Realist News (Jsnip4)

Full Version: Constructive Computation
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Is there a rated risk factor map of the North American Continent, based on obvious dangers? I haven't been able to find one. Would that not be a more worthwhile and constructive project for the computer and internet saavy than tearing down other survivalists attempts at connecting dots? How about a practical analysis of other data, instead of endlessly searching for debunkable details, then going to the trouble of producing flagrantly mocking videos, to discredit someone else?
In my opinion, there is too much spinning of wheels and I get sucked into the maelstrom as much as anyone. It's a regretable downward spiral that's part of egoic human nature.
I AM LAME. I am math phobic and barely able to post online.
But, here's what I'm visualizing someone could come up with, no sweat. I'm positive TPTB have got exactly such info graphically laid out and it's nothing like that "Navy" future map. It's basic outlines may be all the former Naval Officers are able to remember well enough to reproduce and disseminate, but I'm sure it's not what guides the head of FEMA, whether to save or deliberately sacrifice sheeple lives.
We need a basic 1-10 danger scale, to keep it as simple as possible.
Take a detailed topographical map and draw a coastal perimeter far enough inland to avoid tsunamis. Anything outside that rates a ten because low lying coastal regions could get hammered.
Draw a radius around all nuclear reactors stretching them out as the wind blows and make them a Ten. The same goes for active volcanoes. Fault lines, flood plains below levees and dams and densly populated inner cities are obviously very dangerous.
The numbers may step up or down, for things like hurricanes, tornados, drought, based on past and likely future statistical damage potential and historical frequency. Wherever infrastructures are more artifically upheld, centralized and kept afloat by outside money, rather than local natural resources, would get a high danger rating too, no matter how good things may appear in the current matrix paradigm.
This entire continent may be about to change in unpredictable and previously unprecedented ways, but at least that would be a start.
As it is now, I can't find anything that succinctly highlights highest danger zones as 10 and best safety zones, as # 1.
There's plenty of vague and anecdotal descriptions of what makes a good potential, off grid survival zone. You can decide to not fret and trust God, or you can believe a prophet or trust an unseen alien race to spell it out. But, if you use critical thinking and factor in all the potentially deadly features to avoid, what's really left?
Plotting danger data on a map, would make the few better options that are left become glaringly obvious and simpler to head towards, for all of us who see the imminent collapse and general increase in "natural" disasters for what they probably are.
I LIKE this idea!

Although it does seem to me that the bottom line is there are just not enough folks who 1.) are awake, AND 2.) are willing and/or able to uproot from where they are to someplace safer.
(05-06-2011 12:35 PM)HaddieB Wrote: [ -> ]I LIKE this idea!

Although it does seem to me that the bottom line is there are just not enough folks who 1.) are awake, AND 2.) are willing and/or able to uproot from where they are to someplace safer.

Will & I talk about this quandry too. There are only so many regular people with their eyes open and out of those not many ready and willing to regroup and out of those only a very few we would realistically get along well with.
He belongs to NW firearms forum, where they have tackled this subject.
We've always been more self sufficient than most and have homesteaded raw acreage before. But we're in the all too common category of being about to lose our overly mortgaged home, waiting for Chase bank to finally sweep all the remaining foreclosures they stole from WA Mu out from under their accounting rug. Looking on the bright side, we're more willing and able to move anywhere we can park our custom caravan than many people like us are likely to be.
Screening for community types, is probably the most difficult safety factor to rate, since it's the most subjective and personalized, I guess.
I'm eccentric. Neither one of us tolerates fanatics. We're allergic to cults. We're both first born, boomers, more independent and free thinking than most Christian, Pagan, or Scientific Atheists. So there aren't any pre-existing communities we've yet encountered that fit. I'm more spritually pre-occupied and adventurous, where he's more wise guy irreverent and not as interested in such matters. We balance each other out and help keep each other on track with our higher intentions, by offering the other reality checks when we go too far into left field.
I would rate community T O L E R A N C E #1 for sociological safety.
Some of the best geographical areas, for abundant natural resources and lack of the higher rated dangers, might be hotbeds of dangerous prejudice and unbearable community censure, where they only care about "their own". Some small towns are filled up with natives who deeply distrust newcomers under the best of normal circumstances, but if SHTF, they'll be kickin unrelated strangers butts.
Besides that, I don't think I want everyone to have anything more in common that acceptance of the Golden Rule and general avoidance of the Seven Deadly Sins. It takes all kinds to make the world go around. So, D I V E R S I T Y would get a safer rating than homogenity on my map too. But that's probably part and parcel of tolerance.
It's a subtle social quality to evaluate that wouldn't be relevent to everyone, but I would favor A R T in community, because it's something that thrives in healthy and inspirational places, just like stress and ill health can be a sign of underlying unhealthy environmental influeneces.
Tolerance of Animal Cruelty in a community would increase the danger factor to a 10 in my mind. I feel places that otherwise appear wholesome and charming turn intolerably ugly when I notice animal abuse or neglect. I would lose my mind living near any suffering animals!
Reference URL's