The Revolution pilot is online now...

[DarthTom]

sojourner wrote:

---

Pretty sure google guy said in the premiere that steam power didn't work. One would presume, since he is the scientist archetype for the show, that at some point over the past 15 years that he tested it.

I got the impression he's more of a "google geek,' and not really familiar with mechanical engineering.

Specialization today has made many brainy science guys good at one thing but not necessarily good at all science.

Can you think of anyone today that possesses even a fraction of Da Vinci's range in science?

[Scout101]

I'm not, just not projecting it to equate to the happy little suburban villages that the show has given us. Only point was that it would take a long time to get back to these things. We aren't just going a step backwards, we're taking the whole ladder away, so would take a while to get back up.

Basically, just think they didn't go far enough in wrecking the world, and underestimated the impact. Treating it as a fun little family romp when the subject would have been closer to Walking Dead than what we got instead (minus the zombie thing, it would have been live people eating you).

That's closer to the number of survivors, and the small bands of survivors getting together. They weren't trying to figure out steam engines, either

15 years might not be a bad timeframe to show these groups coming together into larger units, but they didn't go far enough in wrecking things first.

[Locutus of Bored]

sojourner wrote:

---

Pretty sure google guy said in the premiere that steam power didn't work. One would presume, since he is the scientist archetype for the show, that at some point over the past 15 years that he tested it.

He said batteries and sparkplugs also stopped working as part of his "physics went crazy" speech. He never mentioned steam power.

DarthTom wrote:

---

Specialization today has made many brainy science guys good at one thing but not necessarily good at all science.

Because they don't need to be, or if they are, they're drowned out by countless specialists in the field, as you say. In da Vinci's time there were over six billion fewer people, very few of which were literate compared to today, and even fewer still who were highly educated and had the financing and logistical capabilities necessary to complete their work.

Can you think of anyone today that possesses even a fraction of Da Vinci's range in science?

A fraction? Sure:

http://moreintelligentlife.com/blog/...dern-polymaths

[Star Wolf]

Speaking of the lack of steampunk objections didn't the fisherman in the flashback scene mention tall ships and steamships being used in the wars so that by then passage to Europe would be as hard as going to the moon in 2012?

[The Borg Queen]

So... it's a Sci-Fi series where the writers didn't do any research beforehand?

Sorry, *another* Sci-Fi series...

Industrial revolution =/= electricity.

[Captain Robau]

Star Wolf wrote:

---

Speaking of the lack of steampunk objections didn't the fisherman in the flashback scene mention tall ships and steamships being used in the wars so that by then passage to Europe would be as hard as going to the moon in 2012?

Right. That's what I got out of it. Seems like most of the steam technology may have been used/destroyed by the militias throughout countless skirmishes.

On a side note, I've been lurking and reading this thread for a while and some of you nit pick way too much. It's a TV show. I enjoy it for the situation, the characters, and the entertainment value. Reminds me of the Saturday Night Live sketch with the Shat talking at a Star Trek convention, "So move out of your parents' basements, and get your own apartments, and grow the hell up! I mean it's just a TV show, damn it. It's just a TV show!" lol

I have read many survival books, practiced several survival techniques, and hunted for a while now (all hobbies of mine) and could nit pick the living shit out of this show. But I'm in it for the entertainment. To make it wholly realistic would require an incredulous monetary investment that would not receive the desired returns.

And to those who claim society would not collapse that quickly, DOD has looked into what would happen if the US infrastructure was damaged with an EMP type weapon. Reports indicate 60% - 90% of our population dead in a year due mainly to starvation. We are totally dependent upon the power grid and have reserves for maybe a few weeks before everything would truly fail.

And if you think people will still be civil after a grid down crisis, think about this:

Take the suburban dad down the road. He is a nice, friendly family guy now. Take away his creature comforts for a few weeks, have him and his family on the verge of starving, and give him a sick kid. What kind of man do you think he is gonna be when he sees you or anyone else with food/medicine supplies he wants? What would you be like?

Ok, end rant.

[DarthTom]

Scout101 wrote:

---

I'm not, just not projecting it to equate to the happy little suburban villages that the show has given us. Only point was that it would take a long time to get back to these things. We aren't just going a step backwards, we're taking the whole ladder away, so would take a while to get back up.

I was thinking of something related to this. The Amish currently live and work without electricity and are very self sufficient in comparison to most average Americans.

In a world where the lights go out wouldn't they become the new specialists in terms of survival skills? Assuming they'd be willing to share their secrets on surviving without electricity I'd assume that any Amish community would be a safe haven for most refugees.

[Star Wolf]

DarthTom wrote:

---

I was thinking of something related to this. The Amish currently live and work without electricity and are very self sufficient in comparison to most average Americans.

In a world where the lights go out wouldn't they become the new specialists in terms of survival skills? Assuming they'd be willing to share their secrets on surviving without electricity I'd assume that any Amish community would be a safe haven for most refugees.

Only Revolution is a world of warlords and will they leave the Amish in peace like current governments do? Perhaps Mormons are doing well out west, having prestored food for that first year's kill off and by theology they will fight back and be better able to fight off the local Monroe.

[DarthTom]

Star Wolf wrote:

---

Only Revolution is a world of warlords and will they leave the Amish in peace like current governments do? Perhaps Mormons are doing well out west, having prestored food for that first year's kill off and by theology they will fight back and be better able to fight off the local Monroe.

I was thinking about the Amish outside of what we see onscreen in Revolution - just generally they possess the skills most of us don't to survivie.

The writers of the show could take it to the next level because in the Revolution Monroe world, I'd imagine he'd kidnap some of the Amish more skilled trademen and the women who had the skills to cook and grow food without electricity and place them into slavery.

[Scout101]

DarthTom wrote:

---

I was thinking of something related to this. The Amish currently live and work without electricity and are very self sufficient in comparison to most average Americans.

In a world where the lights go out wouldn't they become the new specialists in terms of survival skills? Assuming they'd be willing to share their secrets on surviving without electricity I'd assume that any Amish community would be a safe haven for most refugees.

Yes, until everyone else within walking distance had the same idea. "Wait, aren't the Amish all geared up for this?" They'd then get a massive swarm of refugees, and quickly be overrun. They'd try and help as long as they can, but eventually the entire area would be stripped clean, and they'd all die or move on. Way too close to Philly, they'd never have a chance. Million and a half people, give or take, within a day or two's walk. They'd be picked clean.

By the time anyone was organized enough to try and become a warlord, the Amish would be a memory, and you'd find a few burned-out barns on some destroyed farmland...

For that plan to work, you'd have to act on it IMMEDIATELY, like in the first few days, before people realized it wasn't going back to normal and panic set in. But you don't have the transportation, location, or clout to pull that off for a while. Or you'd have to have done it BEFORE the blackout, and stockpiled material and people somewhere ahead of time, somewhere fortified and protected.

[DarthTom]

Scout101 wrote:

---

I was thinking of something related to this. The Amish currently live and work without electricity and are very self sufficient in comparison to most average Americans.

In a world where the lights go out wouldn't they become the new specialists in terms of survival skills? Assuming they'd be willing to share their secrets on surviving without electricity I'd assume that any Amish community would be a safe haven for most refugees.

Wow, you've got a real low opinion of desparate human beings, don't ya. You're saying that perhaps hundreds of thousands of people would abandon their morals and rape, steal, and even kill the Amish of all people for their supplies?

These are the people if you recall several years back that forgave the murderer of several of their children in a schoolhouse - and IMO one of the few Christian groups that actually ACTS like Jesus would have wanted them to.

Perhaps you're right. Remember though - there are several Amish settlements in Eastern Ohio that are not as close to a major population center that people may forget about and not as easy of a walk.

Ohio Amish communities

[sojourner]

A million+ people go a week without food and you'll be surprised how savage they become. Any Amish within walking distance may not die themselves, but any food/farming they had would be stripped clean.

[DarthTom]

sojourner wrote:

---

A million+ people go a week without food and you'll be surprised how savage they become. Any Amish within walking distance may not die themselves, but any food/farming they had would be stripped clean.

I'm curious - why do you and perhaps Scout 101 believe that Americans would exhibit this behavior?

For example, Africans today right now are living in abject poverty, starvation and mostly w/o electricity yet they don't exhibit the behaviors you'd associate with Americans who are in starvation mode?

Example 2: After the Tusanmi in Japan several remote villates went many days - even up to 3 weeks - after the complete distruction of their town/village without food/clothing or electricity yet they failed to riot or strip clean the less forunate or strong of their supplies. Why?

Example 3: After the Hatian earthquake, 3/4 of the population became instantly homeless - many were starving to death yet the population didn't riot against the more forunate in the country. Why?

Are you suggesting that Americans are uniquely violent in desparate situations?

[sojourner]

I'm suggesting the circumstances are different. In each of your examples the have the knowledge that outside help was on the way, giving those people hope to persevere.

But in this situation, all forms of communication are gone. No help is coming and no knowledge of conditions in the rest of the world is available. Yes, some people will wait for help to arrive and starve, but a good percentage will realize the extent of the problem and go looking to save themselves.

Imagine the scenes from Katrina of the thousands of people walking out of the city that we got. Now imagine that those people never found "rescuers" just more and more refugees coming from other towns/cities. Food gets tight, it becomes a bloodbath.

Read Sterling's Dies the Fire. It covers the situation pretty well.

[Scout101]

Yeah, I don't think it's about my opinion of people, it's basic math.

The Amish farm supports 100 people nice and happy, with a surplus. After the power goes out, people hang out in Philly for a week or so, waiting on rescue or conditions to return to normal. After that, you've about eaten everything you've got laying around, and grabbed what was nearby. Now what?

one day, a hundred people wander onto the farm. The Amish are nice and friendly, they suck it up and try to help. Next day, 500 more people show up. Now things are REALLY tight, and no one has enough. Guess what, 1000 people show up the next day, and they're even hungrier than the first 600 people. Well, Philly has 1.5 million living in the city, and that isn't counting much outside city limits. How long before EVERYTHING is gone from that farm? Every last bit of food, everything? At some point, you're just overwhelmed, and it starts to turn violent when things run out. People are also going to start getting the idea that leaving is a good idea, and the tools are gonna start vanishing (the animals have long since been eaten). Farm is eaten clean, that many sick and starving people have pretty much fouled the land, and there's just nothing left. Now what? And bear in mind that's just the first couple weeks after the blackout, maybe a month if there were a lot of supplies nearby to eat through. This is when the REAL carnage starts. Depending on time of year and physical location, winter will probably take care of most of this, and population will literally be decimated, if not more, by spring. It's not a low opinion of people, it's just basic math. The areas where most of the population are CANNOT support that population density, not anywhere near it. Your food comes from areas a thousand miles from where you live, and the high yield they enjoy is mostly because of heavy machinery. Take both of those away, and people are going to die fast, and in huge numbers. Smaller farming communities in the midwest are the best off, as they'll have food already out in the fields, planted pre-blackout, and no where to ship it to. They'll have the best shot at seeing the spring, if they can get the hands to help bringing in the harvest without losing most of it. And IMO they're just hardier people, and more used to living off the land and having useful crafts.

Katrina's not a bad example. Imagine the same example, but all the cell phones, flashlights, and generators are also dead. Government isn't showing up to help, no boats, no helicopters, no buses, no FEMA supplies. Now imagine that going on a month, instead of a week. How long before it burns itself out completely? And if it's happening EVERYWHERE, and there's nowhere to escape to?

I don't picture people living in poverty in the current setup ANYTHING like what we're talking about. When EVERYONE is in this situation, and there's no help coming and no hope of it improving/going away, whole new ballgame. Population density is the other part of the issue. They don't live in MASSIVE numbers in those conditions. And those areas that have larger populations STILL get things trucked in to feed/water them, even if it isn't enough. Suddenly apply the conditions in Somalia to NYC and you think it'll be ok?

Turn the question around: how can you honestly think it WOULDN'T be like we're describing? People are gonna shrug it off and sing songs? Just quickly adapt? How many people live in Atlanta, vs how many do you think the immediate area outside of it could support? And that's assuming they all immediately chip in and help, all have skill and luck with the farming, and you can plant stuff in that paved-over clay without a water source, hoses, etc. And everyone's going to share, no hoarding, no violence, etc. Think my situation is unfortunately more likely.