Wyoming legislator introduces “doomsday” bill

[Jazer]

A number of times I have brought up a doomsday or "end of the world" topics for discussion. Someone just about always comes along that is a skeptic. Then I bring up the earth quake in Haiti or Japan. Or mention 911 and suggest that it maybe a good ideal to be a good scout and be prepared for whatever comes our way. That is usually the end of the discussion. But I wonder to what degree we should be prepared.

I live in a 50 year old neighborhood. It is fairly common for the electrical transformers to blow up here. Last night one went out at 2 o'clock in the morning. I would have slept through it but my wife woke up me so I could worry about if we would get our power back. I was really really impressed that the city was out here and had it replaced in a hour. It was raining so they basicly worked in the middle of a storm in the middle of the night.

I wonder though what would happen if an act of terrorism took out our power and they were not able to fix it right away. Is that something we should be prepared for? Should I have a back up battery to run my computer on when we have a power failure or should I have a generator to run some electric if the power were to go down for a extended length of time? I know in disaster areas generators at times can be difficult to find and people who have generators have been know to charge a lot of money for them to take advantage of the situation.

So does it pay to be prepared or would it be a waste of money?

Wyoming legislator David Miller introduces “doomsday” bill | The Sideshow - Yahoo! News

 

[CaliforniaSun]

What's that Boy Scout motto again?

 

[AV1611VET]

So does it pay to be prepared or would it be a waste of money?

Scientists like to talk about the San Andreas fault line and California falling into the ocean, when the "big one" hits; but, as usual, they overlook a fault line in the Midwest that would make the San Andreas fault line look like Brownian motion by comparison.

The one in the Midwest generated an earthquake so powerful, the Mississippi River actually flowed backward for a period of time.

Thanks to scientists and their misguided interests, those in the Midwest just take earthquakes with a grain of salt.

How many hospitals in the Midwest, for example, have a contingency plan for [major] earthquakes?

Oh, they might do census-alert practices every now and then, along with triage; but I mean, how many are really prepared for the "big one" in the Midwest?

 

[AV1611VET]

What's that Boy Scout motto again?

Be Prepared.

That's why seismologists were probably picking their noses in Hawaii when Mexico got blindsided; or picking their noses in Monte Carlo when Haiti got blindsided.

As I have pointed out before -- pick any major disaster in history and tell me where the scientists were at the time; probably on the other side of the earth playing Euchre or getting their name in lights warning of a local disaster or something.

Then they rush to the scene and pose for pictures in the National Geographic or Time or something.

One thing that bugs me is when some tragedy strikes, and CNN has a scientist's head on TV, sitting in a chair fit for a CEO, telling us exactly what happened.

 

[CabVet]

 

[Eternally Optimistic]

Scientists like to talk about the San Andreas fault line and California falling into the ocean, when the "big one" hits; but, as usual, they overlook a fault line in the Midwest that would make the San Andreas fault line look like Brownian motion by comparison.

The one in the Midwest generated an earthquake so powerful, the Mississippi River actually flowed backward for a period of time.

Thanks to scientists and their misguided interests, those in the Midwest just take earthquakes with a grain of salt.

How many hospitals in the Midwest, for example, have a contingency plan for [major] earthquakes?

Oh, they might do census-alert practices every now and then, along with triage; but I mean, how many are really prepared for the "big one" in the Midwest?

A kinda joke I've heard around here is that if the big one hits New Madrid, we won't need a contingency plan, as all the old coal mines will sink in, and we'll all just be dead.

 

[CabVet]

Be Prepared.

That's why seismologists were probably picking their noses in Hawaii when Mexico got blindsided; or picking their noses in Monte Carlo when Haiti got blindsided.

As I have pointed out before -- pick any major disaster in history and tell me where the scientists were at the time; probably on the other side of the earth playing Euchre or getting their name in lights warning of a local disaster or something.

Then they rush to the scene and post for pictures in the National Geographic or Time or something.

When science claims to be able to predict earthquakes you can start to complain about bad predictions, but not before that. We can, however, predict hurricane paths pretty well, so it is easy to make experiments if you don't trust science.

 

[CabVet]

Scientists like to talk about the San Andreas fault line and California falling into the ocean, when the "big one" hits; but, as usual, they overlook a fault line in the Midwest that would make the San Andreas fault line look like Brownian motion by comparison.

The one in the Midwest generated an earthquake so powerful, the Mississippi River actually flowed backward for a period of time.

Thanks to scientists and their misguided interests, those in the Midwest just take earthquakes with a grain of salt.

How many hospitals in the Midwest, for example, have a contingency plan for [major] earthquakes?

Oh, they might do census-alert practices every now and then, along with triage; but I mean, how many are really prepared for the "big one" in the Midwest?

No, scientists talk about all faults, and about the risks in all areas, that's why you know about this fault in the Midwest. Policy makers are the ones that decide where to put (or withhold) efforts.

 

[AV1611VET]

When science claims to be able to predict earthquakes you can start to complain about bad predictions, but not before that. We can, however, predict hurricane paths pretty well, so it is easy to make experiments if you don't trust science.

Are you seriously comparing an earthquake prediction to a hurricane prediction? or were you contrasting them?

If you were contrasting them, I apologize for rolling my eyes.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, scientists talk about all faults, and about the risks in all areas, that's why you know about this fault in the Midwest. Policy makers are the ones that decide where to put (or withhold) efforts.

-- Oh, that's right -- I forgot.

The triad of scapegoats: government, administration and big business.

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Be Prepared.

That's why seismologists were probably picking their noses in Hawaii when Mexico got blindsided; or picking their noses in Monte Carlo when Haiti got blindsided.

As I have pointed out before -- pick any major disaster in history and tell me where the scientists were at the time; probably on the other side of the earth playing Euchre or getting their name in lights warning of a local disaster or something.

Then they rush to the scene and pose for pictures in the National Geographic or Time or something.

One thing that bugs me is when some tragedy strikes, and CNN has a scientist's head on TV, sitting in a chair fit for a CEO, telling us exactly what happened.

 

[AV1611VET]

Sorry -- I need to get off my high horse, eh?

 

[CabVet]

Are you seriously comparing an earthquake prediction to a hurricane prediction? or were you contrasting them?

If you were contrasting them, I apologize for rolling my eyes.

I just don't understand why you complain about scientists not being able to predict earthquakes when nobody claims they can.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

Be Prepared.

Were you a Scout, AV? Eagle right here.

 

[Jazer]

the old coal mines will sink in, and we'll all just be dead.

I have seen that. Your driving down the street and there is just a hole where a house use to be. Swallowed up by an old coal mine that caved in.

 

[Split Rock]

Scientists like to talk about the San Andreas fault line and California falling into the ocean, when the "big one" hits; but, as usual, they overlook a fault line in the Midwest that would make the San Andreas fault line look like Brownian motion by comparison.

The one in the Midwest generated an earthquake so powerful, the Mississippi River actually flowed backward for a period of time.

Thanks to scientists and their misguided interests, those in the Midwest just take earthquakes with a grain of salt.

How many hospitals in the Midwest, for example, have a contingency plan for [major] earthquakes?

Oh, they might do census-alert practices every now and then, along with triage; but I mean, how many are really prepared for the "big one" in the Midwest?

Actually there was a recent article in Science about the midwest fault system... so no, scientists do not ignore the danger. The real problem is two fold:

1. Predicting the actual date of an earthquake is not possible yet.
2. People in the midwest don't experience earthquakes as frequently as say those living in California. Therefore, it is very difficult to convince them or their leadership to spend resources to prepare for it.

-- Oh, that's right -- I forgot.

The triad of scapegoats: government, administration and big business.

That "triad of scapegoats" hold all the purse strings. Sorry if you chose to ignore that, just so you can use scientists as the scapegoats instead. But, maybe you can offer advice to us stupid scientists on how to get people in the Midwest to spend money on a threat that we can neither predict nor one that they can see coming. Maybe your irrational distrust of scientists will convince thgem to take the threat oulined by scientists more seriously.... no?

 

[Split Rock]

When science claims to be able to predict earthquakes you can start to complain about bad predictions, but not before that. We can, however, predict hurricane paths pretty well, so it is easy to make experiments if you don't trust science.

Are you seriously comparing an earthquake prediction to a hurricane prediction? or were you contrasting them?

If you were contrasting them, I apologize for rolling my eyes.

I just don't understand why you complain about scientists not being able to predict earthquakes when nobody claims they can.

AVET doesn't want to use hurricanes as an example, since it is a success story. Instead he uses earthquakes since we can't make accurate predictions about them.

Sorry -- I need to get off my high horse, eh?

There's an idea!

 

[CabVet]

AVET doesn't want to use hurricanes as an example, since it is a success story. Instead he uses earthquakes since we can't make accurate predictions about them.

And he complains about scientists not worrying about the Midwest, but if scientists were more vocal about it he would say they are all about "doomsday" predictions like he does with global warming. So, no way to get on his good side.

 

[rikerjoe]

But, maybe you can offer advice to us stupid scientists on how to get people in the Midwest to spend money on a threat that we can neither predict nor one that they can see coming.

Hey, maybe they should take a lesson from the tv evangelists and preachers out there? They seem to have the recipe for this....

 

[AV1611VET]

Were you a Scout, AV? Eagle right here.

Tenderfoot --