As a grizzled veteran of the TB2000 ‘wars’, I doubt that a New Year will come without regurgitating memories of those emotional times. Can it really be TWO YEARS since the ball fell on the Doomer’s and brought clarity to the situation? Much has happened in the last 24 months but it somehow seems like only yesterday that the angst was at a fever pitch.

Of course, we know that these folks who are predisposed towards the negative have simply exchanged one apocalypse for another without missing a beat.

Hell of a way to exist!

This I am sure of: There are few things in our lives that we have complete control over……concentrate on those with much energy.

The rest of it…………..go with the flow.

May 2002 be good for you.

-- So (cr@t.es), January 01, 2002

Answers

I remember falling asleep as New York "passed" with no problem. I had watched the rollover from the first little Island that crossed over, too tired to wait up for it to hit here in Seattle.

I then felt a deep sadness for many at TB2K because I knew they would be confused and have problems having what they so clearly believed to be untrue. There were some rude people there, but an awful lot of nice ones too which I hoped I would still be able to talk to. The relationships between people in groups and even between groups had grown to be such a part of life that it would be impossible to just walk away without interacting any more.

There had grown bonds, brought on by Y2K in the beginning, but they had moved into a community of people who had other things in common and ideas to argue about.

Can't say I had the least amount of pity for Ed Yourdon, as it was obvious to me that he had stopped believing in the possibilities of any major problems six months earlier, but didn't have the guts to say so to his followers. I'd give anything to have had the opportunity to read the emails he received from his strongest believers.

I really felt bad for the doomers, until one person actually asked Paula Gordon to explain something. That made me blow up and use language I had never used in the forum before.

Didn't they realize that what they had just experienced showed that most of those so called experts didn't know what they were talking about? GGGRRRRRRRRrrrrrr. I was soo frustrated.

Odly, I didn't feel like I had won anything, didn't experience any form of victory, because I hadn't. To have accomplished what I had set out to do would have been to convince others, using logic and common sense that the rollover would be little or nothing.

I worried about how it probably upset a LOT of people that to find those who they trusted had pulled an elaborate con on them, even if in the early days there was not enough information to show one way or the other, 18 months before the rollover details and exact data on existing devices had been proven safe from rollover problems. I had taken that "list" of possible failures and researched them, one by one, except the ones others were doing, and discovered what if any problems they would have and what was being done to prevent them. Not surprisingly, most of the suspect devices being thrown around the internet wouldn't have any problem in the first place.

I must admit, in doing the research I did, I also learned that although I may be a dinosaur, technology had not passed me by. The basics will never change (until they get into molecular level) the logic is the same, and the methods of working with and understanding the same, especially the hardware and interface and perifials.

So little has been done with technology today, there is so much left to create. Sure information has been exploited, almost to the point of glutting the market. But computers have the ability to do so much more. When tied to hardware, the potential is endless. It's really too bad so many went for the "quick and easy" field of IT. What is needed now is an explosion of functional hardware devices controlled by computing.

Devices built with Murphy's Law in mind, much like the manner in which Boeing aircraft are designed. It's time for us to start connecting hardware to computers and exploit the unlimited possibilities that exist. It is easy and can be made redundant and safe. Lets go for it!

The possibilities go way beyond radio controlled cars and battling bots.

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), January 02, 2002.

The funny thing is that people like Socrates and Cherri are the ones that are still holding a grudge. That's because you know that in reality you are more wrong than those who prepared for Y2K.

Even after incidents like Sept. 11 you still can't get it through your thick heads that it's better to be safe than sorry. The reason our entire population now has to live in fear of an attack with a biological agent is because our government had the same kind of attitude as you, so we do not have the proper vaccines to protect us.

-- (face reality @ we. are vulnerable), January 02, 2002.

I mentioned time and time again that I was prepared, ad been for years. Not for Y2K, but for earthquakes. This helped me survive a bad snow and wet slushy melt one year when others around me ran out of food and other supplies.

As for the government, it had a LOT of supplies and plans in place in case of terrorist threats, years ago. Most people never knew it because that kind of information didn't bring in profit or ratings to the major media.

Even New York had a plan in place that had been created by Clinton, many major cities have them also. They didn't just pop up there out of thin air, they were created by and pushed into being made by Clinton and his administration

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), January 02, 2002.

our entire population now has to live in fear of an attack with a biological agent

*I* don't live in fear of this, and I don't know anyone IRL who does.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), January 02, 2002.

I too can not believe it's been two years. Wow where did the time go? I must be getting very old, indeed.

"Even after incidents like Sept. 11 you still can't get it through your thick heads that it's better to be safe than sorry." That's funny. Anita got it right. Knowing this and not living your life in fear because of it separate the rational from the irrational people. We don't have thick heads, you do.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), January 02, 2002.

Best said, Maria and Anita!

-- Ra (tion@l.1), January 02, 2002.

As a grizzled outsider to the Y2K "wars", I find it fascinating that anyone is still talking about it. I can only wonder what sort of imaginary "war" could have left such a deep mark on people. It seems unaccountable to me.

As for "living in fear" of biological warfare, I agree with Anita and Maria. It makes no more sense than it would to "live in fear" of cancer or an auto accident. You take any precautions that make sense, then you fuggedaboddit.

In the case of unknown bio-weapons from an unknown direction at an unknown time, few if any precautions make sense, so you move directly to step 2.

-- Little Nipper (canis@minor.net), January 02, 2002.

Tuesday January 1 11:18 AM ET

Americans Upbeat About Future

By WILL LESTER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - A majority of Americans believe the country is headed in the right direction and that their own finances will get better, an Associated Press poll says. But they also fear more terrorist attacks are likely in 2002.

Seven in 10 Americans believe there will be another terrorist attack in the near future, although their worry is less intense than it was a few months ago, according to the AP poll.

``I think terrorism is not done yet, we have to be a little leery,'' said Ron Kaiser, a 33-year-old employee of a medical products company in Buffalo, N.Y. ``I think we're too sophisticated a country to miss a major attack coming. It's more likely to be little things, like things in the mail.''

The number of people who believe a terrorist attack is ``very likely'' in the near future has dropped by half - from 48 percent to 23 percent - since October, according to the poll taken for The AP by ICR of Media, Pa. An additional 47 percent in the new poll thought another terrorist attack was ``somewhat likely.''

The poll of 1,013 people, taken Dec. 14-18, has an error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

-- (majority@fear.attack), January 02, 2002.

"majority fear attack", it is one thing to express a belief that more attacks are likely when directly questioned about this possibility and another thing entirely to "live in fear" of such attacks. In fact, if you read the article carefully, you'll discover that the word "fear" was used by the reporter, but almost certainly did not appear as part of the survey question.

-- Little Nipper (canis@minor.net), January 02, 2002.

I think you're missing the point. "Living in fear" was perhaps the wrong choice of words, it is good if you do not fear death. But whether or not you actually "fear" an attack, the odds are greater that you will die if one happens, because the government took the Pollyanna attitude on this issue. They have known that we are likely to be targets of such attacks for 15 or 20 years, yet they failed to prepare adequate vaccines.

-- (government@was.negligent), January 02, 2002.

LN, I had always assumed that you were a ‘regular’ from the original TB2000 from 1998-to rollover. If you were not there then I can understand your lack of emotion regarding the heated debates that took place.

However, if you WERE a participant and have forgotten the fever pitch that was reached, then you should up the dosage of Cognex.

-- So (cr@t.es), January 02, 2002.

what's cognex?

-- helen (eh@whats.this?), January 02, 2002.

Helen:

I assume he isn't talking about the technology company but the trade name [in the US] of a drug for treating dementia.

tacrine

SO: The world ended at 12:01 on 1 Jan 2000; you just aren't perceptive enough to realize it. ;o)))

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 02, 2002.

Thank you, Z. I didn't know there was a treatment for it. It gives me hope...until I forget it exists.

Socrates, in some alternate universe, y2k was a horrible thing. Your alternate self is living in my refugee center, drinking my well water raw, and plotting to take over the commune from the mule. ;)

-- helen (tatoo@this.on.my.forehead), January 02, 2002.

It was a great show Socs. Think best I liked the honest emotion on both sides. Both sides had crap shooters but both sides had mostly sincerity. Honest people both knowing they were right and most of both with nothing but the best of hope and intentions for their fellow man.

Derision flourished. For a few derision became an inescapable personality of its own and those that fell into that comfortable trap of self lost. Fortunately the list is short for both sides.

I'll never forget it. Blundering into a realm I didn't understand with agencies predicting trouble and personalities predicting farce. No apologies from this Doomer. The State Department, DOD, War College, international authorities on oil and a bunch of others smarter than me outsmarted was the company I kept.

Best of it all was I got to meet you guys. It worked out fine.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), January 02, 2002.

Tempest in a teapot. The online debate was shrill and often acrimonious, but quite isolated. While there was a great wailing and gnashing of teeth at Yourdon's forum, the rest of the world quietly fixed the problems and had a wonderful celebration. I thought the fireworks were spectacular.

The recession I predicted finally arrived. The great battleship of the American economy took longer to slow than I anticipated. While others worried about the Y2K meltdown, I readily acknowledged nervousness about bio-terrorism. From a strategic standpoint, the recent anthrax attack will save far more lives than it has cost. The U.S. is finally waking up to the reality of biological warfare and attempting to rebuild its crumbling public health system. Even the stockpiling of vaccines is a positive step.

This said, I'm not living in "fear" of a biological attack. I simply acknowledge the reality that communicable bio-weapons become more inexpensive and accessible every year. The best approach is not filling a cellar with water and tinned food, but having a government actively involved in intelligence and counter-terrorism.

A personal irony in the Y2K debate is that I'm a normally prudent person who spent a great deal of time arguing for the so- called "pollyannas." My suggestion to pay down debt and live a modest lifestyle were constantly rejected by the hard- core "doomers." Apparently, it's much more fun to buy camping and survival equipment than pay extra on one's credit card.

While few admit it, the Y2K "threat" was a great thrill ride for some. As a fan of apocalyptic fiction, I understand. In our comfortable modern society, there are few frontiers, few great "tests" for us. What is more compelling than stocking the proverbial lifeboat?

For others, it was a chance to move upward in the social order. I think of the hapless Paul Milne. A lifelong outsider, I imagine Milne had dreams of leadership in a brave, new world.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), January 03, 2002.

Howdy Ken:

Good to hear from ye. The recession I predicted finally arrived.

It is all relative. In my county, the unemployment rate has shot up to 1.8% [it had been setting at about 0.4% during the Clinton administration]. Of course that is to be expected with the structure of the tax cut; a transfer of wealth from the middle class to the upper class [economic classes of course]. It, as it always has, makes any economic downturn worse.

Here, retail sales at Christmas, showed the largest yearly increase ever recorded. After Christmas, all of the stores were empty. The small speciality stores did really well.

The auto dealerships have had some problems. The big producers have cut back on production; they have, literally, run out of cars. The place that I buy from, the largest volume dealer in the state, has spent most of their time finding cars from dealers on the coasts so they have something to sell. The Ferrari dealer is doing ok. He can bring stuff in from California at a good price. When I went in to work on Wednesday, I followed a truck full of them cars; did you know that they carry them in a covered truck; pretty cool.

It just depends where you are; but my guess is Bush is in for one term if he doesn't change his policy priorities. Well, it is a family tradition. ;o)))

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 03, 2002.

Ahem...as someone with a cellar filled with water and tinned food, I agree that a proactive approach toward solving problems is a lot better than holing up.

In the year leading up to the non-event, I was concerned that no one around us go hungry. Most of the people in our area could take reasonably good care of themselves in case of long term shortages, but there are always a few who can't. We were determined to fill in gaps as well as we could. This seemed like the good and proper thing to do.

Even though nothing happened, ever since then I've been aware of how people get along, or in many cases, don't get along. I've run into several people that I don't think I could live with for even a day, much less a long term crisis situation. The really ... gosh, what's a good word? ... intense ... doomers who insisted on exclusion of all but close friends and family were probably right to do so. It really is a better thing to let a stranger starve outside your door than to take him in and murder him yourself a couple of days later in a fit of rage. :)

We just had a boorish, abusive, and nutty dinner guest who refused to leave when the party was over. I left instead -- for about an hour before going back intending to bodily throw this cherished child of God out into the freezing dark. Thankfully, the cloud over my head convinced this person to leave before I got into range...

-- helen (camp@helen.is.closed), January 03, 2002.

Oh, Z. Please try to avoid the common compulsion of horseback economics. If I recall, your field of expertise is molecular biology or some such thing. I readily promise to keep my odd biological theories to myself if you will avoid explaining your personal insights into tax policy and economic downturns.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), January 03, 2002.

Sorry Ken:

When talking about bioterrorism, you moved into my area of expertise. So, I moved into yours; small city government. :o)))

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 03, 2002.

I'm a bit confused, Z. I didn't know small cities were linked to economic recession.

You have my permission to worry about about recession; as I hope I have yours to worry about bioterrorism. I imagine you know more about how to create weaponized smallpox, create viral glass or develop a biological delivery agent. I imagine I know a bit more about the linkage between U.S. income tax policy and economic recession. Of course, I always enjoy the James Bondesque surprises you spring. Perhaps you snuck in a doctorate in economics at the LSE while racing in European Grand Prix circuit? If you can demonstrate your theory about tax policy, you can tuck a Nobel Prize into your brimming trophy chest. Oh, heck, why not add a wing to the estate?

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), January 03, 2002.

Ken:

I'm a bit confused, Z.

I have realized that for some time. ;o)))

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 03, 2002.

Oh, God, "viral glass"???

-- helen (ack@what.is.it?), January 03, 2002.

"my guess is Bush is in for one term if he doesn't change his policy priorities. Well, it is a family tradition." Thanks for my daily chuckle, Z.

I was wondering when the liberals on this forum were going to take up the new song. I was also going to hand you the comment on your background but Ken beat me to it. Also, I'm not buying your explanation of Ken's reference to bioterror. "Face reality" was the first to bring in terrorism and, with her response to that, Cherri praised Clinton (as expected - thanks Cherri for not disappointing). But I'm kinda surprised at you, Z. What's for dinner tonight?

:)

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), January 03, 2002.

Ken:

You should get into something important. Conversion of Poole to a good salmon cake recipe.

Salmon Cakes

This is a basic recipe. I'm sure that you could add changes. Changes are welcome. ;o))))

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 03, 2002.

Maria:

Buy it or don't by it; makes no difference. I can't comment on that one.

Actually, I am somewhat conservative; I don't buy into the social conservatism of the religous conservatives that run the Republican party. I am politically active. Because of my position there is only so much that I can say and do. One is limited by state statute.

What I can do is pick on social conservatives like Ken. I can do it without facts; just to mess with his mind. I can't go further than that. ;o))))

Best wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 03, 2002.

WHAT is "viral glass"? Dozens of doomers are dying to know. ;)

-- helen (does@it.come.in.red?), January 03, 2002.

Good enough, Z

Helen, it doesn't sound good, does it? A doomer would imagine the worst. I remember the first time a (little a) discovered EMP. That *was* funny!

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), January 03, 2002.

Confusion is an occasional, not constant, state.

As for viral glass, I should defer to Z since he is the expert in such matters. If he declines, I will gladly offer my simple layperson's description of viral glass and other methods for stabilizing a bioweapon for delivery.

Personally, I think a "cake" is rather barbaric method for preparing salmon. A good filet deserves the heat of good wood, maybe apple, and a generous handful of fresh dill. I'm also partial to salmon sushi.

Finally, I am surprised to be categorized as a "social conservative." From my perspective, I lean more towards libertarian and fiscal conservatism. Frankly, I have little interest in the agenda of the social conservatives, ridding the world of "sin." I'm more interested in avoiding the beneficent impulses of the federal government... and in keeping the State limited and local.

As for "state statutes," you'll have to point out the law that regulates the political expression of the last letter of the alphabet.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), January 03, 2002.

Ken:

rsonally, I think a "cake" is rather barbaric method for preparing salmon. That just means that you have a very limited cultural and geographical background. That is obvious. You should talk to Poole. He has an open mind. If you want to have any influence, you will need to expand your experience beyond the tidewater.;o))))

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 03, 2002.

Z,

My mind is utterly closed when it comes to salmon cakes. :)

No compromise on that one, either.

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), January 03, 2002.

Just to add a little more obnoxious-ness to this thread, wasn't it 731 days? ; )

-- Pammy (2000 was@leap.year), January 03, 2002.

Viral glass dammit!! Do I need bleach, a gas mask, or what??

-- helen (prepping@for.what.now?), January 03, 2002.

The hell with tidewaters and state statutes for the moment. I want to know what county Z lives in??!!? It sounds like the photographic negative of my hometown. Z, dunno if this is too awkward, but I'd sure like to know where the heck you are, geographically speaking.

-- (just an@anonymous.one), January 03, 2002.

Poole:

You are on the wrong thread: Go here;

Salmon

I'm willing to try if you give me a recipe.

Best wishes,,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 03, 2002.

Ken, I'm pretty sure Z has passed on the viral glass question. PLEASE define your term!

-- helen (need@snowshoes.or.swimsuit?), January 03, 2002.

Z,

If your address is real, and with your permission, I'll send you an email with my question. I'm more than a little curious. Let me know?

-- (just an@anonymous.one), January 03, 2002.

Funny from your email address.

Present one is FrmlyZ@aol.com. Of course it could be changed at any time. ;o)))

Best Wishes,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 03, 2002.

Z, My anonymity is a concession to the history of these fora, and the few loose wingnuts who float around them. Perhaps it's a reflection of my poor judgement, but I don't consider you a candidate for that distinction. I've sent you an email.

-- (just an@anonymous.one), January 03, 2002.

Z is actually LL.

I thought everyone knew.

-- (duh@duh.duh), January 03, 2002.

no no no Z is really cin

Uh oh now she's got your e-mail address. Oh my gaaaawwwwd she's gonna spam you! nooooooooooooooooooooo

-- (oh@my.gawd), January 03, 2002.

Z passed gas? Helen, how did YOU know? ; )

-- Pammy (helen@makes.me laugh), January 03, 2002.

You said he passed GLASS? Ouchie!

-- Pammy (that's a horse@of.a different color), January 03, 2002.

Pammy, sweetheart, stoppit! I'm trying to get the definition of "viral glass". Is there a vaccination for it? An herbal remedy? Does it itch? Does it scratch?

-- helen (ready@to.doom.just.give.me.directions), January 03, 2002.

Oh no! Is Z/Cin/LL gonna send me the glass virus now?? Oh Gawd, not the glass virus! Anything but the glass virus!

-- (just an@anonymous.one), January 04, 2002.

Helen, dear, who lit the fuse on your tampon? ; )

-- Pammy (take@it.easy girl!), January 04, 2002.

First, Z, you have no knowledge of my cultural or geographic background. Drawing broad conclusions from a single opinion about a "salmon cake" is unfounded. As I am sure you know, ad hominem attack is a poor substitute for thoughtful culinary criticism. Perhaps you can use your international connections and License to Kill to secure us time in Kitchen Stadium. In a salmon battle, you can dazzle Chairman Kaga with your stunning "salmon cakes." I'll stumble along with my my provincial "tidewater" recipes.

Helen, viral glass is not a specific virus, but a method of stabilizing a virus. An individual can use an "incubator" to produce large amounts of a given biological organism like a virus. This viral "soup" is not necessarily the most effective medium to preserve or disperse a potential bioweapons. The high concentrations of virus can be preserved in sugar trehalose or sugar glass. Viral agents suspended in "viral glass" may be stored at relatively normal temperatures for longer periods of time. The viral glass may be used in conjuction with a low-intensity detonation to disperse the viral agent over a wide area. Of course, the explosion will destroy some of the virus, but not all.

The two most common potential bioweapons are smallpox and anthrax. Since anthrax (the disease) is not communicable so the threat is primary contact. Smallpox (the disease) is communicable, as discovered by the unfortunate Native Americans. There is some bad news about smallpox. One, we no longer provide routine smallpox vaccinations. Two, there is evidence to suggest that smallpox has been manipulated on the genetic level to produce nasty hybridized strains.

Returning the Native Americans, viral glass is modern equivalent if the virus-laden blankets given to the Indians. It's not the blanket to worry about, but the virus therein.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), January 04, 2002.

Ken is correct that trehalose is unusual in that it has a high glass transition temperature [around 79 degrees as I remember] and helps stabilize glasses as a component. It is also stable at high humidity levels. Trehalose glass; boy I learn all kinds of things here. ;o)))

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 04, 2002.

On the outside chance that one of you wants to know what Ken is talking about, there is a non-technical description here:

glass transition temperature

Good Reading,,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 04, 2002.

Never mind about viral glass.I'd like to know if we can catch mange from the dog !

-- Chris (chris@ireland .com), January 04, 2002.

Of course, Helen, I should add this caveat. I am only a layperson and have no specific technical knowledge or equipment to create viral glass. Now, if only Z will caveat his economic posts with a similar statement....

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), January 04, 2002.

Chris, you can't catch mange from the dog. You can catch the mites that cause mange from the dog.

(Thanks guys. )

-- helen stands down from red alert (viral@glass.defined.at.last), January 04, 2002.

Sorry Ken, I have to leave in the morning, unless this ice storm hits.

My economic discussion comes from all of those damned meetings that I have had to set through at Harvard, MIT, Yale and Stan. over the last 10 years. If you don't like the abbreviated conclusions; don't give money to those schools. ;o))))

Best Wishes,,,,,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), January 04, 2002.

Helen,

Thanks ! He's had one treatment but is still scratching all 112lbs.Jeezzzzzzz

-- Chris (Chris@ireland.ie), January 04, 2002.

And, I still don't know what magical geographic region Z lives in, and now HE has MY name and email address. At least he can't send me the glass virus now. I'm pretty sure my computer runs hotter than 79 degrees.

-- (just an@anonymous.one), January 04, 2002.

Nipper:

As an event, y2k didn't happen. However, as a window into the thought processes of a fairly common personality type, it was an anthropoligist's dream come true.

Y2k was a *prophecy* rather than a serious technical issue. It had its strongest appeal to the Devout, for reasons that are still emerging. Find yourself someone who was sincerely worried about y2k, and you will find someone who believes that only gold is money, that interest is immoral, that humanity is 6000 years old and evolution is the Devil's fraud, that the bible is Pure Truth, that we are in the throes of moral dissolution, that the government is secretly run by ain international cabal out to control our minds (and has been successful except for us few remaining defenders of the faith who see through this, of course), and that God Himself has told us these things, which are beyond any possible doubt (as is everything else).

While this stuff may be beneath your notice, I find it fascinating.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 04, 2002.

Flint,

Do you think the connection between all these charachteristics has to do with a deep desire for these people to be a part of something "special" as group? Or are they just desperately seeking a self fufilling prophecy of the end of the world? Do you think that they are that alienated from society that they really want to see it destroyed? Or does this need come from within in the form of frustration with society because their beliefs are not the dominant driving force of today's society?

Especially interesting to me is to gain an understanding of why they hate and distrust government so much. I can understand having a different viewpoint of how big government should be or even what the proper function of government is. I would imagine that you and I differ on our views of how much government is proper. However, do you feel that "the Government" is out to get you? Are there people in government actively plotting against you personally?

-- Jack Booted Thug (governmentconspiracy@NWO.com), January 05, 2002.

Flint, I was worried about y2k until the fall of 1999, but I believe in almost none of the other things you listed. I think you paint with too broad of a brush.

JBT, people who believe the Bible think the world will end because that's what the Bible says will happen. As to the distrust of government, I have NO idea where that comes from.

-- Pammy (pamela_sue57@hotmail.com), January 05, 2002.

I agree with Pammy. I think those who were really worried about Y2K were more of a mixed group. If I recall correctly, "A" was both a hard-core doomer and an atheist. And (I may be wrong here) my impression is that the majority of posters on the forum were not about to follow crazy Andy the gold bug. Politically, there were many who thought Clinton was incapable of doing anything right, but he had his defenders (Hawk especially comes to mind, but I myself defended him on some things though not many).

-- Peter Errington (petere7@starpower.net), January 05, 2002.

Flint and JBT, I was worried about y2k right up until the rollover, but none of the other stuff you mentioned was true in my case.

Although...there is a lingering regret that I was never crowned Empress of Tick Infested Hell...

-- helen (plain@nonroyal.helen), January 05, 2002.

Flint: I think that the current "incarnation" of TB2k has pretty much lost the original Cast of characters. You're seeing more fundamentalist Christians there today because the site is being advertised as such elsewhere [at least I read one person say that the site was recommended by "another" (her words, not mine) Christian forum.]

The original cast has scattered to the wind. The new folks, IMO, have MUCH more of a fervor to accept that today's world events fall into the biblical prophesies of The End Times.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), January 05, 2002.

Flint, thanks for the input.

I agree that studying such folks has a certain fascination, but I find that my fascination is limited. The reason is that the very traits you listed require The Devout to be self-limiting, incurious and fixed in their beliefs. This circumscribes what you can learn from them or about them. I have known a few such people. For me, they wore out their fascination pretty quickly once I hit that wall.

To the extent that any one person matches the portrait you painted, that person will be exactly like every other person who matches that portrait. Of course, to the extent a person deviates from your rather one-dimensional description, then the less they meet the criteria you claim fascinate you - and the more likely they are to fascinate me.

-- Little Nipper (canis@minor.net), January 05, 2002.

Granted, at the limit these people have little of individual differentiation to offer. But that was a broad brush. I'm not particularly qualified to speculate on what inspires or motivates these people. I visualise a receptor site on the psyche that fits any promise of Absolute Certainty, and tends to collect extreme positions because these, however irrational, never suffer doubt.

And it's true that before y2k, it wasn't always easy to distinguish those who were concerned about possible glitches of unpredictable nature (I was one of those), and those who gave every appearance of desiring the end of a world within which their coping mechanisms were not adequate. But now, we can look around and see that the failure of prophecy had absolutely no effect on the belief system. Rational people might say, if A implies B and B is clearly false, then A must be false as well. These Believer people say A is Truth. If it implies B (that is, B *must* be true if A is) and B is clearly false, then somehow B must STILL be true, but "they" are keeping it a secret. Or maybe B is something else instead, but still Truth.

As for government being out to get us, the presumption is that "government" is monolithic, controlled essentially by a single well-hidden mind (of foreign origin), with the goal of depriving us of all our freedoms, as "proved" by the removal of prayers from our schools. So far, I have never yet seen the fear of government independent of the perceived threat to religion. Basically, anything that does not actively cooperate in the imposition of Fundamentalist beliefs is ipso facto evil.

Then again, maybe simple things interest me?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 05, 2002.

Flint, since I joined Unk's, there have been several threads on the general subject of 'lessons learned from Y2K'. I found the first one I encountered moderately interesting. The second added nothing to the first. The third was more than enough.

Now, for me, the fascination is in the seeming compulsion among some here to thresh the chaff long after all the grain has been removed. However, I will join Socr@tes in hoping 2002 is good to us all.

-- Lttle Nipper (canis@minor.net), January 05, 2002.

Helen,

I will be more than willing to have a procalmation (complete with little gold foil seal) issued acknowledging you a Empress of Tick Infested Hell. Please advise where to send it.

-- Jack Booted Thug (governmentconspiracy@NWO.com), January 05, 2002.

JBT, I want a ceremony too. It'll have to be at a gathering. ;)

-- helen (want@crown.too), January 05, 2002.

I am a fundamentalist. I knew that y2k was camel shit. Allah would not permit such an end for those of us who know the truth.

-- (Mullah Omar @ Paradise.com), January 05, 2002.

Nipper:

I felt exactly the same way about threads whose general theme was "advantages of the liberal political persuasion." After 2 or 3 of these, MEGO sets in.

But in any case, I'm not really talking about lessons y2k taught us, so much as relating certain postures vis a vis y2k into a more cohesive description of a viewpoint which exists and exercises political power. For example, the threat of teaching magic in high school science classes is real. Stupid, but real.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 05, 2002.

You stupid pollies will never understand. Y2K is just simmering beneath the surface, just waiting to strike. All the problems we have experienced anywhere since 1/1/2000 is a direct result of Y2K and Klintoooooooooooooon's complete mishandling of the situation by trying to start World War III and declare Marshall Law and make himself President for Life and send us all to the American Death Camps. The fact that the problems haven't caused a global catastrophe yet only means that the it will be much much MUCH worse. Most everyone will be dead very soon. Finally, you pollies will get the deaths you deserve. Ha ha haaaaaaaa

-- Ghost of (P@aul.Milne), January 05, 2002.

Um...Ghost? It's "Martial Law".

-- helpful helen avoids the subject of James Coburn on this one (spelling@is.a.neglected.art), January 06, 2002.

Hey, its great to see so many from the old Y2K forum still here.

Y2K was never going to cause all the problems that many were predicting, but lets not lose sight of the issues that did exist. The mere threat of disruption caused many companies to review their backup and data recovery procedures. (eg It convinced us to ensure that our power stations could still be operated manually if required.)

And even now we still haven't fully fixed everything. I have just completed a data search for flows on a local river from 1011230 to 1020104. Isn't it great to be living in the year 19102.

-- Malcolm Taylor (taylorm@es.co.nz), January 06, 2002.

Well, speaking as one of those "doomer" types, :-P to Socrates and Cherri. I have never claimed that Y2K did actually happen, nor did most of the "doomers" I enjoyed meeting through Yourdon's bb. On the other hand, I was only a marginal doomer, anyway. I thought a 5 on the scale of 10, and was thrilled (:-D) to be wrong.

I had to LOL at your 19102, though Malcolm! There were certainly lots of glitches, some of which were rather unfun. Like the letter my BIL got accusing him of being way behind in his student loan payments (he payed it off about 1985). Ah, well, fortunately there are still people making the final decisions about whether or not the computer is right. I'm glad I won't be around for 10000, though!

-- Tricia the Canuck (jayles@telusplanet.net), January 06, 2002.

Um...Ghost? It's "Martial Law".

Clearly, you don't remember the doomer stories from the original TB2K about the semi trucks filled with signs saying "Stop Marshall Law." Strange, though. At the time, they weren't at all interested in the proper spelling of the term. LOL.

-- (what@i.think), January 06, 2002.

Since Ghost didn't put quotations around any of the stuff, I thought the misspelling belonged to Ghost, and was of recent origin. Every time I see "Marshall Law" I always think of Marshall Matt Dillon. :)

-- helen (got@out.of.THAT.one), January 06, 2002.

This thread made me think of how I found Timebomb 2000 and all the bizarre people associated with it. When doing my first y2k search I found Sanger's Review and there was a link to Timebomb there. Since this thread made me think of Sanger's I checked through my bookmarks to go see what happened to that site.

What I found was totally unexpected. I think there is some kind of moral to the story here or some other type of social commentary going on but I haven't decided what yet. Check it out.

www.sangersreview.com/

Sorry, HTML deficient.

-- Jack Booted Thug (governmentconspiracy@NWO.com), January 08, 2002.

JBT: Those young chicks steered you to Timebomb in the first place? Clearly they've got brains as well as boobies.

-- Peter Errington (petere7@starpower.net), January 08, 2002.

"Boobies"?

Stop (tears in eyes)....yer killin'me here.

-- So (cr@t.es), January 12, 2002.

It seems that several of the old Y2k sites have been purchased by [ahem] more risque-oriented sites, Cornboy. I laughed at that term, as well, Socrates. Not quite as funny, however, as a female friend I have who refers to chicken breasts as chicken fronts.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), January 13, 2002.