Please clarify #6.
Specifically the "No gear" part.
Even Neanderthal did not survive winter in the wilderness with "No gear".
The residents of the far northern regions of today do not attempt to survive with "no gear".
Building a technology to allow survival is part of the human endeavor.
(16 November 2013, 23:26)Mortblanc Wrote: [ -> ]Please clarify #6.
Specifically the "No gear" part.
Even Neanderthal did not survive winter in the wilderness with "No gear".
The residents of the far northern regions of today do not attempt to survive with "no gear".
Building a technology to allow survival is part of the human endeavor.
Kind of getting caught up in the minutia there MB. Don't be focusing on the list. As I said before, it's just an example of the point of the post.
Can't see the wood for the trees.
So, what is the point of the post past a universal call for self degradation?
No one can know/do everything, and in spite of the previously stated cliché, one can work around their weaknesses and gather people around them to augment their mutual success. We do so every day in both normal and emergency situations.
"Wood for the trees"? I didn't start the list!
(17 November 2013, 03:04)Mortblanc Wrote: [ -> ]So, what is the point of the post past a universal call for self degradation?
No one can know/do everything, and in spite of the previously stated cliché, one can work around their weaknesses and gather people around them to augment their mutual success. We do so every day in both normal and emergency situations.
Instead of a universal call for self degradation, think of it as a universal call for recognising our capabilities and expertise, and not mistaking book (or youtube) knowledge, for actual first had knowledge.
The second part of what you mentioned about gathering people around with the skills you lack...that's one of the things I said.
To put it into terms I think you'd be more appreciative of, if you met a guy at a Civil War reenactment that went on about knowing everything about the weapons and the alike, but then you find out he's never fired a gun in real life, just read about it....that's what I mean. Using an example of the bow drill (please do not focus on the bow drill, it could have been any one of a million other skills, e.g. bee keeping, sutures, plant recognition, etc) if someone said they could use one and make fire from it easily, but you find out they have never made, used, or seen a friend use, a bow drill, that's what I mean.
And you're right, you didn't start the list. But you did focus on the list.
Recognising weaknesses is part of prepping.
The problem with the list is that I could say No to every question on your list and still be better prepared than someone that says yes to them all. I'm just better prepared for something different.
I'm taking your point to mean that there are a lot of people offering advice, myself included, that have no or very little practical experience of what they are advising. That is partly becuse we are not allowed to test many of the ideas we have for legal reasons and we don't have to such water from pools of cow poo so why should we take the chance.
I make my own mind up about what advice I am given. Does it make sense? Who is saying it and what is my views on his previous advice some of which I have experience of? From that I can investigate further if I want to and learn more.
I commented on this on the main site. We need to point out bad advice as much as good advice but bear in mind it depends very much on the environment as well.
Sifting good information from bad is one of the universal features of the life experience.
Separating information from opinion and myth is a large part of the effort.
One is objective, the other is subjective.
Anyone want to buy a Bulls#!t detector?
(17 November 2013, 20:09)Mortblanc Wrote: [ -> ]Anyone want to buy a Bulls#!t detector?
what for? when we've got you?
We have pretty good bullshit detectors built in. It is called common sense. Our problem is we override it because we want what is said to be true.
Filtering intel is like picking flysh!t out of pepper.
Sort the elements of truth from amongst the BS.
Evaluate both content and context to determine whether the corruption of info is sufficient to make the entire source suspect.
This is why you separately compare and evaluate corroborating sources.
Common Sense includes trusting your gut instincts. They are usually right.
Trust me, I wouldn't lie too you, just relax, everything will be OK, just have another drink, and by the way I have some papers for you to sign.