Post by perthprepper on Oct 8, 2016 16:04:31 GMT 10
Good grief. 55 years if you're the sole survivor in a large city, perhaps. Though even the most non-perishable item wouldn't be all that tasty or nutritious by then anyway. And if you're not the sole survivor, a quick look at coles and woolies approach to stock turn and inventory management should convince you that 55 years is off the table
No idea why you'd head to the beach. A bit like backing up against a wall.
Because the "expert" sees the sand as a valuable source of glass. I kept looking for something indicating this article was some attempt at humour or satire, but as far as I can tell they're actually serious.
He also doesn't mention what to do with all the rotting food once the refrigeration ceases, what to do with human excrement, how to find the 80kL of water each person will need to survive for 55 years (not allowing for times of illness, which will happen without any proper washing with this water allowance), how to keep rodents at bay, etc.
It's this type of nonsense that gives those of us who prepare a bad name. If it wasn't so pathetic it'd be hilarious.
I think the reporter who wrote the article did their usual internet "news" thing and took what little they know of his book, added their own crap and wrote about it in a different context.
The article reminds me of an online "how prepared are you" type quiz I saw a while back. It started out OK, with the usual "if you were on a desert island, what kit would you want" type questions, then became progressively dumber and dumber. The clincher was the question "What clothes do you put on first after getting out of the shower? a) Singlet b) Socks c) Underpants ..... apparently hard-core preppers put their socks on first, as socks protect the feet in case something happens and they need to run out before getting their other clothes on. Obviously written by an armchair expert!
55 years of food. Even if you were alone, most food won't last more than a year, so 54 years of cans, and if I'm being generous with 1000kj/can it's 157,852 cans for 54 years. Maybe, just maybe a really large supermarket.
"A third of people carry a 'grab bag' in case of a disaster, research shows" - There's no way that 1/3 of British people would have that set up? Absolute Baloney. I'm very dubious about the claims made on this and looking at the website associated with it, it looks like a science fair for kids, who were probably the participants [aka unlikely to be accurate].
Low/mid/high Basic First Aid 32% 40% 28% - possibly accurate How to preserve food 39% 41% 20% - no way How to make chemical substance 80% 15% 5% - no way. Anyone know how to make quick lime on here, it is used quite a bit? How to make things from wood 54% 31% 15% - probably How to make or repair metal tools 68% 23% 9% - no way. How to grow crops or rear animals 47% 34% 19% - possibly, the animal husbandry would be far lower. How to make your own clothes 62% 27% 11% - probably, a bag with a few holes with arms and head is clothing right? How to get engines/machines to work 68% 23% 9% - That's complete bull, 1/3 of human beings having some idea on how to get a car/engine/machine running again? Or is that a test of how to turn the key? ------------- Having said that, the guys' book might be ok... as he talks about some useful ideas for preppers, what to do after? It's $16 on booktopia [free postage]. I would suspect it being no where near as good as 'Lees priceless Recipes' though I ordered it anyhow.
"This book is definately not a survivalist s handbook, and neither is it much about the science behind basic technolgies. If the modern world ends you will want experts around with practical experience of how to "reboot" civilisation from zero and communicate that knowledge - this author is not one of them."
I'm no 'prepper', I'm just very, very well-read, but I was astonished how much of the stuff in this book used to be 'common knowledge' in science and text books I still half-remember. Now, such interesting but off-curriculum material has been squeezed out. Libraries shun it as irrelevant. It may be 'out there' on the , but...
A cautionary note; technically, this is a 'work in progress'. I'd hope that the second or third edition will be printed on 'acid free' paper, so endure until required. Similarly, I'd hope this book may spawn a set of supplementary volumes, a modest return to those well-thumbed 'home cyclopaedia' works beloved of grannies and aunts...
Post by frontsight on Oct 10, 2016 15:34:52 GMT 10
Think those numbers are not wrong, just way out of context!
55 years worth of food, probably true if you report this like man-hour/ man-day. A large construction site worth 100000 man days can be done in 0.91 year with teams of 100 workers each doing 3 shifts. But cant be done by one man doing 100000 days nor 100000 men doing 1 day.
If a supermarket has 60000 meals it will support 20000 ppl for 1 day (3meals). But not 1 person for 55 years. Some journalists need a reality check.
Btw we dont shower at all! We live in NBC suits don't we?
Last Edit: Oct 10, 2016 15:42:27 GMT 10 by frontsight
The problem with your analogy is the first is based on spaciality/logistics and age. - 100000 men for one day, can't get them all into that space to do the work and many would need other parts to be done before doing the next etc. - 100 men for a .91 year = fair deal. - 1 man 100000hrs, 8hrs a day, 5 days a week and it would take him 52 years! More importantly there's some jobs that require more than 1 man to do, to hold up beams etc.
In terms of a pile of food, assuming it didn't go off such as canned food, then I can't see how that would make any difference at all. Of course no supermarket stores 158,000 cans [54 years]!
Over all the idea of 55 years from a supermarket is very problematic and not well thought out.
Last Edit: Oct 10, 2016 16:38:20 GMT 10 by shinester
Kinda knew it wouldnt be much when you see this 'grab bag'
Seems like they were mocking the grab bag from the start.
Then this just proves they have no idea straight off the bat.
A third of people carry a 'grab bag' in case of a disaster, research shows But most of these bags wouldn't keep people alive for long says expert
Pointing out the obvious while showing they dont know much on the subject? Since when was a small bag going to keep people alive for long no matter whats in it, its also not the purpose of a grab bag.
Yep, I very much doubted that bit about the grab bag that people supposedly carry. How many non-preppers do you know who would have anything remotely useful in an emergency in the bag they usually carry? Apart from the few things I have in my work bag, and a mate who has a nifty GHB that goes everywhere with him, I doubt anyone else I know would carry anything useful, unless it was something like a bottle of water or a makeup compact with a mirror that could be adapted for survival use.
I read the article in the Daily Mail with about the same amount of scepticism as I would have when reading a number of articles about so called prepping or preppers and therefore it was a case of take some information out of it and ignore the rest.
A number of you that are commenting about the article should take note of some of the ridiculous posts on this thread relating to those who appear to be too afraid to take a shower like normal people in case the whatever happens while they are in the shower for three minutes. Sounds a lot like not knowing what is going on in your local area or a case of I'm So Tough Syndrome!
On the How to tell I am a Prepper! thread it is alright to talk about all the rice etc. that some of you take great delight in stashing away. Seems to me that a lot of you must spend a lot of time, money and effort preparing but no thought is being given to be self sustaining.
Where are the comments about growing your own or are these skills just not part of your preparation for a post SHTF event?