Nat Geo joins sensationalist press

A lady I know clued me in to this...

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/doomsday-preppers/

I'll check it out, but it looks a variation on the Taboo series.

Unfortunately, National Geographic has been going downhill for a long time. A few weeks ago Alaska Dispatch ran an interesting article called "What happened to National Geographic?" written by by a former Nat Geo writer and editor.

Personally, I watch very little TV. I almost never watch any kind of "reality TV", and in particular I never watch shows about Alaska, because in my opinion they are far too often painfully contrived.

Thanks for highlighting the article. My cable provider doesn't carry the NG channel, but I have looked at some of the titles in the program guides and thought they were very un-NG style. It is really a shame.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaxjfQheNes

Thanks for the link. I think it looks pretty interesting. Remains to be seen what an entire episode could look like. Unfortunately, Nat Geo is not on my cable service.

The videos they have up are an interesting look into the preps and plans of a "subculture" (per the Reuters article earlier this week) that does exist in substantial number. And I'm sure there are more than a few on ETS - actively posting or lurking.

The chick whose boyfriend is prepared to shoot their cats will be a bit unnerving to a non-prepper who stumbles upon the channel. As will be the "tail-gunner" in the bug-out school bus. A couple of these other videos I think I've seen before:

(they eat tilapia every single day - ick - but I'd want to be their friend post-doomsday)
http://video.nationalgeographic.com/vide...g-suburbia.html

Southern Cal earthquake prepper/forager:

http://video.nationalgeographic.com/vide...ek-chris-1.html


No more of a time waster than American Pickers or Pawn Stars (both of which I enjoy on occasion).

National Geographic magazine remains terrific and a great subscription value.

I only get to watch Nat Geo sporadically when I'm visiting a relative. Although I still read the magazine from time to time and think highly of it, the TV network is surprising in its shows. More like a higher quality version of programs you might see on SpikeTV or even the Military Channel. Definitely not the kind of content I would think of when I think "National Geographic".

I'll check out some of the video clips later.

I find that woman unnerving. No, I'm not troubled by the thought of long-term preparation, but by the fear that drives her efforts, and by the somewhat self-deluding, almost fun-like attitude she has. It almost seems to be some sort of fantasy game.

Having a tail gunner doesn't bother me. But that does make me wonder what they're going to do when someone with a .50BMG shoots out their engine block like in the movies. (On a more serious note, it's not clear where the tail gunner is located in the caravan. One would think at the end of the convoy, but the video clip seems to suggest the tail gunner is in the first vehicle. This doesn't seem like a good idea to me, but perhaps those with military experience can speak to this with more authority.)

While I'm at it (and procrastinating from real work), let me go on a bit. I like the man in LA who forages in an urban environment. A knowledge of botany is a good thing, and when combined with an appetite and a desire for hiking, results in something delicious. (The "landscape" he hikes in is less than appetizing.) Herbal medicine isn't a bad thing, either, but... "knife fights"? Really? Weapons is about oneupmanship, and the knife is pretty low on the totem pole. I really hope this was just a bad example.

As for the Arizona man fearing coronal mass ejection in 2012, we are having one right now:

http://www.mobilemag.com/2012/01/24/mass...arth-right-now/

Should we tell him?

On another note:



I don't know a whole lot about National Geographic, but it stands to reason that, like much of journalism, it is dropping its standard to cater to the lowest common denominator. I am confused by the almost "nationalist" sentiments that pop up twice in the article. The author seems to suggest that National Geographic during the Cold War refused to cover areas held by our enemies (and that's taken as a good thing), and now it is an international publication and has to address an international audience (and that's regarded as a bad thing). I don't see that this change necessarily implies a decline. Moreover, from the little I've seen (such as this program we're talking about), National Geographic's decline is more American than anything else. Some of the programs it puts out are in line with the unique, terrible American invention of the reality show.

This was quite interesting, but left me a little uncomfortable too. It appears that to be fully prepped for a year or more, you have to make a huge investment in money, and buy a place, or convert your home into a warehouse.

Some of the questions I have include

If a small group has a lot of food in an extended emergency:

!. How could they be sure that the marauders are anarchists and not the local government passing some 'ordinance' that requires them to share their food and enforce it?

2. What if the squatters on the farm were women with little children. Would you shoot them?

3. I think that having deliveries made at night is fruitless, as the neighbors will know what is going on. The house would be completely defenseless if attacked, even though the kids are trained with pistols.

My overall belief is that anyone can and should prep for short-term problems such as extended power outtages, weather, floods... The type of prep we see here in this video is for only a few with massive resources to draw on. IMO, the farm has the best chance of success, but a high chance of invasion. I do not think the suburban homes would be safe. The fallout shelter would also be attacked easily and the supplies stolen by blocking the trap door, and then all of the air vents.

I agree, and this is one of the major reasons that the show does a disservice to its audience, which will think that emergency preparation is (1) for the "subculture," and (2) way too expensive. In fact, you pretty much have to quit your job and career, and possibly move, to pursue some of the prep depicted in the video.

If that video was the first thing I came across when I started looking for ideas prepping, it would have turned me off and made me feel kind of hopeless. But fortunately I found this website, and Doug Ritter does us all a service with his good sense. Alas, wisdom and knowledge are just not sensational enough.

What is common to all these scenarios is a very deep pessimism about the social fabric - we will be faced with a problem (CME, earthquake, inflation) and society will totally collapse into anarchy and chaos. We, the preppers, will be the only survivors.

What does happen? We have had major earthquakes in Chile, Japan, and Haiti recently with serious challenges. Haiti, already a disaster area is still struggling, even with significant outside help, so definitely life in a marginalized society is never good. Chile seems to be recovering and Japan certainly has problems but is working on them as well. I haven't heard about anything like a societal collapse, roaming armed bands, etc. (Indeed, how many thousands of yen have been found and turned in to authorities? Good luck on that happening in the USA!

Point is, when we have our magnitude 8 in southern California, life will be both tough and interesting. We will need help. I think it is realistic that we will get it. The USA is a well developed society and has shown a reasonably capable ability to respond to disasters.

Any prudent person should realize that the help won't come right away, and one needs to be self-sustaining for a good bit more than the traditional 72 hours. I don't personally think that bugging out will be very useful in the event of a quake, at least where I live. Fortunately, i will be living on the dandelions, oranges, and avocados in my yard or nearby (and a reasonable stockpile of other food). Hopefully I won't have to slaughter our cats...

i guess I am skeptical about intense preparation for an off the charts, over the top, extreme disaster, that actually is rather unlikely, at least in the magnitude envisioned.

Of course, they just might be right. Who says you have to go to Las Vegas to gamble? It is true that it wasn't raining when Noah too up shipbuilding........

In my opinion this sums it up. Preparing in a 'normal' world for TEOTWAWKI is pointless. The 'rules' will change in unknowable ways. If you are a resource rich target, you will be overwhelmed by masses of people wanting what you have. People have been trying to prevent this for centuries, and have ultimately all been unsuccessful.

I think that this hits the nail on the head. The three days/72 hours is a rock bottom "best" case minimum. What is a realistic period? I don't know, and any guess I make would depend on so many local and personal family variables that it would probably be meaningless to anyone else.

That being said, IMO, a three week preparation of food, water and meds does not seem impossible, nor totally unreasonable or extravagantly expensive. Going to 3 months would be harder, especially in things like water, but not totally impossible given the right conditions. 3 or longer years on your own? Doubtful without a lot of help, or reverting to basically a pre-Columbus native American level of sustainable technology.

Hi,

I don't consider myself a Doomsday type, but I have concerns about certain issues combining in a domino effect with panic tipping the pot.

I am working towards a homestead that I will continuously strive toward making as sufficient as possible. Yes, I'll build in "retreat" aspects, including long-term storage; but, I want the entire effort to be a living, working farm & home.

For protection, I intend to be remote with a network of good neighbors in the whole community. I'm not being rosy-eyed, just optimistic. My own stead will be as protected as my experience & education can make it, but I don't want a fortress.

If nothing catastrophic occurs, then my children will inherit a sturdy home and good farm. They can turn it into an artists colony or fort or sell it. Or, it can be the family home through generations.

Sorry, think I went OT.

Finn

IMO, if you can survive for a month without outside help your chances of surviving any disaster are greatly improved. I am prepared for about 90 days and even though I know an event could last much longer I can't let fear rule my life. Don't spend your whole life preparing for something that may or may not happen or you will miss out on life itself!

Its funny how my grandparents had the homestead/farm that was pretty self sufficient. Then my parents generation tore down all the buildings and orchargs and gardens and put in electric lines and telephone wires and satalite dishes and now my generation wants to plant an orchard and rebuild the farm.

I think we are all Doomsday people .. you know why ? Cause we insist on carrying that fifth tire in our cars, (JUST IN CASE) we ever get a flat. We maybe carrying it around the whole year and nothing happens !!

We all need to be mentally checked for doing that .
LOL

I often read "Countryside" and "Backwoodsman" magazines and there is a growing trend of getting back to the values & skills of our parents, grandparents & further back. Too often, our parents, in seeking a better life, shunned (and sometimes destroyed) those things which helped make them. Now, we struggle to re-learn those skills. I still regret that I didn't bother to learn canning from my mom.

Preparedness for emergencies (blizzards, drought, etc.) isn't crazy. However, expecting a full-blown nuclear holocaust with mutants, zombies and road gypsies...

Skills are good, but they will perish unless they remain practical for the changing times. A very good book for the anthropological readers is The Invention of Fire by R. Wrangham. As you probably can guess, the book is about how fire changed human physiology, society, and behavior. A part of the chapter mentions some primitive, but ingenious cooking methods that certain Stone Age tribes still use today (or in recent history until they discovered the iPhone like the rest of us). Many such clever techniques are now lost, because we no longer need them, and haven't needed them for thousands of years.

It would be nice to have a compendium of pre-industrial and primitive techniques and technology, if only for our intellectual curiosity and for posterity. (It would be dreadful if we have to reinvent the wheel!)

As for getting back the values of our parents, I dunno. Guess our parents are very different. I didn't like all that sexist and racist crap.

Bingley,

Hi! I simply meant values of preparedness and some practicality. My mom had some racism, but that didn't detract from her skills & knowledge.

Thanks!

We can thank our lucky stars that we have those splendid folks known as archaeologists. That is a large part of what they do - learning about flint knapping, stone boiling, and other esoterica.

I missed the two premiers last night, any one else watch the show? They are being replayed Saturday morning and will be taping those plus new episodes as they come out.

NAT GEO' DOOMSDAY PREPPER TV SHOW

No cable here. I hope to see them on Xfinity at lady friend's place.

Internet is bad here for streaming, so I haven't seen most of the clips.

I watched them.

There were basically three segments in each show. The premise seemed to be not just that they were preparing, but the show made it sound like they were preparing for different scenarios such as EMP, Financial collapse, Worldwide Oil Crisis, "Killer Earthquake" etc. That in itself to me probably misrepresents general preparedness. I myself, am not preparing for any one specific scenario, but more for general self-reliance and education.

Overall they were of marginal value to me. A few things of interest to me was when, near the end of each segment, the narrator provided a review of their preps through an "Expert Assessment" (thought they didn't say who those experts were), was at least a bit useful.

What I didn't care for, was at the very end of the program, the narrator provided what must be the producers' estimate of the likelihood of each scenario happening. For example, the narrator stated "... there has never been a complete cutoff of oil to the United State and it is not likely". They did finish with "The possibility of a major earthquake, of magnitude 8.0 or higher, could hit Los Angeles in the next 30 years, but the chances are less than three percent." Finally, in the second episode, there was the "What are the odds of hyperinflation actually occurring... while hyperinflation and severe depressions have occurred in major economies in the past, most economists do not believe the United States is currently at risk."


Wonder where they get their estimates and probabilities?

These wrap-ups, to my mind seemed to try to make a subtle case that "preppers" are over-concerned.

So, to heck with a few extra cans of beans this month, I think I'll splurge on a good cup of coffee.

Just my $.02

buckeye

Just watched them on Xfinity.

Well, some of it was really good. I did genuinely learn some things. Some of the folks stood out for intelligence & foresight while others caused continuous mutters & eyerolls.

The LA earthquake man is an author- Christopher Nyerges. I've seen his name around.

The "experts" seems to be a business called Practical Preppers- http://www.practicalpreppers.com/ I'd personally feel better if it wasn't set up like a commercial tie-in. Still, it could have become "Extreme Makeover- Doomsday Edition, sponsored by Sears & Tactical Bacon!"

I'll go through the website for PP.

I had a mixed reaaction to this show. I saw some benefits to some of the preparations and some waste of effort and money. I think some people are way overboard with the concept, although well prepared for...something?

I also saw some people who had a plan that when tested failed. The Houston gal was a good expample. I seriously was surprised she could wear short shorts and walk across Houston without having to "pull the piece". I doubt she would have done so well on the trek had there not been a camera crew with her. She seemed to realize that there was some major flaws in her plan after the dry run.

I guess it is a decent show and can provide some food for thought. Not really much of a prepper myself, at least not to the degree of living in seatainers stacked on the prairie. In my city the evac would be pure hell and at the same time would be mandatory at some times of the year. So, I guess I am more of a "hope-er", hope it never is necessary!

I watched the show and was not particularly impressed. The earthquake section was of particular interest to me, living as I am in southern California. Prediction of earthquakes is really fascinating and tricky; basically, given the extent of geological time, we only have data from a very short period from which to infer future behavior. Earthquakes aren't the only potential problem; on a day to day basis, wildfires are likely to be just as much a threat.

The show seemed to steer away from any kind of reasonable balanced portrayal of preparedness and fixed on extreme behavior; I guess it is all about what will make sensational TV.

in fact right now I'm watching the 3rd episode. I've blasted through them all in last 24 hours. Several are from my metroplex. Its positive in that it shows I have better water food than some but where I am behind its by a magnitude of tons it seems. Same with fitness. And as far as a 2nd location, I've got plans but not pulled the trigger as I am focused on my home stores first. And I've heard of it but never really considered shipping containers as a home set up. Its an interesting cost offset to a less defensible situation.

Con's. I can't seem to get past the fact that the advisors at the end of each persons story sometimes tend to focus on giving a negative that is, well maybe not petty but secondary to the plan that person had. I can't really put my finger on it, but it seems that last one dig was unneeded.

I've managed to catch a few of these shows online now, and have been rather struck by a few things:


-- Preparing for singular events/scenarios. I kept thinking, are the interviewees REALLY just preparing for one big thing, or is that just the narrative the producers asked them to follow?

-- Several of the people interviewed appeared to be quite overweight and/or in poor health. For some reason I'd always thought that hard-core "preppers" would focus more on fitness in the event of a major meltdown.

-- The direct involvement of children in their plans. I wondered how much the parent's actions might affect their lives later on, for good or ill.

-- The wide range of socio-economic-political backgrounds. I was surprised that some appear to be quite affluent, or were firefighters/cops.

-- Pets. If one was as concerned about the situations they described, why would they have cats or small dogs in the first place? The young woman who calmly mentioned the possibility of killing her cats with a gun was a bit disturbing, for some reason.

-- The willingness to go on television. I thought that people in this mindset would be more cautious. But I suspect that these are rare exceptions...

Not sure if the folks or the TV producers framed the "single scenario" aspect. Personally, I am concerned about a domino effect of factors hitting in fairly rapid succession.

The weight & health issue struck me also. Then again, we see people every day who seem very out of shape for their careers or hobbies. The medically-retired truck driver in TN seemed to have a reasonable grasp (except for the cheesy militia get-up) regardless of his health.

Preparedness can be a family efort or hobby. We do not honestly know how healthy those families are. The whole thing can be handled like homesteading or scouting or like a cult.

Pets... I understand the emotional/psychological value of pets. Yes, small, "helpless" animals can be a hindrance, but can be very important to seniors or children. Allowances should be made.

The cult of TV... Well, if a person can be a professional reality TV personality...

Yeah, I've got some issues with the Houston gal (notice her boyfriend eschewed the show?). However, she was taking positive steps.

I've been watcing these shows - and as per some of the comments, seems almost everyone on them is obsessed with (1) eating and (2) guns.

Hi!

The eating is very relevant and the guns sell the show to America.

It is more than weird to have anonymous "experts" having the final critique. I think Nyerges summarized very nicely the prep situation in Southern California; basically prepare to shelter in place in the event of an earthquake, but plan to leave in the event of a tsunami or wildfire. Keeps you on your feet, especially if you live on or near the beach.

I learned my survival techniques from The hit Y2000 movie charlies angels.

Im wondering when these people will just start living in houses made of canned food and water jugs.

Personally I think the show is a joke and shouldn't be taken seriously.

Also I dont believe in stocking up on guns Ill just slit my enemies throat in the night after I welcome them into my house for a feast which in return puts everyone at danger and in the end wastes the food we stored and made and will eventually lead to the demise of me and my group.

Here's the link to "Practical Preppers", the experts who evaluate each of the "participants" planning. Note that one of the principals is an engineering graduate of RPI, certainly a well-respected engineering university in Troy, NY.

http://www.practicalpreppers.com/

There is another show starting this Wednesday, Doomsday Bunkers. It looks to be about how to build or who construsts them

So, like a lot of you I am not a huge fan of this show... I think it makes us preppers look like fools at times. But if I catch it on I will watch it, because I firmly believe that most people have something to offer, so I'll watch an hour of a show even if I learn only one useful thing. Last nights episode presented an interesting idea: hiding your stores. The women hid her supplies somewhat obsessively, IMHO, but she did so to keep from irritating her husband, so thumbs up for that. Thankfully my husband is on board, so I don't have to hide stuff! Lol. But, it did get me to thinking: are there any items that you see a need to specifically place in a hidden location in your home?

I'm a renter, so I can't exactly be installing drop down ceilings or anything like that, lol. There is a hidden gap behind my dishwasher though... Canned tuna anyone?

But seriously, without succumbing to extreme paranoia... Is there something you think should be hidden?

Firearms come to mind. And I suppose looking at the first two 5 gallon jugs of water is okay but even my wife gets a little miffed working around the next 8 jugs, so those are placed in odd closets and in around the garage rather than all in one spot.

Watching the show and reading a lot of ZPOC & TEOTWAWKI books (cheaper than hollywood gossip mags and for me more enjoyable) I have been thinking of getting a small room at the storage unit building down the street, one with an outside door for easy entry, and use as a cache. Then maybe one farther outside the city.

I have thought about that as well, it seems like a good idea, not to mention I guess theoretically you could hide in it for a resting spot if it were a teotwawki type situation. Sort of like way stations or something.

I'm not a fan of the storage unit idea. First, in a bad situation the electric locks will be inoperable. Next, the other reality TV theme- Storage Wars; guys who buy up abandoned units. They'll be the first to raid folks' property. I have a friend who works for a buyer. He has scrounged some great stuff (for me too!) and he knows that nearly anything can be found in these units.

I am more in favor of borrowing a family member's unused garage or shed.