EXTRA!! POLLYANNA-IN-TRAINING "FLINT" CROSSES THE FLOOR!!!

TIMEBOMB (Y2K News) - Noted y2k pollyanna Flint today crossed from the Bump-In-The-Road camp to the side of the TEOTWAWKI doomsayers by posting a detailed and scary description of his anticipated future for our society. Members of the Yourdon forum who were contacted expressed shock but generally approved of Mr. Flint's outing. "It feels good to have this off my back - hell, who knows? Maybe Infomagic is right," Flint was heard mumbling as he pondered the consequences of his actions.

"This could represent the turning point for unfounded optimists the world over" said Paul Milne, Flint's former archenemy on the y2k debating circuit.

Pollyana mentor Paul Davis had no immediate comment and was last seen searching the "Skeptics Other Than Me" guestbook for a suitable replacement candidate.

Welcome to the other side Flint! :)

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

Answers

I still think it may have been an imposter

-- anonymous (anon@anon.com), January 21, 1999.

'a', I haven't changed my position at all. You asked for what I expected, and you got it. This is my best reading of the contradictory and ambiguous material available. I still fight against those who believe they can see the future, because I can't and I don't believe they can either. I believe that all reports, no matter what they say, should be subjected to exactly the same standards of evidence, consideration of source, and correlation with what's gone before.

I've always said I believe there will be problems; now I've told you what I expect them to be. I've always said to prepare (despite Milne's assertions to the contrary); now I've told you why.

Milne will always be my enemy, I think, because I'll never tolerate his insults, or agree with his black-and-white thinking, or put up with his double standards. Milne is a lunatic, and if he's right it's by accident. He hasn't been right yet.

I would really like to know where you think my vision falls short (I know there are many issues I couldn't address). I'm willing to state my expectations and biases up front, you need only ask (as you did). Let me know.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 21, 1999.

Flint: until I read your post, I didn't think it was going to be all that bad. You have scared the shit out of me.

(just kidding)

Thanks for the PEP-talk. I have read it several times and you did a good job relating your feelings on things.

In all honesty, I have known since we exchanged email some months ago that you were not a pollyanna. Our main difference is over your assessment of Milne's mental status, and that's what we were arguing about back then. But it's scary that we are all almost on the same wavelength. The way I see it,

4.0 Paul Davis
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0 Flint
6.5
7.0 a
7.5 Milne

Is this about right?

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

a., where have you been? Flint's been a middle of roader for at least the past 2 months that I've noticed. And so is Paul. Paul even complained today that he's being shot at from both sides, bump-in-the-road types and doomers.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), January 21, 1999.

Chris: brother Flint came out of the closet in the thread

Flint's take

Like someone said on that thread, its alarming that the good news guys are getting more worried.

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

'a', yes, I'd place myself at about a 6, blending the scales together. I tried to explain in more detail what I expect. None of those scales seem to describe it too well to me. And I'll continue to argue in favor of considering all material on the merits, no matter which way it seems to lean.

Chris, which Paul do you mean. There are at least three posting here.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 22, 1999.

'a', I haven't changed my position at all. You asked for what I expected, and you got it. This is my best reading of the contradictory and ambiguous material available. I think everything is contradictory and ambiguous. That way I can sleep at nite. I still fight against those who believe they can see the future, because I can't and I don't believe they can either. I believe that if I can not properly assess the facts and evidence NO ONE shall have that ability. Damn it! Why should I, the amazing FLINT, be the only myopic idiot? I believe that all reports, no matter what they say, should be subjected to exactly the same standards of evidence, consideration of source, and correlation with what's gone before. And then, they should all be classified as ambiguous and contradictory, as usual. I've always said I believe there will be problems. Just 'problems'. I will not do anything at all to define what problems mean, because that would not be contradictory and ambiguous enough for my refined myopia. I've always said to prepare. Mostly in relation to mustard. Always have prepared mustard. Milne will always be my enemy, I think, because I'll never tolerate his insults, or agree with his black-and-white thinking, his poly- chromatic wisdom in technicolor and panavision, or put up with his double standards or triple standards or fourple standards. Milne is a lunatic, and if he's right it's by accident. He hasn't been right yet.

BWAHAHAHAAHAHAHAA! Milne is a lunatic. And he is only right by accident , I say. BWAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA! Hear me oh God's of the accidentally correct. Hear me I beeseech Thee!

I would really like to know where you think my vision falls short (I know there are many issues I couldn't address).I think I need cranial bifocals. I'm willing to state my expectations and biases up front, you need only ask (as you did). Let me know.

But, most of all I pray to the Gods of contradiction and ambiguity. Strike Milne deaf and dumb so he will be silent, accidentally. We know that he can not assess the facts. So he must be crazy and only accidentally correct. There can be no other reason. There can't there can't there can't..........

sobbbbb sobbbbbbb sobbbbbbb

-- flint (flint@flying up my own ass repeatedly.com), January 22, 1999.

Flint (the real one) I was talking about Paul Davis.

a., you're right in the sense that I've noticed the optimists talking in gloomier terms.

flint the troll, your envy for Flint's flair is showing.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), January 22, 1999.

i see we now have TEOTWAWKI trolls too.

-- one troll to another (.@...), January 22, 1999.

My question is if Milne's a 7.5, then who and what is a 10?

Paul, didn't you say that you predict upwards of 90% of the world's population is going to die due to Y2K and it's fallout? Or was that Infomagic? Don't want to be putting words in someone's mouth, that's one of the symptoms of the problem being described here.

It's hard enough to sift through the mix of information and garbage that's available without having to constantly defend yourself against a label.

-- David (David@BankPacman.com), January 22, 1999.

A bit of confusion there David, what I said was that if Milne and Co. were correct then their idea of how many would die was way short of what would actually happen. Take a city that does not have an agriculture shipping or storage facility - it probably has about a 2 week supply of food if you count everything. If power and transportation are completely out for over 6 weeks - 90% or more will certainly die - the remainder will either be cannibals or living off of pigeons and rats. And most of them will be sick.

Now I don't think we are going to be as bad off as that - not in the US. But that is what would happen if the power and transportation were hit so hard that such a city could receive nothing for a month and a half. Some folks here think I am afraid to look at how bad things will be - no - I just disagree with how much impact Y2K will have. But I am sure that the world would be very much depopulated if anything shut off shipping and power for a couple months everywhere.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), January 22, 1999.

Thanks for the clarification Paul! I knew I had seen 90% death rate associated somewhere with Paul Milne's name. Glad to know I was just confused again.

-- David (David@BankPacman.com), January 22, 1999.

David: the 90% dieoff is a prediction of Infomagic. Paul is a 7.5. Info is a 10. He has a three-part essay on why he believes it will be this bad, and it's very hard to read it with an open mind. See his section in Cory Hamasaki's weather Reports:

Infomagic

-- a (a@a.a), January 22, 1999.

Thanks a! Will check it out.

-- David Bowerman (David@BankPacman.com), January 22, 1999.