Jack, H. G. Wells wrote the book, the War of the Worlds. Orson Wells did the radio show in 1938 of War of the Worlds that caused the famous panic.

I say we return to a more agrarian society. There will be lots to do @Rob. Just growing food will be a big employer. As Paul Wheaton says, you don’t eat, you don’t shit, you don’t shit you die.
Plenty of work everywhere, but this time it will be doing stuff that matters.

In case anyone doesn’t really get the ‘oligarch’ thing.. I ran into this definition/explanation:

‘The term oligarch is reserved for those with extreme wealth who also want to control the political process, policy levers and most other aspects of the lives of the citizenry in a top-down tyrannical and undemocratic manner. They think they know best about pretty much everything, and believe unelected technocrats who share their worldview should be empowered so that they can unilaterally make all of society’s important decisions. The unwashed masses (plebs) in their minds are unnecessary distractions who must to be told what to do. Useless eaters who need to be brainwashed into worshipping the oligarch mindset, or turned into apathetic automatons incapable or unwilling to engage in critical thought. Either outcome is equally acceptable and equally encouraged.’
– Mike Krieger

Here’s how oligarchs think/work:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G790p0LcgbI

source:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-10/obamacare-architect-admits-lack-transparency-huge-advantage-against-stupidity-americ

HG Wells predicted that man will live in brick buildings on the moon and the people there would communicate with people on earth by jumping up and down in morris code and looking through telescopes at eachother. The moon counts as a satellite of earth. Before the modern satellites were put in space, satellite was a word used to describe any space body that revolved around another space body.

The science fiction author, Arthur C. Clarke, is the one credited with the invention of space satellites.

You can thank President Dwight D. Eisenhower for implementing satellites. He wanted to count tanks and planes in the Soviet Union because the “military industrial complex” kept giving him numbers that varied wildly (WAGs… wild ass guesses). The paycheck of the “military industrial complex” depended on high numbers so that the US would feel compelled to buy more tanks and planes than the Soviets. Eisenhower wanted REAL numbers to counter REAL threats. That is why he launched the first spy satellites. You can thank him, Edwin H. Land and Polaroid.

Warning: I’m going to mention the movie “Interstellar”. I don’t think I will give anything away here but if you don’t want to know anything about the movie, then stop reading. I thought it was a good movie. It was long but I didn’t notice. It was exciting.

The new movie “Interstellar” portrays another of Clarke’s ideas… a special type of space station that allows one to feel like one is standing outside as long as one doesn’t look too closely at the horizon. Toward the end of the movie, some kids are playing baseball when the batter hits a high fly ball that goes so high that it hits the roof of the house floating directly above the field. It is an interesting change of perspective and you must realize that the space station is actually a rotating cylinder. The centrifugal force keeps objects near the inside surface of the cylinder feeling as if they are at full gravity but if they look up they see that their are people on the opposite wall of the cylinder that are “upside down” so to speak. (See “O’Neill cylinder” for a scientific treatment.)

You can see what such a space station might look like on the cover of Clarke’s
book “Rendezvous with Rama.” The book is good. The sequels suck.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendezvous_with_Rama

Here is a link to picture that illustrates reasonably well what the inside of such a cylinder look like…

http://www.pinterest.com/pin/295759900501674475/

Here is a link to video of such a rotating cylinder from the inside…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiO8CgGiWPM

Finally, Larry Niven wrote a scifi novel entitled “Ringworld” that is more fiction that science but he attempts to portray a modified Dyson Sphere as a ring. It would never work without constant adjustment so after receiving many complaints the sequels to Ringworld introduced special jets that automatically made these adjustments. (He should have consulted Jerry Pournelle in the first place.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ringworld

Alex

First, that cop should not only be fired but investigated for possibly criminal charges of assault and battery.

However, I want to pose a question. Say a well known cable news network were to do a series about preppers in where they only interview and talk about the crazy doomsday types, or published only stories about CHL/CCW holders who commit crimes, or are dangerously irresponsible with their firearms. Would we not be critical of them for being misleading? It’s not that they’re lying or making something up, but by choosing to only talking about the small handful of preppers who are crazy, or the small handful of CHL holders who acted illegally or irresponsibly, they are displaying a confirmation bias, and the end result is dishonest, even if they didn’t actually lie. Painting an inaccurate picture of a group through selective publishing and pandering to confirmation bias is intellectually wrong. We as preppers and gun owners know that the vast majority of us are law abiding, reasonable, and not at all unhinged or dangerous in any way. And yet news organization do indeed seem to go out of their way to only talk about the negative sides of prepping or firearms ownership, almost as if they want people to think those statistical outliers do indeed represent the entire group. We see this sort of thing all the time in the media. Jack even talked about it when he mentioned that one person getting sick from food is hyped up to the point where everyone is afraid even though logically they should know that it’s very very unlikely that it’s a huge menacing problem.

I wonder how this pertains to only talking about stories regarding bad cops. Yes there are bad cops out there. There are cops who should be demoted. There are cops who should be fired. There are cops who should be in prison right now and yet are still out there carrying a badge and holding the authority to trample on the rights over other unimpeded. These cops do exist.

But they are not the majority. Not even close. And yet, by only talking about the bad ones, an impression is made that they are the norm. This is inaccurate and either could indicate confirmation bias on the part of the one telling the story, or pander to that same bias in the listener. So all emotional reactions aside, if we can see that that sort of selective publication regarding bad CHL holders or crazy preppers is inaccurate to the point of being dishonest about all of us…..is it not also inaccurate to the point of being dishonest when the same selective publication of only negative stories about police is done?