I am a team leader of the state of Louisiana for a non-profit group that is currently taking a survey. Known "preparationists/survivalists" are not authorized to be a part of this survey,,,,but "I" am extremely curious as to what answers I would get from everybody here.

This is what I wish to know:
your age; level of education, what state you live in;

1) Do you believe that there may be in your lifetime a World War III involving nuclear weapons? Yes or No,,,,if No, skip the rest of the questions.

2) How strongly do you believe? Unlikely, maybe, probably, or certain.

3) How soon do you think it will occur such as: within the next year; within 2 years; 5 years or longer; 20-50years

4) Do you think North America will be hit? No; Possibly; Probably; Definitely.

5) Do you think that there is anything that you could do to survive in the event that our homeland is a target and if so, have you personally made any preparations? Yes; No


Tomorrow night I'll tell you who is trying to get this info from the general public. Like I said at the beginning, no answers gotten here can be added to the actual survey results because of the nature of this website, to begin with.

Question 1

I don’t think so, but I don’t know???

Age 48; 5 years post-secondary; don't live in a "State".
1. Will nuclear weapons be used in my lifetime - yes, and almost assuredly first by the US, in response to a perceived or potential threat.
2. Confident.
3. 10-20 years
4. North America? NO or possibly, maybe by a dirty bomb.
5. ALWAYS something you can do unless you are at ground zero. Fighting panic and paranoia will be the worst thing most people will have to put up with. Some will experience theft/looting/vandalism. Very few will be in combat. Preparing by not believing in the hype NOW. I'm a pretty stable non-emotional person and NOT a preparationalist/survivalist. But then again the definition of such a person could vary wildly.

39, MS CS, MS Physics, CA

1. yes (unless we start talking to Russia on equal...).
2. probably
3. 5 (2012-13)
4. Definitely.
5. Yes

yes
Possibly - most like a dirty bomb - if you count that
Unknown
probably
yes - but no more so than "Natural" or other "Man Made" disasters

1. 50/50 chance right now
2. see number 1
3. too dependent on variable conditions, the risk increases with time.
4. Yes
5. Yes

As a sidenote, the US has broken all diplomatic relations with Belarus, part of the former Soviet Union, this week. This means we've closed our embassy there, and sent their ambassadors packing from our country. Their leader is characterized as the last dictator of Europe, and Belarus has access to a Nuclear arsenal.

Age: 55
Education: Post Grad
State: CA

1) YES

2) Maybe

3) 5 years or longer

4) Possibly

5) YES

52
High School
1. Yes
2. Probably
3. 5-10 yrs
4. Possibly
5. yes & yes

Shadow

44
B.S.
Gypsy (I travel extensively with my job)
1. Yes.
2. Almost a certainty as food and fuel shortages (real or perceived), economic problems, and racial/cultural tensions continue to grow worse.
3. To many variables for a time frame however I will be surprised if it is not within the next 3-5 years.
4. Yes, while the U.S. dollar is in decline we are still a very rich and powerful nation and as the above reasons/tensions increase the U.S. (as we have for years) will become increasingly more and more blamed and there for targeted more and more for retaliation. These problems will escalate dramatically once/if the U.S. reaches a point where t is not able or willing to provide aid to other parts of the world.
5. Yes, unless you are in a blast area or in an area that receives a 100% lethal dose of radiation there is always a chance however slim. Short term survival will depend directly on food and shelter preps made in advance a your ability to stay under cover and limiting radiation exposure. Long term is really an unknown due to effects of radiation on animal and plant life, nuclear winter, and a myriad of unforeseen circumstances.
Yes preps are made as well as I am presently able to make them given family and financial constraints.

40, post-grad, Texas

1) No, not a large-scale, multi-superpower nuclear exchange. However there will be smaller nuclear skrimishes.

2) Probably

3) Greater than 5 years

4) No

5) Yes, only as overlap with other possibilities.

-Blast

Age 43, some college, Phoenix, AZ

1) No. I am fairly certain there will be at least one major city hit with WMD in my lifetime though.

2) Pretty certain no chance of a 'World War'. Equally certain of smaller uses of WMD.

3) Within 10 years, I say 30%. Within 50, probably 70% (chance of my #1)

4) I would say North America has about a 50-50 chance of being the target

5) As to the case of a large scale WMD war, those of us living in major metro areas are basically screwed. In the case of a single use WMD on a city or region, well, that can be mostly treated like a natural disaster and prepared for and survived in a similar way.

This may be late, but you could still use it as you secondary data group for comparison.

46, Master of Science, OK

1) Yes
2) Maybe
3) 5-20 yrs
4) Possibly
5) Yes, No

41
College Graduate
No

Wildman, interesting survey. Love to see the results.

Brian, Texas, age: 44, BS in Business Administration, Masters of Theology Studies

1. Yes, but more likely tactical nukes instead of large exchange of ICBMs.

2. Probably.

3. 5 years or longer.

4. North America would get hit eventually, but I think it will start in Middle East (Israel hit with suitcase nuke, then retaliates with larger nuclear response) or between India/Pakistan.

5. Yes, there are things that I could do, but no, I probably won't do them because of it's cost prohibitive.

60, Masters degree, Texas (female)
1.Yes but limited scale
2.Probably
3.5 yrs
4.Probably
5.Yes...prepared for man and/or nature

58, 4yrs college, Central Va.
1.) No, but I do believe we will see some sort of activuty involving smaller WMD`s In the next 5-10 years.

Age: 44 1/2
Bachelor's Degree
Louisiana (heaven help me)

1. No
2. Unlikely.
3. NA
4. NA
5. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

#1 ... there may be in your lifetime a World War III involving nuclear weapons? "[M]ay" be suggests possibility not probability. It is pretty hard, maybe impossible, to overestimate how high humanity can reach. And, unfortunately, how low we can stoop.

It is highly improbable that a full "World War III" scale event will happen. But it is not impossible.

2# I feel it is highly probable that my estimation is accurate.

3# The five to ten year range seems the most dangerous based on public information I have seen. The rhetoric, on the other hand, has a habit of declaring it is the time to panic every few months. Largely independent of the facts.

4# The USA is an obvious target. lots of people ignore any other. Perhaps because 'other places don't count' and partly because projecting ourselves as the main enemy of evil makes us feel good about ourselves.

I will point out that historically nations and groups quite often find they have something in common with their enemies. And offer viciousness and contempt for people and groups they feel are traitors or splitters.

Everyone understands that Christians kill Muslims. Muslims kill Christians. But historically more Christians have been killed by Christians, and Muslims by Muslims, than across the religious divide. Internecine battles are often vicious bloodbaths of extermination without quarter given or asked for.

The only nation that gets more badmouthing from UBL than the USA is Saudi Arabia. Heretics who have turned away from the true faith get more venom than our heathen souls. We could still be the main target but it is hard to underestimate how much hate there is between people much closer to the likely sources.

5# Yes, there is. The biggest thing is that you can stay away from likely targets. I was considering moving to a major city that would be an attractive target but decided against it.In part because of the risk of attack and the problems with being in a highly concentrated population center during and after a natural or man made disaster.

Sounds like a GOP think tank and/or attack nonprofit is looking into the possibility of ginning up the paranoia vote to try to help get McSame into office. They don't want to hear from the survivalists because they know that they already have the majority of those nuts.

Could be Dems looking into how open their flank is to such an attack.

Either way this sort of thing usually has everything to do with attack politics.

I thank y'all for your replies!!

This survey is being conducted by Bruce Beach of the ARK II located in Ontario Province, Canada. It has a website and can be viewed if you're curious.

This survey started last Saturday in 28 states. Each volunteer agreed to survey 10 people. I have surveyed 2 since I have been tied up with convalescent issues at home. I hope to get the remaining 8 opinions tomorrow and get them in.

I will post the final results when I get them.

Again Thanks for sharing y'all's opinions and for taking the time to share your opinion with me and everybody else.

Bo

You know, there's a poll tool in this forum system.

What I want to know is did I get the answers right??!!!


And if so, what did I win???

keep wondering, no gifts are released until the year 2121

Awwww Man!!!!!

57, BE, NC
1. WWIII - No but a war with nuclear weapons, yes.
2. Probably
3. 5 to 10 years
4. Possibly as a terrorist attack
5. Yes

32, college degree, eastern Canada.

1. Naaahhhh. *looks at his beautiful yard*

National Scientific Survey shows that:

A. 97% of the U.S. population does not expect a nuclear war within the next
two years.

B. less than one percent of the population in the U.S. is making the
physical preparations that would be necessary for such a war.

(This May 14th, 2008 poll may be quoted as "the Beach poll", "the Beach Ark
Two poll", or "the Ark Two poll".)

This was a scientifically conducted survey conducted by a former professor
in the social sciences who had graduate training in polling techniques, who
taught statistical methods, and who has previously conducted many surveys.

In sample size, dispersion and randomness the poll meets accepted standards
for a US national poll with an accuracy of plus or minus 5 percent in 95 out
of 100 cases. One can say that the results are one of high confidence.

Interviews for what is dated as this May 14th survey were conducted during
the two week time period from April 26th to May 13th using 55 pollsters in
35 states of the US plus additional pollsters in four other countries. The
results from the other countries were kept separate from the US sample and
results but showed no significant difference. No news events occurred during
the time period of the poll that would have likely affected the results.

The survey was done face to face in a variety of settings ranging from
malls, to university and college campuses including a church college. Other
locations included Wal-Mart parking lots, a farmers market, and a variety of
other locations where a diversity of people could be found. Five of the
pollsters submitted summaries of portions of their interviews rather than
each separate interview. It would have been selective to have left out their
information so it was expanded into separate entries in the tally sheet.

The 415 respondents to the poll ranged from two aged fifteen to one aged 84.
There were 20 under the age of 21 and 16 over the age of 70. The average age
was mean 40 and median 42. There were 232 male respondents and 183 female
respondents. The educational average for the survey was approximately 14
years of schooling (2 years of college) completed - for those over the age
of 17.

There was an attempt to survey a range of ages but there were no specific
demographic parameters established regarding age, religion, education, race,
and so forth. There was no intentional discrimination regarding any of these
parameters but there was an attempt to balance the number between men and
women surveyed. While no screening was held for religion or race, individual
pollsters did report anecdotal observations and responses which would
indicate that the survey was unbiased in that regard.

The pollsters asked for subjective abstract replies such as 'unlikely,
maybe, probably, or most certain'. These were converted to weighted values
for performing the calculations and their average then translated back to
the corresponding subjective term to present the analysis.

The survey was conducted in cities and in very rural areas. Some respondent
groups were highly educated and others such as agricultural and labour
workers, were less so. The pollsters were directed to interview only
strangers so that the responses would not be prejudiced by the respondent
knowing the pollster's inclinations. While individual pollster's groups were
heavily weighted, because of location, as to education, age and such, the
overall resulting mix should be quite reflective of the U.S. society in
general.

Most national surveys do not include Alaska and Hawaii. We did - which
introduced a bit of male weighting because there are more males than females
in Alaska. Some pollsters avoid military bases, however we surveyed around
military installations which once again slightly increased the male
weighting. While those samples by themselves were not sufficiently large to
arrive at a statistically valid conclusion for that sub-group - anecdotally
we found that military and military/industrial communities, even more
strongly than the general population, do not expect nuclear war. But still,
we threw all this into the general mix.

On the other hand, two or three pollsters appear to have surveyed among
demographic groups (say middle class males on a Wall-mart parking lot in the
Bible Belt area) that had a considerably stronger inclination towards
nuclear concerns than the general population. However, once again, the
overall social diversity of the survey, which included a group of
mid-twenties skate boarders, a group of retired university professors,
farmers at a feed store, parents chaperoning a prom, a crowd on a beach,
numerous malls, and a variety of other creative settings for interviewing
individuals who were strangers to the pollsters, made the survey as random
and unbiased as we could think of how to do it.

The novelty of this survey is that there is no other known survey that has
been conducted on these questions by the large national polling
organizations. A similar polling by them, of equal breadth and depth, would
be most welcome to further substantiate (or discredit) these results.

Details of the Survey:

Of the 415 persons surveyed:

183 respondents felt that there will never be a nuclear war and another 79
felt at least not for twenty years which leads to the conclusion that 63
percent of the sample is not expecting a nuclear war.

On the other hand:

34 felt VERY CERTAIN there will be a nuclear war in next 2-5 years
55 felt PROBABLY within the next 2-5 years
30 felt MAYBE within the next 2-5 years
4 in the next 2-5 years but unlikely
(an inconsistent response -
but that can't be helped -
because people are inconsistent)

Therefore the conclusion that 30 percent think there may be a nuclear in the
next 2-5 years.

And finally of the 14 that felt within the next year
7 feel very certain, 4 probably, and 3 maybe

Therefore we conclude that 3 percent feel within the next year.

As another way of summarizing the results we can say:

44 percent of the U.S. population does not think there will ever be a
nuclear war (God will not permit it - or leaders are not so foolish as to do
such a thing - or for whatever reason).

An additional 19 percent do not think that there will be one for at least 20
years.

So cumulatively we can say that at least 63 percent of the US population is
not presently concerned about nuclear war.

However, 30 percent think there may be a nuclear war between 2-5 years to
five years from now.

An earlier surveyor of survivalists and survival patterns (Dr. Richard
Mitchell) told this analyst that people do not make preparations unless they
feel there is an imminence of less than 2 years. We can therefore conclude
that 97 percent of the US population is not concerned about preparing for
nuclear war.

What may be more interesting is the question of what type of preparations
are being made by those who do think there will be a nuclear war in less
than two years. That would be a different survey - and one we did not make.

But of those individuals expecting a nuclear war in less than two years over
half of them said that they were making NO preparation and of the remaining
half - half of those volunteered - as reported anecdotally by our
pollsters - that their preparation was salvation through the Lord Jesus
Christ (which may lead one to conclude that they may be expecting to be
raptured or something of that nature.)

We can therefore conclude that less than one percent of the US population is
making any physical preparation for nuclear war - and as stated previously
it would be a different survey to determine the degree of their preparation.
Indications are that - far less than one percent of the population is doing
anything like building a fallout shelter or stocking potassium iodide.

Another curiosity of the survey was that while less than 8% of the U.S.
population felt that the US would ever be struck by a nuclear weapon (and
even in this we did not carefully define whether they meant something of an
Intercontinental Strategic Device - or a Radiation Dispersal Device such as
used by a terrorist), if there was any distinction between the U.S. survey
and those in other countries - the other countries were more inclined to
believe the U.S. would be hit. This too must be regarded as anecdotal
because there were not enough interviews in other countries to have
statistical significance nor was there a broad enough number of other
countries or cultures.

I wish to express my appreciation to the 55 pollsters who helped conduct
this survey. It is only through the power of the Internet that such a thing
could be accomplished by us. I feel that we did better and broader than most
national surveys who use predetermined lists of individuals who are willing
to answer surveys. I hope that you fell pleased and proud of the
accomplishment and your contribution to it.

Peace and love,
Bruce Beach