Episode-120- Listener Feedback for January 12, 2009 — 4 Comments

  1. Jack is right to keep a balanced perspective regarding what threats are most likely. He is probably correct about the nature of most environmental, economic, or political threats. I would like to hear about a survivalist’s response, and preps, in the possible scenario of an electromagnetic pulse (EMP). China is feeling the economic pinch, and we could find ourselves in a conflict with China in the not too distant future. They have declared that they will “rule the electromagnetic battlefield”. This is the scenario that I hold as the worst case, with some foreseeable probability.

    When an EMP goes off (a special type of nuke that doesn’t kill people outside of the immediate blast area) ALL integrated circuits are fried. No (modern) vehicles will run, no communications, no power, no furnace (they have solid-state chips inside), no generator, no GPS, NOTHING. And the power, and the cars and motors and appliances, will never ‘come back on’.

    I live in upstate NY and I an only imagine the pandemonium if we got hit (not far from Ft. Drum), or if NYC got hit. The high temp will be 8 and the low will be -4 this Thursday. If an EMP hits this area during the winter it will descend into chaos fast.

    So, I’m just wondering what the approach would be in such a scenario. I have my own ideas, and plans, but I am curious about what others think about such a situation.

  2. Actually there are other ways than exploding a high altitude Nuke to generate localized EMPs. Some electronic damage can be eleminated by shielding (the more the better) but stuff left out will indeed be fried. Old vehicles with non-electronic (non-computerized) ignition, air/fuel delivery and other systems will probably work (if you have a battery thats not fried). The Chinese may want to “own” the electronic battlefield and we may may have to fight ’em, but (as they say)

  3. Just a short comment the viking term for the Inuits was Skarlings, which means short dirty people. This was not meant to mean that they looked down on them most historians believe that that this was simply a descriptive term. The Inuits where much shorter and brown skinned in comparison to the Viking and this was how they named things.

    The idea that the vikings did not trade or work with the Inuits is very out dated and based on research from about 100 years ago. over the last 20 to 30 years many main stream historians believe that the Viking traded regularly with the Inuits and have (since the ice in Greenland has pulled back) in the last 10 years found several villages where evidence shows that many of the Vikings and Inuits lived and worked together when things really started getting bad.

    Most of the Viking that settled Green land did not die their where thousands of Vikings that disappeared over a period of more than 200 years most main stream historians believe that any of the Viking that had the resources or connections simple slowly moved from Greenland to Iceland, Norway or Sweden.

    Sorry for my little rant, I am just very active in Northern European History and the cultures that make up what we refer to as the Viking people.

    Thanks for listening.

  4. Vincent,

    I don’t doubt you because you sound informed. I can only work with the facts as I find them reported though. Here is one account about the issues with the harpoons,

    The documentary I mentioned “The Little Ice Age – The Big Chill” is fairly current (2005)

    Can you point to any documentation that explains your view?

    Again this is NOT because I doubt your statements only because I actually love finding out published info (such as in the film) is wrong.

    That said the French refusal of the potato is well documented.

    I have also confirmed my suspicision about the banning of Amaranth, which is clearly one of the most arrogant things ever done by one group of people to another. Here are a few links about that,