Having visited the forum on a daily basis since Feb.I must admit that my priorities have changed drastically.

I have felt justified in doing as much research as possible and allowing other things to take a back seat. That does not mean familial or social or financial obligations. I have just redirected my normal focus on financial expansion towards preparing,strategizing,and researching the rollover.

I use the TB2000 as a catalyst to keep me motivated to prepare and also to keep abreast of any snafus that occur around the country.

The information that has been exchanged here has been extraordinary, in fact it is unfortunate, in my estimation that the info. that has been shared could not have been promoted to a much larger audience.

After having come here for soooo long, I do wonder how much of a bias or conditioning has been effectuated, if any. How much of my objective thinking has been slanted via association with all of the information at my disposal at the forum.

The reason I ask myself these questions is only due to what I empirically see as major problems while at the same time witnessing y2k promoted as a joke. I continue to be in dismay how this subject can create such a variance of reactions.

Is it just me or is anyone else wondering if they are conditioning themselves with a bias towards an 7-10 occuring because of the profound focus on the subject at this forum? Or is it as obvious as the sunrise and the masses are really that blind???

The chosen Few??? or The chosen duped???

Duped?? No way--- too much information-- Struggling to reconcile the potential ignorance of the masses.

-- D.B. (dciinc@aol.com), October 24, 1999

Answers

This forum obviously has a very narrow focus, by definition. And, it seems many times to act as a magnet for two categories of people that add a lot of noise: 1) those who are convinced that the world is coming to an end regardless of Y2K, and are always promoting some non-Y2K catastrophe or other; 2) those who believe (or at least try to give the appearance that they believe) that Y2K is completely overblown, and go to great lengths to deny the mountain of evidence otherwise, normally by trying to discredit those in the forefront of Y2K awareness.

Rule of thumb: Go to LOTS of different sources; always check out the links to the evidence for yourself; make your own decisions; let nobody convince you on the basis of disinformation-type arguments (e.g., discrediting of the "messengers").

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 24, 1999.

The chosen Duped - glad you said it. I think next year when Y2K hysteria dims, there will be a lot of former Tinfoils wondering how they could have been fooled so badly. People like North will be used in the same sentence as Jim Jones...

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), October 24, 1999.

Thank you, Y2K Pro, by offering the perfect example of the "disinformation-type" approach that I mentioned in my post!

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 24, 1999.

Pro,

I also mentioned "chosen Few".

Why is it that- I would surmise most here can acquiesce to a 1 or a 10 occuring. You lump everyone into the looney bin.

-- d.b. (dciinc@aol.com), October 24, 1999.

The chosen Duped - glad you said it. I think next year when Y2K hysteria dims, there will be a lot of former Tinfoils wondering how they could have been fooled so badly. People like North will be used in the same sentence as Jim Jones...

Oh give me a break...Jim Jones!? If nothing happens, the worst that will happen to most prepared people is that they will have a full pantry and be out of debt.

Pro, I really hope you're right about being duped by "Y2K hysteria". If that's the worst that will happen to me in my life, I'm a very lucky person.

-- Mabel Dodge (cynical@me.net), October 24, 1999.

GOOD PEOPLE,

I IMPLORE THAT YOU DO N0T ALLOW YK PRO TO TAKE THIS THREAD HOSTAGE WITH HIS ANTAGONISTIC BEHAVIOUR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-- D.B (dciinc@aol.com), October 24, 1999.

Things get slippery here, don't they? I know very well that anyone can make any kind of prediction based on a wealth of empirical observations, provided those observations are selected with sufficient care and purpose, and interpreted in light of the desired outcome. It's not easy trying to integrate the preponderance of observations without imposing any sort of bias.

I think we need to make a sincere attempt to adopt different viewpoints, as part of each of our efforts to see things more clearly. Yes, we have plenty of evidence that big problems are coming, and this evidence is quite solid. But we also have plenty of evidence that we've experienced big problems often enough in the past without chain reactions taking down our lifestyle significantly.

What makes y2k more difficult is that we've faced nothing directly comparable in the past, and it's nearly impossible to get a handle on the magnitude of the problem. Yes, we know the problem is extremely wide. But as for how *deep* it will turn out to be in practice, we honestly have few clues. And those we have contradict one another.

History strongly suggests that extreme viewpoints at both ends will be wrong, and that those who hold those extreme viewpoints (either hoax or End of World) have duped themselves via simplistic analysis.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), October 24, 1999.

Dang if yo ain't one o' the few makin any sense 'roun heah abouts lately. BOTH ends be duped. Though I be slowly slidin into the high end duped camp m'self. What's a po footballer to do with no one to trust.

Night Train

-- jes a po confused footballer, easily led (nighttr@in.lane), October 24, 1999.

Sure there is a bias generated by reading the board. It is difficult to remain objective no matter what we are doing. If you pick a five you can only be wrong by five (at the most). Will someone point me to the link that defines the scale (1-10). I don't believe I have ever actually read it. I would like to try to rate my own opinions on that scale, though I think I will probably fall between a three and a four. -m-

-- Michael Erskine (osiris@urbanna.net), October 24, 1999.

"Has this forum created a bias in any of Us that frequent it?"

Of course it has D.B.! A better question to ask yourself is; How could you possibly *NOT* have become biased after frequenting this very biased forum as long as you have?

-- CD (not@here.com), October 24, 1999.

C.D.: Is it not possible that there are those of us who relied on the TV news and local newspapers for information and became a little biased in the other direction before coming here? I do not buy everything that is put on in TB2000 but it at least gives me a different set of facts to form an opinion based on opposing views. What, pray tell, is wrong with looking at both sides of an issue and deciding for yourself?

-- Neil G.Lewis (pnglewis1@yahoo.com), October 24, 1999.

I'm sure this forum has changed the perspective of some newcomers to Y2K, but for me it is a place to share thoughts with those who have had a similar vision. In my case, as with many others I'm sure, I experienced the vision before being drawn to this forum.

In some respects, there are similarities to the movie "Close Encounters of the Third Kind". I had a sudden and profound premonition of the approaching chaos, and was "driven" to seek out others who had also experienced this vision. Lo and behold, I found this forum, and I can tell by the nature of some of the comments here that others are also experiencing virtually the same type of intuitive insights of things to come.

So whether or not this forum is reinforcing my intuitive feelings about Y2K at this point seems irrelevant to me, because I have always trusted my instincts when they are this strong, and they have always been proven to be real. This does not happen often for most, but occasionally, when we are able to disassociate ourselves from the illusions being fed into our minds, we are able to "sense" the truest reality.

-- @ (@@@.@), October 24, 1999.

I suppose my comment comes under the headings: For What It's Worth, and Goes Without Saying,...but I'll post it anyway.

There is no way to go through life "uninfluenced" by people we meet and know, organizations we have interactions with, jobs, events. At various points, (numerous, I might add, even daily perhaps) we are presented with opportunities to learn, grow, stagnate, change.

Along with TB2000 and all the posters I have been influenced highly over the past 10 years to examine how I live, if I am walking as I talk about stepping lightly upon the planet, living consciously and with less conspicuous consumption.

If "bias" means I have examined possibilities (in all life events), and made decisions based upon my experiences and thoughts, then heck,..I'm biased. There is no way to stay alive in the universe without discernment. When opponents of my worldview called me biased, they are correct. But, of course, they likewise have been "biased", influenced by what has preceeded in their entire lives too.

As I said up top...goes without saying, yes? As in all eras, the one we live in has done peculiar things to words. "Bias", and "influence" are, in my rarely humble opinion, a couple of those words.

-- Donna (moment@pacbell.net), October 24, 1999.

DB,

Nahhhh, you didn't get biased by reading from this forum, or Gary North's or anywhere else. If you are biased, you had it when you arrived. Think back on when you first heard about Y2k. What was your reaction? Denial, Skeptic, Believer? You started your bias at that moment. You got a gut feeling quickly about it, didn't you? All you get from lurking here is more than one way to think about this, within a range of 1 to 10. You want to talk bias? Look at Y2k Pro. Biased all the way, from day one, and has never had even a moment's doubt that he was right. He didn't get that here, although he spends a lot of time lurking and posting here. No, he had that bias, full blown, from the moment he heard about Y2k and hasn't budged an inch.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), October 24, 1999.

"...because I have always trusted my instincts when they are this strong, and they have always been proven to be real. This does not happen often for most, but occasionally, when we are able to disassociate ourselves from the illusions being fed into our minds, we are able to "sense" the truest reality." --@@@@@

Just curious "@", was your mind experiencing one of those illusions you were able to disassociate yourself from when you "sensed" the truest reality and emblazoned a thread a while back with the headline: MIR CRASHES INTO SOUTHWEST U.S. CAUSING POWER GRID TO GO DOWN!!! [paraphrasing]?

"What, pray tell, is wrong with looking at both sides of an issue and deciding for yourself?" -- Neil G.Lewis

There is absolutely nothing wrong with looking at both sides Neil. If you are indeed looking at both sides I applaud you for doing so. Let me ask *you* a couple questions. You suggest that you look at both sides. Do you also read csy2k or BFI or Debunker? If not, why not? How many others here do you think read those forums? How many others here do you think refuse to read those forums simply because they don't like the personalities of the contributors there? And finally, how many people here do you think made up there minds when they were first introduced to Y2k and became scared to death from the likes of North and Yourdon? Again, if you are indeed seeking out the other side of the story (which you definitely will not find on this forum), then good for you Neil!

-- CD (not@here.com), October 25, 1999.

Mabel,

That old line about have lots of food to eat is wearing thin. Can you come up with something else?

-- (NO Food @here.com), October 25, 1999.

For me, reading the forum has caused me to 'raise the bar' for whom I may consider 'nuts' in real life.

-- flora (***@__._), October 25, 1999.

CD,

You asked;

"Just curious "@", was your mind experiencing one of those illusions you were able to disassociate yourself from when you "sensed" the truest reality and emblazoned a thread a while back with the headline: MIR CRASHES INTO SOUTHWEST U.S. CAUSING POWER GRID TO GO DOWN!!! [paraphrasing]?"

That is a good example of the typical state of mind we are in when we are not able to glimpse the true reality. This was exactly the opposite of my feelings on Y2K which are based on iniuitive insight. If you recall, I arrived at the conclusion about Mir because of several articles I had just read about it being abandoned the previous day. This is the point I was trying to make, that with Y2K my premonition of things to come are not based on anything I've read, but on my deepest intuition.

-- @ (@@@.@), October 25, 1999.

Yeah, readin this forum has affected me...it reinforced my bias...every time I get some money, I think about my family and I "buy us" some more supplies...

-- Jay Urban (Jayho99@aol.com), October 25, 1999.