirely different situation. Surviving it is highly unlikely so the odds of having world class artists generated in the chaos of the dying is at best unlikely wishful thinking.

Pat

 

[MasseyWV]

What about the dark ages followed by the age of enlightenment? I don't see a useful connection with the doomsday hypothetical being discussed. This is two entirely different situations, not able to be equated. Comparing apples to pencil erasers is of no value. The dark ages were not entered overnight as there was time to develop the infrastructure to grow and distribute food to most of the postulation. Loosing everything electrical overnight is an entirely different situation. Surviving it is highly unlikely so the odds of having world class artists generated in the chaos of the dying is at best unlikely wishful thinking.

I never said that a permanent power loss wouldn't cause massive loss of life, but even you have to admit that the odds of every human on the planet dying as a result of such an event is virtually impossible. Even a global catrostophy such as nuclear war probably wouldn't kill everyone. The humans who survived would likely go through many phases of change over a long period of time, some good and some bad, but ultimately I feel that the long-term outlook for humanity would be better than it is today. Hence my comparison of the Dark Ages to the Renaissance.

Afterall, it's only hypothetical.

 

[patrick_g]

I'd go so far as to say the outcome would be sufficiently bad and heIIish if the button were pushed as to classify anyone who would seriously contemplate doing it right along side Idi Amin Dada, Adolph ******, Ming the Merciless, Jaba the Hut, Vlad the Impaler, or any number of Spanish inquisitors such as Torquemada.

Offering lame excuses related to yearning for simpler times is unacceptable wishful thinking devoid of any depth of understanding of the meaning of being responsible for the deaths of so great a percentage of the humans on the planet.

I'm reminded of "A modest Proposal" by Jonathon Swift where he outlined a plan for Preventing the Children of Poor People From Being a Burden on Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Public. Swift suggests that impoverished Irish might ease their economic troubles by selling their children as food for rich gentlemen and ladies.

Certainly Jonathon Swift's modest proposal is less grievous than pushing the button. Baby, "the other white meat!"

Pat

 

[Blitzn]

Surviving Katrina is NOT a valid example of how resilient we are and how well we can withstand disaster!!!

Katrina and other disasters only inconvenience a very small portion of the population. The Federal Gov would not survive a loss of all electric powered technology and continue on in a form able to offer aid to anyone. The National Guard, regular military, militias, etc would be unable to feed themselves much less distribute food to large numbers of others. Their infrastructure is dependent on electric stuff too. I'm not sure what level of anarchy might pervade the military but in such a survival situation I think I'd rather NOT see the military anywhere near me. Military... large group of armed people carrying guns and looking for food and water. This isn't Hollywood folks and you won'r see Kevin Costner delivering the mail.

Pat

Having been there, and discussed these scenarios in the Army - it depends on who is in charge. Many of the Officer Corp would refuse such a command as unconstitutional. Besides, whoever said that rendering the US Govt immobile was a bad thing?
Ok - we know Pat would not advocate for the button pushing.
But, if such a button was pushed - I think you will find more American's, indeed humanity more resilient than you give them credit for. From weathering the last ice age, to the plague, to the present, mankind shows a tremendous innovative spirit - and unlike the President, I don't believe the government gets the credit for human successes. :cool2:

 

[brin]

Oh come on, did you really take my response that personally? I wasn't trying to offend you when I pointed out that your "huge blob of text" posts were hard to read. BTW: I happen to be a very good Chess player, when I want to play.

I think creekbend is probably figuring at this point for our country to do away with all tech...we would revert back to the stone age....I mean what tech. do you want to eliminate...cell phones, computers, electricity...?? think about each one of these and how they are used to make our lives more livable...Are there abuses..? Yes...all the texting , video games, cell phone calls, gimmics etc...Would we have been better off staying with the electric typewriters, calculators and go no further....maybe so...but it looks like it is too late now...we are too dependent on the tech for our way of life....think of all the records on computers..etc. I for one agree with Creekbend....I don't want to give up modern conveniences anytime soon and we can't pick and choose which parts of the internet are used or how cell phones are used or the kinds of Movies or videos on tv or games...It is what it is and humanity has brought it where it is...good or bad...I use the good and ignore the bad as best I can...

I think that is what creekbend was getting at...maybe I'm wrong though...

 

[Blitzn]

I'd go so far as to say the outcome would be sufficiently bad and heIIish if the button were pushed as to classify anyone who would seriously contemplate doing it right along side Idi Amin Dada, Adolph ******, Ming the Merciless, Jaba the Hut, Vlad the Impaler, or any number of Spanish inquisitors such as Torquemada.

Offering lame excuses related to yearning for simpler times is unacceptable wishful thinking devoid of any depth of understanding of the meaning of being responsible for the deaths of so great a percentage of the humans on the planet.

I'm reminded of "A modest Proposal" by Jonathon Swift where he outlined a plan for Preventing the Children of Poor People From Being a Burden on Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Public. Swift suggests that impoverished Irish might ease their economic troubles by selling their children as food for rich gentlemen and ladies.

Certainly Jonathon Swift's modest proposal is less grievous than pushing the button. Baby, "the other white meat!"

Pat

Interested in Soylent Green? It's improved from Soylent Yellow! We get it Pat, anyone who considers functioning without the benefits of the modern age is a backwater buffoon and should be exterminated by your allegations they are comparable to an IdaAmin or ******.

But you also forget the Washington's who replaced George the III, the lone chinaman in Tiannemen Square, the failure of von Stauffenburg, and more. Human success and goodness trumps evil - but it can take time.
However I can point to many abuses and dysfunctionalities championed by governments - including New Orleans, Detroit, War between the States, Wilson's 14 points of light that led to WW2, the Holocause, the Gulags, the Great Society, Roosevelt's New Deal, etc.

Ok - we know you can't survive without the Federal Govt.

 

[patrick_g]

Having been there, and discussed these scenarios in the Army - it depends on who is in charge. Many of the Officer Corp would refuse such a command as unconstitutional. Besides, whoever said that rendering the US Govt immobile was a bad thing?
Ok - we know Pat would not advocate for the button pushing.
But, if such a button was pushed - I think you will find more American's, indeed humanity more resilient than you give them credit for. From weathering the last ice age, to the plague, to the present, mankind shows a tremendous innovative spirit - and unlike the President, I don't believe the government gets the credit for human successes. :cool2:

Weathering the ice age, dark ages, famine, pestilence, pandemics, and so on and so forth ENTIRELY PALE when compared to the aftermath of pushing the button. Sorry but in my opinion you are definitely in the wishful thinking zone. There are so many unprecedented difficulties and all at once. How do you distribute the thousands of tons of food needed per day to feed one large city much less all the cities, suburbs and the majority of rural population so as to prevent starvation for the first 90 days?

I don't think you are being realistic. I don't mind dissent but please make it thoughtful and realistic not just wishful thinking.

Pat

 

[MasseyWV]

I think you will find more American's, indeed humanity more resilient than you give them credit for. From weathering the last ice age, to the plague, to the present, mankind shows a tremendous innovative spirit

I feel the same way and was actually surprised that some people seemed to take the mere mention of losing all their precious technology as being tantamount to committing heresy. It only strengthens my belief that humans are over dependent on technology.

Humans may be going through a "duh phase" as they yammer away on their cell phones while they drive aimlessly from one place to another burning more and more fuel so they can buy things they don't really need, but when the crap hits the fan, humans can be remarkably resilient, at least some of them can be.

 

[forgeblast]

Surviving it is highly unlikely....I dont know how I feel about that. On one hand there are the Amish that live with out technology and survive, but they have the technology of knowledge on their side. There are also those who if they are able to make it through the first year, would be able to keep going. The shock, and lack of food, comfort, and medical care will take out many of the people unprepared. Books/knowledge will be worth their weight in gold.

 

[patrick_g]

No cars, trucks, buses, trains, or subways, or other mechanized transport requiring electricity or fuel provided by electricity. With no distribution, fuel stores will be quickly exhausted and little or no road traffic will exist, no trains, etc. after a very short period. Even if the means to grow sufficient food to feed ourselves as a country existed (it doesn't without mechanization) without distribution most would rot in the fields and there would be mass starvation and all the chaos appertaining thereunto.

If you disagree with any of my posts, take a look at the original posters hypothetical and then in that light, not some personally reworked variation, make your case. I'm willing to be persuaded by a logical argument based on realistic and believable premises (unlike the hypothetical itself.) Simply asserting the military will be well behaved, great artists will arise out of the minor difficulties, and the indomitable spirit of the American people (hum "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" quietly and respectfully in the background during this part) will triumph over all adversity and return to a simpler time when we could all risk polio, unsafe patent medications, embalmed beef, dawn to dusk labor etc. you know, the good old days!


As detective Columbo used to say, "I have just one more question."

"But, if such a button was pushed - I think you will find more American's, indeed humanity more resilient than you give them credit for."

Well, du-uh, What makes them starvation proof for the first few days or weeks after the supply line/conveyor belt bringing Post Toasties to the supermarket stops running? Logistics is not subject to wishful thinking. It, like gravity, is not subject to negotiation or wishful thinking. If every horse in America were a Clydesdale you still couldn't pull enough carts to keep the vast majority of the population from starving and or freezing the first winter.

Left to their own devices a decent percentage of the rural population might survive after a fashion through subsistence farming B U T they will not be left to their own devices, instead they will be overrun and pillaged by roving bands of armed vandals from the cities and suburbs in such overpowering numbers that armed defense is extremely problematical at best.

Pat

 

[Blitzn]

Weathering the ice age, dark ages, famine, pestilence, pandemics, and so on and so forth ENTIRELY PALE when compared to the aftermath of pushing the button. Sorry but in my opinion you are definitely in the wishful thinking zone. There are so many unprecedented difficulties and all at once. How do you distribute the thousands of tons of food needed per day to feed one large city much less all the cities, suburbs and the majority of rural population so as to prevent starvation for the first 90 days?

I don't think you are being realistic. I don't mind dissent but please make it thoughtful and realistic not just wishful thinking.

Pat

I never said any of our scenarios did not include defining acceptable casualties. I never said that pushing the button would not result in mass chaos.
I believe you are the one in error however, to imagine that such an issue could 1) never occur and 2) the loss of any life is unacceptable.
Beleive me when I tell you, nay assure you, that there are contingencies in place for certain portions of the populace to be protected and well-fed. The remainder - you're on your own.
It was rather comical the movie 2012 - but there are some interesting items. And no, I don't know if we are building arks.

 

[Blitzn]

If you disagree with any of my posts, take a look at the original posters hypothetical and then in that light, not some personally reworked variation, make your case. I'm willing to be persuaded by a logical argument based on realistic and believable premises (unlike the hypothetical itself.) Simply asserting the the military will be well behaved, great artists will arise out of the minor difficulties, and the indomitable spirit of the American people (hum "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" quietly and respectfully in the background during this part) will triumph over all adversity and return to a simpler time when we could all risk polio, unsafe patent medications, embalmed beef, dawn to dusk labor etc. you know, the good old days!
Pat

OK, I looked at the OP - Your answer is no then.
easy - case closed.
There is no argument - it's either yes, or no - would you push it.

Note - you have given this decision to every politician you ever elect - they can decide your fate - whether the A-bomb, H-bomb, or the bullet.