Thanking those who warned us

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

From what I've read, the fundamental personality of some Y2K doomers requires being sycophantic along with unshakeable pessimism.

Why are we thanking bad analysts?

We don't have to be ugly, but we don't have to fawn, either.

Why don't we just say, "Whoops, looks like it wasn't 'much more pervasive and serious than most of the [disasters] we've experienced in modern history'. Oh well, you tried your best."?

-- Imso (veryverythankful@prepped.com), January 08, 2000

Answers

Because it takes character to be honest with others as well as some kind of mental fortitude to be honest with ones self.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), January 08, 2000.

Cherri,

YOU ARE RIGHT!! You should try it sometime...

-- (what a @ninny.you), January 08, 2000.


"Why don't we just say, "Whoops, looks like it wasn't 'much more pervasive and serious than most of the [disasters] we've experienced in modern history'."

Or maybe it could be that the collective hard work has paid off?

-- (cause@nd.effects), January 08, 2000.


Sigh. We don't thank for "the hard work paying off" because of:

1. The persistent refusal to accept and broadcast that the doomsday scenarios are OVER

2. The persistent prediction/insinuation in prior months that no matter how hard we worked, doom would likely come--THIS is the part that was wrong; not the encouragement to fix bad programs--heck; everyone was for that. No "Polly" with an IQ over 90 would think you shouldn't fix Y2K bugs--they just understood that failure to fix them all, perfectly, wouldn't result in chaos.

-- Imso (veryverythankful@prepped.com), January 08, 2000.


In a message dated 1/6/2000 5:04:24 PM Central Standard Time, Chris.Rohrs@sf.frb.org writes:

<< Subj: Re: [uk-bcp] FYI - Millennium Bug prophet receives death threats. (reply) Date: 1/6/2000 5:04:24 PM Central Standard Time From: Chris.Rohrs@sf.frb.org (Chris Rohrs) To: SMeyers33@aol.com

Reference: Posted 05/01/2000 4:00pm by Thomas C. Greene http://www.theregister.co.uk/991231-000005.html

Thanks, Steve I finally found it. "Defrocked Prophet of Y2K Doom" really bothered me because de Jager has never been a doom prophet. Guess they wanted to ring a few people's bells.

>>

You are welcome Chris......

Yes, very disturbing that some individuals can find nothing better to do, other than to tear down someone who is so intelligent, and more so, obviously a very caring person. He seemed to miss that about De Jager.....*and all the other* precise, brilliant, caring people who gave Y2K the serious attention it deserved. They did their very best, they were honest; they did real work, hundreds if not thousands of hours...because they cared.....and *that* is what counts.

So few are able to admit that the central problem with Y2K were the *unknowns*....NOT what we 'knew' about it. We were all quite lucky....at least so far (no major chemical or nuclear accidents)...that was my prime concern, above all others. Like I said, "Who needs to try to dodge *those* icebergs...when there are already so many other potential Y2K problems to navigate? It would only complicate matters that much worse."

Obviously, the idiot that made that statement about De Jager had no comprehension of what a Y2K breakdown would mean....in terms of human suffering, here or elsewhere. Or its implications for social instability...a very ugly, hurtful thing...(care to visit Russia or Calcutta today?)...and/or greatly accelerating existing ecological problems. What folly.

At best, 'sophisticated egos reduced to intellectual sword fighting'...devoid of human compassion and completely missing the negative potentials involved in Y2K. Very upsetting that someone could 'shoot from the hip' and (attempt to) discredit someone of the caliber of De Jager, and by implication, all the others working at his 'level' as well. Then threaten him? How encouraging, no? To anyone who still has a brain, or a shred of Heart left in them, this individual only draws attention to themself and how much is lacking within...they are saying very little about de Jager, and a great deal about themselves.

Sorry I'm a bit upset here, but I am. For so many to have worked so hard to insure the safety of Humanity...only to have other *very* small people take pot shots at them...is disgusting. That all the years of focused effort...could be reduced to "eat crow in public" because we *didn't* have a disaster?? Are these people insane? Unbelievable.

It makes me think of Rudyard Kipling's "IF"

'If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken, twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools....'

That about sums up my view of the individual who saw *nothing* of value or benefit in what De Jager and many others did. They missed what is most important about 'the Man' as a human being...and all he did, his contributions. We are quite lucky to have the De Jager's, Gordon's, Kappleman's, Yordon's, Barnett's, Jim Lord's, Koskinen's, David Spinks/UK, Dale Way, etc. and *so* many others who helped get us this far. Yes, even Gary North deserves much credit, even if only as "Devils Advocate" to make people stop and think twice. He did. Gary North is a brilliant individual and a straight shooter; much insight, much excellent analysis; very hard working, dedicated, caring individual. He certainly is nobody's fool. Gary played 'the part' very few have the guts or tje brains to pull off. He didn't cause the problems...he tried to solve them. That takes a lot of caring...that is what I see about the man.

Everyone did their part and made a difference. North got many people to prepare...and had the situation turned out differently, his work would been seen in a very different light today. They seem to miss the connection between those who kept the pressure on...and how much *did* get accomplished; (more than what most expected it seems). Yes, any informed person knows very well we are not out of the woods yet...still more hills and valleys to traverse before we 'Know' we are in the clear. We are not at that point yet...only 1 week into Y2K. There is still more to come it seems; let's hope it's manageable.

I would much prefer that people were "over concerned" and erred on the side of safety, spent extra money, etc....than some half-ass approach which could have resulted in incomprehensible levels of suffering for millions...had the pressure not been on continuously. How people can miss that..is beyond my understanding.

In my view, hats-off and kudos to all those who cared enough to do everything they could, individually and collectively, to insure the safety of so many. We are all very fortunate (so far) and *that* ought to be the understanding that comes out of this "Y2K thing".

What about the he individual efforts AND the cooperation which took place...world wide. When is the last time Russia & the US sat down together to make sure their nuclear weapons didn't go off at each other? How did all that get lost...what...because 'we *didn't* have a massive breakdown' on Jan 1? Y2K helped us realize we are all in this together...and that we depend on each other, and that we need each other....how could that recognition not have significant, lasting value in our fractured world? To ignore all that and more.....and then tear down the very people who worked tirelessly to cover all bases? My, aren't we an enlightened species...

Actually, Y2K was a good 'practice run' for the ecological problems we are now facing, which arguably make Y2K look quite 'trivial' in true context..(see below)...if only they would open their eyes. The information is there, but who knows if they have the emotional guts to look at it for what it is, and not go back to sleep.

Sorry for all my opinions, but that's they way I see it, based on thirty years of comprehensive, global-environmental research. The data on the environment speaks for itself...doesn't need me or any 'authority' to 'validate' it. It's there, and we better face up to it like we just did with Y2K. This is not the 'end' of our problems which need solving...only the beginning.

Anyone who cares to argue that one.....would be a certified fool.

For a short briefing, see:

http://www.bashar.com/GSP/rachel.htm http://www.bashar.com/GSP/sciwarn1.htm. http://www.bashar.com/GSP/articwarm.htm http://www.bashar.com/GSP/water.htm http://www.bashar.com/GSP/oceans.htm http://www.arkinstitute.com/htmls/update.html http://www.bashar.com/GSP/treedying.htm http://www.bashar.com/GSP/butterfly5.htm http://www.chem-tox.com/chlordane/default.htm http://www.trufax.org/fluoride/isfrextracts.html http://www.foe.co.uk/camps/indpoll/0198ape.htm http://www.bashar.com/GSP/erthstat.htm http://www.sierraclub.org/cafos/map/index.asp http://www.mg.co.za/mg/news/97jul2/29jul-radioactive2.html http://www.bashar.com/GSP/chernobyl3.htm

I invite anyone to read *all* the articles, take them *as a whole*...and put forth their 'assessment' of "what it all means" as far as "infrastructure problems". Good luck..(smile)...because we are going to need it even more than what we have just seen with Y2K. It will be quite interesting to see how many "experts" will still be standing after Y2K, or...if they truly learned anything about 'infrastructure threats', or... if it was just well- intentioned "academic posturing"...specialists lacking true context, depth and comprehensive analysis. How convenient. Denial is just such a wonderful thing.

The only problem with 'seemingly making it through' Y2K....is that we probably will not really learn anything lasting from Y2K, and continue unabated, pedal-to-the-floor, racing towards ecological disaster as we have been...under the false impression that we are so smart...."Now, we can lick anything." What a dangerous illusion...and lost opportunity to really "focus up" about the truth of our present global environmental situation: Our planet is dying....and we are pretending (or are being told) that nothing is happening. Uh huh. (My, what a brilliant species...so smart.) Think we can fix those problems as easily as a four digit date field? Keep dreaming.

I like Robert Dean's assessment: "If you are not concerned about these issues, then you are simply uninformed."

and "Why are these issues so important?"......Make no mistake: it's because one of the things at stake...is the future of Planet Earth...."

(Contrary to popular myth, there are real solutions IF we got down to it with the same focus as Y2K, we might even surprise ourselves...and 'make it.' see http://www.bashar.com/GSP/door- solution.htm

In very short order...we'll see how much we really learned from all this, or if 'sailing through Y2K' (as so many now think)...actually turns out to be 'a curse in disguise'. Maybe if things had broken down a bit more...we might have directed our attention to the other threats to our True Infrastructure...our bio-sphere...and Man's destructive impact on it, pursuing short-term profits for the few, at the painful expense of the many.

Those are the real issues, now that we are past the Y2K '10 yard line'. 90 yards to go before we reach the finish line.

Let's hope we care enough about ourselves, each other, and future generations...to get the job done. We are way behind schedule as it is. Any doubts? Read the above articles and, please, show me where I'm wrong.

Best always,

Steve Meyers Global Strategies Project http://www.bashar.com/GSP SMeyers33@aol.com

-- Steve Meyers (SMeyers33@aol.com), January 11, 2000.



Moderation questions? read the FAQ