In another thread (Generator advice), Steve Hartsman says,

"I asked 5 different employees. None of them knew anything about it, but kept referring me to someone else they were sure did. Very frustrating experience. I mentioned in passing that there may be power outages due to Y2K, and I asked how many were in stock, as I expected there to be a run on generators very soon. Again, dumb looks. I digress... "

This folks, is in Wisconsin. In the past two weeks there have been at least 5 major newspaper articles in the Milwaukee newspaper, including the one's we've discussed on this forum. Right, Steve?

After this blitz, most people still are simply not hearing anything. Guess what.....they don't read newspapers, they only hear sound bites on some TV programs. They don't listen to Focus on the Family or watch the 700 Club, or tune in to C-Span and the CISC conferences. They don't read 'Wired,' or other net news.

Is anyone getting it? Nope. We still have plenty of time. Please try to get the word out. the life you save may be your own. Hell, it may be mine ----- so get out there and tell people :)

-- rocky (rknolls@hotmail.com), October 24, 1998

Answers

Go rocky!!!! My favorite rant these days is...personal safety in the Y2K days is directly correlated to the prepardedness level of my neighbors. I'm putting together an essay about Perception Jogs...my phrase for what it takes for assisting others' breakthroughs. It is a subject that has intrigued me for a lot of years....What wakes people up to any insight? What at least temporarily halts the incessant societal loudspeakers that unfortunately blare nonsense that keeps people numb and asleep to so much.

There is much research on states of awareness,...perception...

More is being revealed...I think when so-called "early awakers" LISTEN carefully...the ways to proceed with each person are evident...I just need to get this all down in salient form.

In the end, the more we all keep gently pointing and telling, the more awareness of others will increase. My humble (really) opinion.

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), October 24, 1998.

Rocky:

You are correct, sir!

-- Steve Hartsman (hartsman@ticon.net), October 24, 1998.

The title of this thread, "Is Anyone Getting It?" is a double edged blade.

My answer to Rocky's question is, "Yes, but not very many".

The reason, I believe, that this surprises us is that many of us and those like us don't "get" something else.

We live (in the USA) in a society where by conservative estimates over 50% of the population is functionally illiterate.

We (on this forum) take reading for granted but is it reasonable to expect someone who doesn't understand his own written language to comprehend the technological nightmare that is Y2K ?

I am not surprised.

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), October 26, 1998.

Hardliner,

Where do your get your figures that state that over 50% of the population is functionally illiterate? I found a figure of 97% literacy at http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/us.html Surely functional literacy isn't as low as 50%(I could be wrong). However, I'm sure that the percentage that actually read a newspaper is extremely low. It's not that they can't read; it's just that they are involved in their own problems and don't care about the rest of the world. An example would be the attitude: "I don't care what Clinton does as long as I'm prospering personally."

-- Louise (~~~~~@~~~~.~~~), October 26, 1998.

I'll agree with him on that: given the key word and tricky phrase "functionally".

You are assuming that a population that supports the daily astrology columns, looks to Hollywood and Jerry Springer for entertainment, looks at "pro" wrestling and E! MTV and HBO/Showtime for shows, and only reads the latest celebrity gossip columns and fashion magazine for important "news" is "literate" becasue they "can" read.

Better to realize that they "can" read but are exposed to nothing but sweet drivel and candy, lovingly spoon-fed to their drooling mouths by their baby-sitters in the mass media "politically corrupt" triangle in LA-DC-NY.

I ask retorically:

So now you expect them to understand a highly unpopular and complex technical topic, about a possibly (probably) unpleasant future exaggerated by their beloved "I feel your pain" corrupt President? They have proven themselves uncapable (unwilling?) of being able to understand even simple political manipulations - they are (in their collective masses) unable to understand.

But individually, after being taught correctly by somebody who can teach and who knows the subject - and this eliminates most news correspondants - they are able to understand and take action. But you have to isolate, innoculate and insulate them from the incompetents out there.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (cook.r@csaatl.com), October 26, 1998.

I think you are overestimating the size of the "population that supports the daily astrology columns, looks to Hollywood and Jerry Springer for entertainment, looks at "pro" wrestling and E! MTV and HBO/Showtime for shows, and only reads the latest celebrity gossip columns and fashion magazine for important "news" is "literate" becasue they "can" read" and underestimating the abilities of the rest of us.

The problem isn't that people can't comprehend Y2K. It is a fact that there is not much information on Y2K out there in the normal communication channels that people depend on. The number of people using the internet is still a small minority.

-- Buddy Y. (DC) (buddy@bellatlantic.net), October 26, 1998.

I don't know if these are the "end times" or not. Only God knows that. However I keep remembering these Bible verses:

"For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. For as in those days which were before the flood they were eating and drinking, they were marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so shall the coming of the Son of Man be." Matthew 24:37-39

People haven't changed have they?

-- Louise (~~~~~@~~~~.~~~), October 26, 1998.