g.norths reply to mills

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Gee, Mr. Mills, Can You Help Me Understand? Link: http://www.albany.net/~dmills/subs.htm Comment: Mr. North should stick to history. As an armchair engineer, he seems to have less good sense than the average 8th grade science student. People shouldn't pay attention to him when he writes about things of which he has no expertise. -- Dick Mills

Gosh all whillikers. I'm a just a poor 8th grade science student. Well, the best way to become a better student is to ask good questions, just like that boy did back in my youth on the "Mr. Wizard" TV show. Mr. Wizard made things so clear. So, here goes.

"Gee, Mr. Mills, I get so confused. This power industry engineering stuff is pretty hard. Maybe you can help me understand how it works. I have a few questions which I know are 8th grade, but please be patient."

1. You say that in theory the grid can stay up if enough power plants stay up. But I guess it could go down if they all go down. Is that logical? So, how many of them have to stay up to make sure the grid stays up? I'll bet you've got a formula.

2. How many plants are y2k-compliant, tested, and independently verified today?

3. How long, on average, does to take to get compliant for a power company that supplies power to over a million people? Could you name one that has?

4. How many suppliers does a typical million-customer power plant have? Entergy has 40,000.

5. About what percentage of these suppliers can go out of business before a power generation facility has to shut?

6. What happens locally if suppliers of crucial repair parts are located in regions where power is off for over 60 days? Or is this in theory impossible? Maybe you have a formula.

7. What happens to U.S. power supplies if the coal trains don't run? (No railroad claims to be compliant today.)

8. What happens to power companies that use oil if chemical plants are shut down by y2k-ralated failures?

9. How will power companies get paid if banking shuts down?

10. How will power companies pay programmers to fix their systems if banks shut down?

11. If SCADA systems don't work reliably, how is power flow controlled by human monitors? How long does it take a million-customer power plant to train enough people to run these systems manually, 24 hours a day, for a month? Could you name a company that has done this? Or do you have a formula?

12. Where is the industry's manual on operating things manually?

13. What percentage of the industry's revenues has gone into contingency planning to run systems manually in 1999?

14. Has the industry finished replacing all its noncompliant embedded chips/systems?

15. What proof of compliance has been presented by the 7,800+ U.S. power companies to the private, industry-managed North American Electric Reliability Council, besides self-reported information by managers of 200 companies, who are not under oath and whose companies are not identified in NERC's reports?

16. I hear there's a scientific thing called a bell-shaped curve. Projects get finished early by a few, later by most, and never by some. Where are we on the bell curve as far as the number of Americans being served by compliant companies? How many Americans out of 260 million had compliant power companies serving them, as of March 31, 1999?

17. If power goes off in a city, could this produce traffic control problems or other disruptions that could stop repairs on the local power plant?

18. If power goes off in one city, and trains use electrical switches and computers to go through those cities, could coal and oil supplies be cut off to cities where the power is still on?

19. Then, if they shut down, could the same problem be extended?

20. If it takes electrical power to produce the items that produce electrical power, then what happen if the grid goes down?

You're the expert. I know that you've been working on this for a long time. I know you wouldn't be evasive or anything. You're a teacher! So, what are the answers? A civilization's survival rests on positive, accurate news on at least some of these issues. I mean, will I ever get to 9th grade?

Link: http://www.albany.net/~dmills/subs.htm

-- mcook (doomer@gotbeans?.com), June 19, 1999

Answers

Inquiring minds want to know. Where is Anita? I'd love a few *facts*. While she's compiling her research....how about Dan the Power man? Please, Dan...step up to the stage. I'm signing off for now.....I need to locate Maria.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 19, 1999.

But don't you see? Gary has a religious agenda! And he was kinda wrong about AIDS, so far! And Doc Paulie said he's a Big Fat Idiot! Therefore, his questions are meaningless! Right Anita?

-- a (a@a.a), June 19, 1999.

Darnit...I can't seem to find ONE of our usual numb-nutted nit-wits anywhere! It is a Saturday. Perhaps Mr. Decker has taken them all on a little pic-nic in the park. SUPPOSE?

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 19, 1999.

there will be very little poly input on this thread...which says a lot

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), June 19, 1999.

1. How many power plants would have to go down (forget the assumption that they MUST go down as you say) non-sequitor. Why will power plants "go down"? NEXT.

2. How many plants are NOT y2k ready. PROVIDE EXAMPLES OF YOUR CLAIMS, or fail your 8th grade test. NEXT

3. non-sequitor. Could you name one that isn't? NEXT.

4. non-sequitor. Why does this matter?

5. non-sequitor. Why does this matter? BUT... how many NEW suppliers would LOVE the chance to jump into the supply chain and MAKE-MONEY? (this assumes you are correct that suppliers will "go out of business". First PROVE THAT THEY WILL, then we can address your question) NEXT.

6. non-sequitor. Leading question. Based on assumption power WILL be out for 60 days

7. non-sequitor. PROVE coal trains won't run. *WARNING* Attempted deviation from testing will result in a failing grade

8. PROVE chemical plants will shut down due to y2k-ralated [sic] failures. *SECOND WARNING* bait and switch will NOT be tolerated by this testing board, young North!

9. PROVE banking will shut down. *SIDE OUT*

You are hearby demoted to 7th grade, young North. Go back and take logic 101... you apparently slept through that semester

NEXT CONTESTANT, PLEASE!

-- School Marm (gnorth@garynorth.conjob), June 19, 1999.



School Marm,

1. The phrase is non sequitur...NOT "non-sequitor"!

2. Even the rudimentary educated understand that answering a question with a question is no answer at all.

Your teaching certificate has been revoked, or in your own words: "NEXT CONTESTANT, PLEASE!"

-- (cujo@baddog.com), June 19, 1999.


Answer: Six months before the final test, no one can answer these questions. WE DON'T KNOW.

Maybe that gives you a warm and fuzzy, confident sort of feeling.

For me, it's a signal to complete the final add-on's for the genset (PRI-D and a new whatsis just being completed by Stan Pierchowski and the gang that purifies gunky diesel fuel between the gennie and the tank). Much like a very fine-grain water filter.

As I said on another thread, I'm getting tired of the North-bashing. I don't care if he's an alien from Alpha Centauri. He deserves a Rose Garden ceremony and medal for his steadfastness and research on Y2K (now, THERE is an image). "Mah fellow americins, I feel Garrrry's pain."

GN may or may not prove to have saved my own life, but he's a heck of a lot closer to having done that for me than Mills.

Shouldn't we thank those who have helped us?

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), June 19, 1999.


That's Gary North for you. Kvetch, kvetch, kvetch.

There's plenty of precedent for townies ignoring the prophet ranting outside the city gates.

On the other hand -- sometimes it's useful to listen to the guy. Precedent for that too. You don't have to marry him.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), June 19, 1999.


""Gosh all whillikers." - "Gee, Mr. Mills, I get so confused." - "Gee, Mr. Mills, Can You Help Me Understand?""

I'm sorry, but I just can't understand why someone who is trying to be taken seriously would EVER resort to mimicking a "silly little kid voice". Think about it... Picture somebody in your personal life. Somebody in whom you hold a lot of trust and respect. Now imagine that person is confronted by somebody who says; "As an armchair engineer, you seem to have less good sense than the average 8th grade science student". How would that person you respect react? Would they curl-up their lip and brow while talking in a childish voice? Would you? My guess is that neither you nor that person you respect would EVER stoop to that style of immature comeback. And this isn't the first time for Gary North. You can smell it in most of his "commentaries". I don't get it... He wants people to take him seriously, yet he "comes-off" like that. Amazing!

-- CD (not@here.com), June 19, 1999.


CD: It is not particularly hard to reconcile GN's kid-voice in this article. It is called irony, a well-established response in dialogue. GN did a great job on this one IMHO.

www.y2ksafeminnesota.com

-- MinnesotaSmith (y2ksafeminnesota@hotmail.com), June 19, 1999.



CD: have you not read anything that I have written in the past few weeks? Some people have NO sense of humor at all....and BTW, North has a pretty good one, if you ask me! Don't take yourself too seariously, it's hard on the ego.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 19, 1999.

Yes, MinnesotaSmith. I am fully aware of the concept of irony.

-- CD (not@here.com), June 19, 1999.

Believe me "Will"... There's no danger here of "taking myself too seriously". Thanks for your concern.

-- CD (not@here.com), June 19, 1999.

I have read Gary for years. Sometimes he is right, sometimes not-Sounds like most of us. Ive been reading his daily posts for about a year. I have learned much from him and feel indebted. He is not selling anything on his site. He gives a link to the original source so you can check it out and make your own decision. His summaries are generally helpful and for the most part simply a summary. He has organized his categories to be most helpful. I send Newbies there regularly. He is consistent and calls it as he sees it. It is a shame that he has to put up with so much when all he is doing is sounding the alarm to help people; right or wrong , time will tell.

-- Ruth the Moab (aapm@aapainmanage.org), June 19, 1999.

Yes Ruth its called Shoot the Messenger. Its the pollys favorite pastime.

-- a (a@a.a), June 19, 1999.


Sometimes he is right, sometimes not-Sounds like most of us.

Please name ONE thing he has gotten right. Just one.

Ive been reading his daily posts for about a year. I have learned much from him and feel indebted. He is not selling anything on his site.

Look again. North is not a crude conman, he is well polished and took care of business long ago via kick-backs. Ask what he charges for speaking. What does he charge for his waste of paper publications?

a a@a.a - when the messenger has a forged note from the king that reads "everyone just surrender now" (and the messenger is the forger) what then? Any enemy of the US of A is an enemy of mine, punk.

-- Gary hasn't (been@right.yet), June 19, 1999.


An enemy of the US of A? Just HOW long did it take them to unwrap the cord around your neck at birth, anyway? I pray you never passed the "background check". Phewwwww

BTW...that must have been SOME pic-nic!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 19, 1999.


I'm sorry, BUT.....the biggest enemy of the U*S*A just happens to be our own GOVERNMENT......piss ant.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 19, 1999.

This is that moron Flint's response.

Notice how he not once replies with any facts - facts that would of course back up North's contenetion...

Read this if you can bear it...

[What a wonderful exercise. Let's take a peek at this and see what's going on here.]

Gosh all whillikers. I'm a just a poor 8th grade science student. Well, the best way to become a better student is to ask good questions, just like that boy did back in my youth on the "Mr. Wizard" TV show. Mr. Wizard made things so clear. So, here goes.

[First, use sarcasm to make your opponent look stupid. North is a master at sarcasm.]

"Gee, Mr. Mills, I get so confused. This power industry engineering stuff is pretty hard. Maybe you can help me understand how it works. I have a few questions which I know are 8th grade, but please be patient."

[More sarcasm, laid on thick. Does anyone here think any longer that this is a *real* request for information? This is propaganda 101]

1. You say that in theory the grid can stay up if enough power plants stay up. But I guess it could go down if they all go down. Is that logical? So, how many of them have to stay up to make sure the grid stays up? I'll bet you've got a formula.

[Yes, there's a formula. It's complex. And yes, IF enough generating capacity goes offline, the affected grid will go down. WILL that capacity go offline? And if so, WHY? Note that North doesn't even bother to ask these two critical questions. Why not?]

2. How many plants are y2k-compliant, tested, and independently verified today?

[Notice the juxtoposition of question 2 with question 1. By placement, the implication is that IF a plant isn't compliant, tested, and independently verified, it will go down. This implication is demonstrably false, but North doesn't bother to say that, implying the opposite. How many power plants have EVER had their workings independently verified? None. Do we have power anyway? Doh!]

3. How long, on average, does to take to get compliant for a power company that supplies power to over a million people? Could you name one that has?

[Detailed investigations showed that most of these had NO compliance issues that would have prevented them from supplying power. Yes, they had compliance issues, and still do. And North takes sly advantage of the impossibility of proving a negative, making it look logical. He's a master of distortion. Why doesn't North ask whether functionally trivial noncompliances will bring down plants? Because he knows they won't. So he raises the strawman of demanding that Mills identify some perfectly compliant plant. The issue is availability of power, NOT whether Mills is aware of noncompliances. Neat trick.]

4. How many suppliers does a typical million-customer power plant have? Entergy has 40,000.

[This number can be supplied, of course. But North knows that the answer is beyond meaning for most of us. What would we do with a list of 40,000 suppliers and what each supplies? Who among us would have the patience to weed through suppliers of coffee packets and shrub trimmers to get to critical suppliers? Who would go from there to examine on-hand inventories of important parts? Who would continue on to determine the viability of each critical supplier? Only those directly involved (the utilities themselves). And they've been outgoing with most of this information, which North doesn't bother to mention. The *number* of suppliers isn't the issue. Continued power generation is the issue. But it looks like power will be generated. So North changes the subject. Again, propaganda 101]

5. About what percentage of these suppliers can go out of business before a power generation facility has to shut?

[Percentage isn't the issue, and North knows it (but of course distracts us so we might not notice it). The real question is, what might force a generation facility to shut down, what alternatives do these facilities have to prevent this, and what are they doing to take advantage of these alternatives? Percentage of suppliers is meaningless, but North is a master at asking meaningless but important-looking questions.]

6. What happens locally if suppliers of crucial repair parts are located in regions where power is off for over 60 days? Or is this in theory impossible? Maybe you have a formula.

[This is part of contingency planning, of course. Most parts are not sole-source, and many can be repaired without replacement. In any case, power has been off in some areas for extended periods (following hurricanes, floods, ice storms and the like) and those affected areas have been home to important suppliers. And power in all areas to which those suppliers supplied has been just fine. North ignores this. And finally, his request for a 'formula' is more sarcasm. He probably realizes this is a very weak argument.]

7. What happens to U.S. power supplies if the coal trains don't run? (No railroad claims to be compliant today.)

[Now North implies that noncompliant railroads means no coal. This scenario has been examined in detail, and satisfactory answers provided, but of course North doesn't bother to tell us about it. Notice also North's implication that lack of *claims* of compliance equals inability to run at all. Does North expect us to believe that faced with the requirement to supply coal, the railroads will do *nothing*?]

8. What happens to power companies that use oil if chemical plants are shut down by y2k-ralated failures?

[Groan. What happens now when chemical plants can't supply (it's pretty common)? And notice North's implication that chemical plants *will* shut down. Once again, the question is, WILL oil supplies be curtailed? Why? This is a standard North technique -- to point out an interdependency, and imply (without quite saying so) without evidence that this interdependency will break down. Any economy is an incredibly complex tangle of interdependencies. And economies work, despite all manner of bankruptcies, accidents, and political meddling.]

9. How will power companies get paid if banking shuts down?

[WILL banks shut down? This question has always existed (in ever aspect of our economy). There have been bank shutdowns in the past, and power hasn't stopped. Again, North is changing the subject, very subtly. Banks shutting down is contrary to evidence clearly visible to everyone but Andy.]

10. How will power companies pay programmers to fix their systems if banks shut down?

[The same question asked twice. Maybe if North asks it enough times, the answer will change? But even taking North at face value (always dangerous, he's two-faced), if you were a programmer, would you rather work without pay but with power, or without BOTH?]

11. If SCADA systems don't work reliably, how is power flow controlled by human monitors? How long does it take a million- customer power plant to train enough people to run these systems manually, 24 hours a day, for a month? Could you name a company that has done this? Or do you have a formula?

[By now, let's ignore the sarcasm about formulas. North has worn this debating trick out. Now, tests have shown that SCADA systems won't fail. Why doesn't North bother to tell us about this? The utility employees are trained to operate without SCADA, and already drilled to practice this. Communications have been tested, and found to have few to no functional compliance problems (but some logging problems). North doesn't bother to mention this either. Finally, whether Mills can name a company able to do the demonstrably unneccessary is irrelevant. North might as well be asking whether Mills can name one company prepared to deal with an alien invasion. It's nonsense.]

12. Where is the industry's manual on operating things manually?

[Good question. Of course, North is assuming that such a manual will be needed. But it might be, so does it exist? This would appear to be a standard part of contingency planning. I hope it's being done.]

13. What percentage of the industry's revenues has gone into contingency planning to run systems manually in 1999?

[What would the answer to this question really tell us? Of course we'd all prefer that utility contingency plans be adequate and sufficient. Do we really care what *percentage* of revenues is required to achieve this? Why doesn't North ask how good the plans are, rather than how much is being spent to make them good?]

14. Has the industry finished replacing all its noncompliant embedded chips/systems?

[Another straw man. The *real* question is, has the industry done what's necessary to continue to generate and distribute power? Who cares about noncompliances that are trivial or cosmetic? Who cares if an important noncompliance was remediated by repair instead of replacement? The industry has done a damn good job of determining that indeed they CAN PROVIDE POWER. Who really cares about chips that use 2-digit years but are properly handled?]

15. What proof of compliance has been presented by the 7,800+ U.S. power companies to the private, industry-managed North American Electric Reliability Council, besides self-reported information by managers of 200 companies, who are not under oath and whose companies are not identified in NERC's reports?

[What an array of disinformation tactics here! (1) Lack of 'proof' (whatever that is) means no power. (2) Self-reporting means false. (3) Lack of identification (to the public) means lack of data. (4) Those who don't generate any power are as important as those who do. (5) Lack of 'oath' means lack of honesty. (6) NERC is private, therefore unreliable (as if North has confidence in the reliability of government pronouncements).

Yes, perhaps NERC reports are off-center due to the nature of the reporting procedures. But those who have studied NERC and the reporting procedures (from the inside!) have unanimously agreed that those procedures are good, that they're being followed, that the utilities themselves don't have any desire or reason to be remiss in their responsibilities. Utility employees (right up to CEOs) want power just as much as we do. North's implication that everything they're saying can't be trusted because nobody is *forcing* them to be trustworthy, is absurd. And North knows it.]

16. I hear there's a scientific thing called a bell-shaped curve. Projects get finished early by a few, later by most, and never by some. Where are we on the bell curve as far as the number of Americans being served by compliant companies? How many Americans out of 260 million had compliant power companies serving them, as of March 31, 1999?

[Let's again ignore the sarcasm and examine the misuse of statistics. The bell curve is a canard. Assume (*very* safely) that 100% complaince can never be achieved. Assume further (from historical fact) that power can never be guaranteed. So compliance isn't a bell curve, it's a hyperbolic curve, approaching (but never reaching) zero errors. Projects can never be "finished" in theory, but a point can be reached of "close enough". So North's phrase "being served by compliant companies" is not meaningful. What's important is, communities being supplied with *power*. Let's keep our eye on the ball here. North's bell curve is no more than an artifact he's created, based purely on his knowledge that a negative can never be proved.]

17. If power goes off in a city, could this produce traffic control problems or other disruptions that could stop repairs on the local power plant?

[Of course. This has always been one of the difficulties facing those handling power failures. Therefore, techniques for handling power failures (pretty common) always assume there *is no power*. Doh! That's what power failures *do*, Mr. North. This may be a revelation to you, but it's SOP for the power people. Wake up.]

18. If power goes off in one city, and trains use electrical switches and computers to go through those cities, could coal and oil supplies be cut off to cities where the power is still on?

[Chains of assumptions. Don't be fooled. We have plenty of such cases, and know how to deal with them. We've always had power failures. We've learned to deal with them. We have well-worn procedures in place. North is taking advantage of the fact (of which he's well aware) that most of his audience doesn't work in the power industry, and doesn't know the procedures. Therefore, he implies that these procedures don't exist, and his uninformed readers swallow this without thinking. And again, of course, he assumes power failures, commingling the issues of how we handle power failures, with the question of whether we'll have them. More propaganda techniques.]

19. Then, if they shut down, could the same problem be extended?

[This is pure rhetoric, no longer even pretending to ask for information. So OK, yes Mr. North, if everyone sits on their hands and does nothing, AND if everything that can go wrong does go wrong, the problem can spread to some degree. Assuming the problem exists in the first place (apparently false) AND assuming nobody does anything (certainly false) AND assuming worst failure cases all along the line (never happens). Isn't it amazing where you can get once you start chaining false assumptions together?]

20. If it takes electrical power to produce the items that produce electrical power, then what happen if the grid goes down?

[If North's implication were true, we'd never have power in the first place, since we'd need power to create power. This is the argument that since you need a chicken to make an egg, and an egg to make a chicken, therefore neither chickens nor eggs can possibly exist. When reality confutes your argument, you ought to suspect something is wrong with your argument. But North seems impervious to such suspicions. I wonder why?]

You're the expert. I know that you've been working on this for a long time. I know you wouldn't be evasive or anything. You're a teacher! So, what are the answers? A civilization's survival rests on positive, accurate news on at least some of these issues. I mean, will I ever get to 9th grade?

[apparently not. And North *still* hasn't made a single honest request for information, prefering a maze of false assumptions, bad logic, misdirection, and other tactics of the dishonest debater.

As I wrote earlier, North *isn't interested* in the truth, North is interested in *creating* a new truth. He doesn't care what the situation is now, he cares about how he can help create a situation more to his liking later. And he'll do whatever it takes. This set of non-questions phrased as a request for information but presented as an attempt to discredit anyone knowledgeable, is just one example.]

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 19, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

There is no hope for you Flint.

You truly are a piece of work.

Answer the goddamn questions guy!

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 19, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

No more piffle, Flint.

As Churchill said, just the facts!

JUST THE FACTS!

Answer each question with the facts, no more of your semantics...

Bet you can't and won't do it :)

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 19, 1999.



-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 19, 1999.


BET YOU CAN'T AND WONT ANSWER THE QUESTIONS WITH FACTS FLINT

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 19, 1999.

The wet towel strikes again!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 19, 1999.

Gary hasn't said:

" when the messenger has a forged note from the king that reads "everyone just surrender now" (and the messenger is the forger) what then? Any enemy of the US of A is an enemy of mine, punk."

The messenger has no such note. The messenger uses documented FACTS and news articles. He doesn't say he knows the grid will fail, only that there is a significant chance it will fail.

You think he is an enemy of the USA because he wants people to prepare? I guess you agree with chief of detectives on the other thread that wants people to turn in their neighbors who are building fences. You both are pathetic.

BTW I'm no punk - 6'2" 220 lb.

-- a (a@a.a), June 19, 1999.


a: firm?

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 19, 1999.

Mr. Mills responded to one of his readers' requests to debunk an article Gary North about SCADA. The reader told Mills that the North article was BS. Mills agreed.

Did anyone freaking out about all this read Mills's article? Or any other articles by Mr. Mills? I did. I think he give out some of the most level headed, intelligent information on the net regarding power plants.

Even though Mills was debunking North's BS about SCADA and what would happen to power lines and transformers if SCADA fails, whick Mills does very clearly and logically, North starts spewing even MORE BS about every conceivable aspect of power plant generating. He only mentioned the SCADA controversy one time (question eleven). And it is clear that he was unable to understand the simple explanation given by Mills regarding SCADA systems, or else chose to ignore it.

Have you guys read the article? Did you understand it?

It looks more and more like some of the people on this forum are only interested in trying to prove that they are "right" than in learning ANYTHING.Come on! Open your eyes, open your minds. It's not black and white, no matter how much you would like it to be so you don't have to overexercise your cerebella.

I know, I know freedom of speech and all that. Great. But why waste your time with all this verbal sparring? Wouldn't you be better off preparing for y2k?

-- malcolm drake (jumpoff@echoweb.net), June 20, 1999.


Will,

I think a works for a firm, yes.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 20, 1999.


Hey Malcome...as long as you're participating in the "verbal sparring" -- can you answer North's questions?

Didn't think so. And at this late date, neither can anybody else. That's why we're still sparring.

-- a (a@a.a), June 20, 1999.


malcolm is the same person who accepts Koskinen's statement that, "failures are possible...especially at the local levels". Nuff said.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 20, 1999.

Flint, three questions for you:

(1) Flint, do you live inside a jar of mayonnaise?

(2) Given all of your y2k information and analysis, how do you expect THE REST OF THE WORLD (remember it's a GLOBALIZED economy Flint) to perform vis-avis (a) bank runs; (b) oil & gas production; (c) power generation?

(3) How will the situation mentioned in (2) above impact upon the US economy?

'Cause you know what your problem is Flint? Your problem is the same problem that all y2k non-compliant computers will have come 2000, no matter how many million instructions per second they can process.

Flint, your brain is outstanding and very well trained. It resembles the best, finest, most modern y2k non-compliant computer. No matter how hard you try, you can't grasp the y2k reality. And concerning your analysis on Gary North's reply to Dick Mills, it reminds me of Sam Houston's "Only a damn fool would swallow it"

Best regards Flint

Your pal

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), June 20, 1999.


George:

I'm glad Andy posted my response here. It should be clear that North is NOT looking for the facts. North is building a case. To do so, he tries to discredit Mills. He uses sarcasm when he has no answers. He changes the subject. He makes false assumptions. He asks irrelevant questions. He poses questions purely intended to distract from the issue at hand. He very carefully neglects to mention ANY of the results actually found during remediation and testing. When any of his claims have been thoroughly debunked, he raises them again just as though nothing had ever been said. He weilds the rules of disinformation masterfully.

And you're quite right, only a fool would swallow it. And once the fool has done so, no amount of pinpointing each disinformation technique will penetrate. Fools are impenetrable. I find it sad that you have so willingly joined their ranks.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 20, 1999.


GULP! Hey Flint, would you please pass me some of your yada-yada- yada? I'm getting full of the truth.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 20, 1999.

Flint, just what is your y2k hidden agenda?

I mean, do you have a hidden y2k agenda Flint?

I can't believe that a brilliant mind such as yours can dodge and zig-zag plain common sense so much concerning y2k.

Can somebody else give me a clue of what might be going on inside Flint's mind? Flint is a good person. I can feel that. Gee, I'd sure like to meet and get to know you Flint. I admire you in many many ways.

Will Continue, Feller, maybe Big Dog, I don't know... anybody, please, help me understand Flint. I respect his 'processing capacity' so much. I mean, I'm impressed by his intelligence and knowledgeability although he just about always reaches the wrong y2k conclusions. Just what's wrong with Flint guys anyway?? Let's reckon Flint is VERY INTELLIGENT, EDUCATED and CAPABLE. What sort of short circuit could be going on inside his mind? Is it a human y2k syndrome of some sorts?? Flint, dear Flint, I just KNOW that you know what I'm talking about. Damn it, you have good stuff in that head of yours! I must assume that you probably are a senior citizen, and I respect my folks very much. I respect you too Flint, you just give me a hell of a hard time with your "perfect" (too perfect) analysis and wrong conclusions. Flint, there are millions of people following what we are saying right now, you know that. As Will Continue and many others have pointed out repeatedly to you, under current y2k circumstances we all have a very special social responsibility ...

Flint, if people listen to you they will prepare LESS. Flint, do you understand that. THEY WILL PREPARE LESS, FAR LESS, IF THEY LISTEN TO YOU!!! Flint, with such a brilliant mind at your disposal, you just can't be a mean person. I KNOW you are not, I can FEEL you are not. I want to believe in you Flint. Don't let lurkers down.

They need you and many others like you.

Your pal

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), June 20, 1999.


Could be a problem with his "organic neural pathology" George. :)

-- a (a@a.a), June 20, 1999.

George, I hate to point out that if, as you say, you are "impressed by his intelligence and knowledgeability although he just about always reaches the wrong y2k conclusions", maybe SOME of his conclusions are only wrong in YOUR mind.

-- malcolm drake (jumpoff@echoweb.net), June 20, 1999.

George:

If you want to know whether power will fail, I suggest you listen to Rick Cowles, Dan the Power Man, Bonnie Camp, Dick Mills, the NERC reports, and many of the posters on the EUY2K forum.

On the other hand, if you want to know why power *ought* to fail, (regardless of whether it will or not), North and Milne are for you. (Hint: power failure is the fastest shortcut to bringing down our corrupt society and replacing it with something better).

And no, I won't engage in deliberate dishonesty and propaganda because I think it's for your own good. If you want the facts, go find them. If you want to be spoon-fed someone else's demented goals, fine. I can only feel sorry for you.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 20, 1999.


Yes Flint, I have read all of those guys and many more you haven't even heard of, outside of the USA of course. My opinion is that the people you mention are biased, limited in scope, and strictly restricted to the USA. Flint, I have news for you and others like you. As Christopher Columbus proved more than 500 years ago, the world is round (yes round like in 'sphere') and the economy is globalized. The US economy fully depends on the rest of the world. You do not care, apparently, and I hesitate to say 'apparently' because on the one hand you are fully prepared, and on the other you are influencing people heavily into not preparing. Whether you want it or not, whether you know it or not, that's what you are doing.

You should be ashamed of yourself Flint.

Your view of y2k is minuscule, to say the least.

Flint, as time elapses, and you expose yourself more and more, you are increasingly impressing me as a very intelligent, refined and subtle operator with a hidden agenda. A 'smooth operator' would be a better term. Flint, just what is your y2k hidden agenda?

Flint, you haven't answered me yet any one of my many questions.

This is a certain FACT, which is what you say you are looking for while convincing people not to prepare while you are fully prepared yourself.

Why do you post here in this forum Flint?

If you want to debunk Gary North or Ed Yourdon or y2k itself, go elsewhere, please. On a more sanguine line, you may me sick Flint.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), June 20, 1999.


George:

If you prefer to believe that *every* utility expert is wrong, and North's Propaganda Machine is the Truth, go right ahead. Don't blame me. I already told you that fools are impenetrable.

The only question you've asked me is why I refuse to tell lies deliberately. And this is a moral question. I won't debate morals with you. If facts and analysis make you sick, I'm sorry. Just skip that sickening stuff, you'll have no difficulty finding enough fanaticism here to keep you perking along as healthy as you please.

And in just over six months, you're in for a total surprise. It'll be a very pleasant surprise, but I doubt you'll ever figure it out.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 20, 1999.


Flint:

I've oftentimes asked myself why you DO post here. I came onto this board several weeks ago sincere in my attempts to correct some misconceptions. I was called everything in the book for my efforts. I was basically told to leave, yet when I did, I noticed that someone had posted what I'd posted elsewhere. It's a NO WIN.

I was recently told by Big Dog that folks will NOT make decisions based on what is presented on this forum. This was in the thread presented by A&L regarding the fire that killed the two boys playing with a lighter. Now George is telling you that folks will decide NOT to prepare because you attempt to separate the grain from the chaff rather than simply be spoonfed the opinions of others.

There was another thread that began asking if this forum was Pro or Con Y2k. The answers stated that many folks were in the middle range and that the forum had posters ranging from a 1 to a 10. It does seem, however, that unless folks accept a 10, they're flamed as a pollyanna.

Many posters think that the Debunking Y2k board was designed to state that Y2k is nothing but hype. I guess not many have read the mission statement of that board. It is NOT about stating that Y2k is nothing but hype. Y2k is VERY real and will affect many people. It's about keeping the NOISE level realistic regarding Y2k. The mission statement is clear in its intent, yet, just like the Yourdon board, posts get off-track and oftentimes people resort to name-calling.

Recently, in the post in which I was said to have my ti* caught in my zipper, someone stated that I was on a mission to destroy this forum. I'd like anyone to investigate exactly WHERE I said this and post it. Gee...I'm missing the "Pirates of Silicon Valley." What was I thinking?

Anita

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), June 20, 1999.


Anita:

Being personally offended by words on the screen requires an effort I see no reason to expend. And there are several things I find very gratifying about posting here:

1) The empty vehemence of the personal attacks I get. There are few better ways to gauge the accuracy of what you write, than the type of attacks you elicit (combined with the posting history of the attacker).

2) The occasional valid and thoughtful critique. From these I can learn, and gain genuine insights.

3) The flood of email I get from supporters who don't dare post for fear of subjecting themselves to the same abuse I attract.

I suspect the notion of correcting misconceptions is wishful thinking. The goal of many here seems to be to *create* and *sustain* misconceptions, not correct them. You may get some amusement value by pointing this out. You'll certainly never have any educational value. As I and Decker have pointed out, this forum is much more a church than a school, and unbelievers are hardly tolerated, much less listened to.

y2k is about the most widely anticipated, most poorly documented and understood event within memory. Even the post mortems will be ambiguous. Who could turn down a front row seat?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 20, 1999.


How would you begin to explain how some of *our* misconceptions are prooving true and your opinions are looking wishful? You and any of the other "recession only", "I think they can" , "wishing very, very hard" individuals. Spin on, oh forked tongue and tell us how the job WILL be done in the time remaining. Where ARE the happy test results? They should all be shouting from the rooftops Flint, instead, their budgets climb and they scream "don't panic". Try to keep this short and sweet, I can't stay long.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 20, 1999.

"I know that it will be bad for the system, but sorry...my money is coming out of the bank" - Flint

"I have been preparing for an 8 for two years" - Flint

Flint, you sir are a Hypocrite.

-- a (a@a.a), June 20, 1999.


And furthermore I asked the bugger for the facts, FACTS!!! in reply to Norths questions.

What do we get from Flint? nada, zip, zilch, a big fat NOTHING.

NO FACTS AT ALL!!!

Yet this is what he says to George, above...

"If facts and analysis make you sick, I'm sorry."

What a two-faced bald-arsed lying hypocrite.

George and a, you are both right on the money.

I've about had it with this two-faced moron...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 20, 1999.


'a':

Have you already forgotten Hardliner's distinction between stakes and odds? A review might do you good. Yes, I'm prepared for an 8. I don't expect it, but don't consider the probability low enough to ignore. I believe in insurance. If purchasing insurance against untoward events you don't expect is hypocritical, then every cautions and prudent person is a hypocrite by your definition. And if your definition fits everyone, it loses all meaning by creating no distinctions.

Once again, all together now, *be prepared*! If there's one thing I agree with Milne on, it's that it's much better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it. You don't buy a first aid kit because you plan to be injured, but rather in case you are injured. And I have lots of first aid stuff, and no immediate plans to need it. I don't regard owning it as a guarantee of injury either. Why do you?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 20, 1999.


Well, well. What MORE can you say, FLINT? I'm not having a very good day, so allow me to keep THIS short and sweet. When TSHTF Flint, just remember...I have a horse AND a rope AND your State isn't all that far away. Shape up or ship out, and take Anita 'the monkey woman' with you.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 20, 1999.

I just love living smack-dab in the middle of the country. Where do you live Anita? Or maybe you'd prefer the King's Yourdanite pit.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 20, 1999.

Geez! All this and no one can answer the questions! Flint went so far as to show that the questions were wrong, but didn't answer them. And now, it seems that the thread is jumping all over Flint!

Well, wake up! Flint can't answer 'em! So, can anyone else?

-- J (jart5@bellsouth.net), June 20, 1999.


Flint:

Thank you for the explanation. A P.C. with internet access seems to be a powerful tool for those with low self-esteem. They can vent their anger into a box and "speak" to others using words that they'd not use in normal conversation. I agree. There's no reason to waste energy on this.

I once co-founded a forum on Y2k myself. I'm well aware of the E- mail that floods in from those who fear to post. It becomes overwhelming at times, and very time-consuming. That was LAST year, however, and this is THIS year. MANY changes have taken place in the interim regarding progress.

Anita

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), June 20, 1999.


That is correct Anita, it has. LAST year, there was some piddly "hope". In *JUNE 1999* we are finding that "hope" has been shot in the seat of the pants. You feel free to spew your fairy-tales elswhere. BTW....I would have no problem AT ALL with telling either one of you what's on my mind, toe to toe and nose to nose. If you think not....you are every bit as dillusional as your views about Y2K imply. Take Flint and go lick each other's wounds elswhere. What he lacks in strength....you make up for in ego.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 21, 1999.

Flint,

No Flint, you are dead wrong because "facts and analysis" don't make me sick at all, that's self-evident. It's obvious to anyone that I've been requesting facts and proper analysis from you all along. So that's by no means the problem. You are the problem Flint. It's you Flint, YOU make me sick.

Are you a lawyer by any chance Flint?

Someway or other you remind me of Bill Clinton.

Flint, you haven't yet answered ANY of my y2k pertinent questions. You are a smooth operator allright, with a hidden y2k agenda. Your ignorance on y2k's final impact is only surpassed by your willingness to find the least number of people prepared for it. The world can certainly spare intelligent people like you unwilling to help others not as intelligent but possibly better hearted.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), June 21, 1999.


Well, well. What MORE can you say, FLINT? I'm not having a very good day, so allow me to keep THIS short and sweet. When TSHTF Flint, just remember...I have a horse AND a rope AND your State isn't all that far away. Shape up or ship out, and take Anita 'the monkey woman' with you.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 20, 1999.

THAT is a threat to someones life. WHY is that allowed to stay posted. I am forwarding this to the appropriate authorities. Someone's ASS Will be in a sling.

-- Double Standard (pointing@out.hipocrytes), June 21, 1999.


"I am forwarding this to the appropriate authorities..."

Steady on old bean, is CPR an appropriate authority???

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 21, 1999.


Flint why are you so stupid? We don't have time for your mind games. Most people wouldn't prepare even if they KNEW that Y2k would be bad. Are you really that evil or do you just work for the government's spin machine? Do everyone a favor and just go away.

-- Lurker#286 (can'tstandit@nymore.com), June 21, 1999.

Andy:

FWIW: CPR IS listed as one of the experts on Russ Kelly's site.

Double Standard: Would you ALSO tell the administrators that I have NO pets? It's REALLY getting boring to see my name posted around this forum regarding donkeys and monkeys. Someone obviously has NOTHING better to do.

Anita

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), June 21, 1999.


FWIW: CPR IS listed as one of the experts on Russ Kelly's site.

[really?didn't know that... what's his real name?]

Double Standard:

[actually no, just a rather lame joke...]

Would you ALSO tell the administrators that I have NO pets? It's REALLY getting boring to see my name posted around this forum regarding donkeys and monkeys. Someone obviously has NOTHING better to do.

[why single ME out? i know nothing about monkey allegations and i have nothing to do with the sysops... strange...] Anita

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), June 21, 1999.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 21, 1999.


Andy:

I really don't know what your point was in the OTHER stuff you posted, but CPR is Charles Reuben.

Anita

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), June 21, 1999.


I thought CPR was the rabid chappie on the der boonkah site, however I will now go and check out what Mr. Reuben has been saying in the Russ Kelly poll. Thanks for the info.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 21, 1999.

Andy:

Sorry I didn't space down a bit when I addressed the poster named Double Standard. I can see now why you became confused.

Anita

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), June 21, 1999.


Andy:

Yes...CPR and Charles Reuben ARE the same person, and CPR DOES oftentimes sound rabid on the debunker site. I've admonished him via E-mail for doing so, but he's been exploring the folks behind Y2k for so long now that he has lost tolerance. I can't blame him. As Will Continue demonstrates, everyone has their OWN style in posting.

Anita

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), June 21, 1999.


Thanks Anita :)

I know the feeling well of losing patience with folks (no spam, y2k pro, kentucky fried chicken spring to mind...:) )

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 21, 1999.


IN SIX MONTHS WE WILL ALL KNOW THAT GARY NORTH WAS RIGHT!

The ones who prepared accordingly, will survive!

-- y2kready (y2kready@aol.com), June 21, 1999.


IN SIX MONTHS NOTHING WILL CHANGE

Those who recognize North as a kook who has ALWAYS been wrong will just add one more "wrong" to the list.

Others that swallow his Bullshit will still be stupid and handing him their money. Idiots will still be idiots and the earth will still rotate.

I applaud GN as my idol. I hope to make as much money from the unix date problem as Gary made from y2k.

-- Gary hasn't (been@right.yet), June 21, 1999.


who gives gary north money?really?we all know gary north's actual followers are whack,that's what "concerned humanist"is so afraid of

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), June 21, 1999.

IN SIX MONTHS NOTHING WILL CHANGE

What? Planes aren't gonna fall from the sky??? What gives!!??

-- a (a@a.a), June 21, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ