We are getting dangerously off-topic, but let me say this. I just
re-watched
"Three Days of the Condor", and it's the same tired mantra now being
chanted. Even if your scenario came to past, shortwave would be just
as dead
as the wire telegraph. It is a technology that, in its current form
anyway,
has no future. Satellites are just too easy to lob up, and they don't
want
constant TLC. Transmitter farms do. Shortwave exists today because
tubes had
to come before LNAs on chips. Now, LNAs are kid stuff. Sirius and XM
are
just baby steps compared to what's coming. If I were a government and I
wanted to get my word to a specific region, shortwave would rank just
above
carrier pigeons on my list of choices.
-----Original Message-----
From: swprograms-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:swprograms-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kevin
Anderson
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 7:57 PM
To: SWPrograms list
Subject: [Swprograms] Re: The cutting of radio before when we may
actuallyneed it the most
Richard, Joe, and Scott:
Thanks for reading and commenting on my post, even though I'm
sure you all think I'm off my rocker (a fourth person told me as
such in a direct reply). Maybe I am, but only time will tell.
<grin>
Let me provide a few more comments, starting with those more on
topic.
I would agree with Joe, should economics go the negative way I
suggest, that thousands of local AM (MW) and FM (VHF) radio
stations don't make sense. The combined used of electricity for
transmitters alone, as you point out, plus all the energy use
for programming, just doesn't seem sustainable. Satellite
distribution (which Richard also acknowledged) does certainly
make sense (I may someday indeed get Sirius so I can get BBC,
WRN, and CBC from one source), although I don't believe the
private or corporate use of satellites will likely continue. (I
think space will once again become the domain of only
governments trying to protect their interests.)
And while I will hope that the Internet (or its future
replacement) might remain viable (providing all the news and
"radio" we need), and indeed the governments may step in to do
so for their own security, I am doubtful that individuals in
great numbers will remain computer users. If electricity
becomes unreliable, or the availability of computers becomes
more scarce, I doubt they/we will have the time or priority to
use computers.
So I come back to the idea of shortwave being a viable
broadcasting means for most people. And if it remains analog,
then all the more who can receive it, including with simple
solar-powered or wind-up radios. To me, any further "erosion"
now of international broadcasters and open sources of
information will mean much less available to us later when times
get tough.
Now onto the oil future (stop reading now for those who don't
want to go off topic):
Joe, I've heard of that research by Gold as well. It has been
commented on by lots of people in regard to Peak Oil
discussions. While I don't discount that oil can be made this
way, my reading of the research suggests the rate of production
is no where sufficient to generate enough, or to have created
the volume of oil in the earth except over a long period of
time. That is the crux of the matter - no matter how oil is
first produced (by compression of organic matter or by other
methods), we are pumping too much of it.
Richard and Scott, I don't doubt that more alternative energy
sources are here and coming, and higher oil and transportation
prices will certainly help in making them happen. The more the
better - alternatives, as well as more conservation of energy
use, will soften the blow and postpone the worst times. But my
reading is that there isn't enough time left, nor are the
replacements as viable as oil, for meeting all the
transportation, energy, and production needs that are currently
met by oil. Plus the population of the earth is just too large.
(The carrying capacity of the earth, which is long term,
sustainable use, suggests that between 1 and 2 billion can be
comfortably supported globally. At 6 billion on the Earth, this
suggests we are 4 to 5 billion too populated. We passed 2
billion people just before 1930, which is also when the
oil-based economy of today really took off, suggesting that the
extra population is only here because oil had provided the
means. Some would say that the gains we experienced in our
lifestyle weren't supportable to begin. And our dependence on
oil to produce food means all the more problems for people to
get food later, so things go as I interpret will happen.)
I hope you take the time to actually read the books and webpages
that are mentioned in the blog articles I referenced. I used to
be optimistic and positive thinking as you folks are. But I
guess all the reading I've bein doing in earnest since 1990, and
particularly in the last two years, has convinced me otherwise.
I can certainly respect where each of you are coming from (as I
was there once too), and all others wanting to ignore what I
say. It is hard to accept this kind of news.
Now I apologize to the group as this took things too far astray,
and return you to our regular programming. I'll gladly talk
with folks offline. And I will be on topic the next time I
might post again.
Cheers/73,
Kevin
Dubuque, IA
=====
--
-------------------------------------
Kevin Anderson, Dubuque IA USA, K9IUA
k9iua (at) yahoo (dot) com
-------------------------------------
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
_______________________________________________
Swprograms mailing list
Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms
To unsubscribe: Send an E-mail to
swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the
URL
shown above.
_______________________________________________
Swprograms mailing list
Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms
To unsubscribe: Send an E-mail to
swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the
URL shown above.