Conference noted::sf

    Blacksmith, farrier, farmer, mason, potter, carpenter

I'm assuming that your disaster happens in the 'near' future -- that is,
aside from the stasis field, we should be thinking about only the
technology available today. 

	a) a small nit -- If one stasis field can operate, why not two? or
	   many? 

	b) ten people are not likely to re-populate the earth by themselves,
	   at least, a great deal of care should be taken to maximize the 
	   gene pool.  Unless you stipulate the existence of artificial
	   wombs and other related paraphernalia, most, perhaps all of the
	   ten should be women, with a good supply of frozen sperm. 

	c) the only supplies inside the statis field should be perishables.
	   There are plenty of ways to keep machinery, learning materials,
	   etc. (even food), for a century of two without using up valuable
	   space in stasis.  Hence, I would argue that there should be more 
	   people, less other stuff.

	d) all training should be redundant -- i.e. someone may need to 
	   'doctor' the doctor

	e) a geologist should be included -- someone who can locate 
	   deposits of coal, iron, minerals etc. to help move back to a
	   technological footing 

	f) presumably, these people will be taking as much information as 
	   possible with them, whether it be in stasis, or in a 'time 
	   capsule' stored with them.  It is not impossible to have access
	   to the entire Library of Congress, stored electronically.  
	   Therefore, I propose at least one of the party should be skilled
	   in library research skills.

	g) I believe the group *should* include an engineer, someone with
	   the practical skills to design and build things.  There won't be 
	   any need for skyscrapers, but there WILL be a need for roads, 
	   bridges, buildings, power (wind/water/steam/electric), and the like.

	h) all of the ten *must* be firmly grounded in wilderness survival 
	   skills -- hunting, trapping, etc.

>	e) a geologist should be included -- someone who can locate 
>	   deposits of coal, iron, minerals etc. to help move back to a
>	   technological footing 
    
    Deposits of iron and minerals and other such?  Just include a map.
    "Lessee, we need some steel, let's see if we can find any where Boston
    used to be..."
    
    Willie
    

        Someone who knows how to turn off the stasis field from the
        inside...

    Would they be able to turn it off from the inside?

    This reminds me of a low-grade sci-fi movie that appeared about 10
    years ago.  I forget the title of it, but I do remember Alex Cord of
    "Airwolf" fame(he played the Angel One character), was in it.  It 
    involved some top secret gov't experiment to try out the idea of
    setting up an underground  refuge where civilization could re-emerge
    from if a nuclear attack would destroy everything.  Certain people were
    chosen for their skills in survival and the knowledge they have that
    would be useful in rebuilding society.  The facility  they lived in had 
    supplies to last them until the right time to go back out into the
    earth.  I don't remember all the types of people they had included in
    the group but I do remember a doctor, a social scientist, an engineer,
    a politician, an agriculturalist, a soldier and an architect were among
    them.
    	Anyway, the experiment turned out to be a failure, everyone went
    insane and turned on eachother.  To add insult to injury, there was a
    colony of vampire bats near the underground facility.  The bats
    ended up killing  all but 3 of the group.  The social scientist, who was
    the only one who knew it was all an experiment and was observing
    everyone's reaction upon discovering that a nuclear attack had
    destroyed everything, decides to call everything off when the bats
    cause trouble.  So they return to the surface.

    Pick a fairly diverse group of 8 young women.  Make sure they
    are all pregnant, again making sure the males used are a diverse
    group.  Pick two (2) young men, to continue the job....
    
    Pack the group of 10 inside, with whatever supplies inside or
    outside that you can.  Set the timer (or whatever will turn
    the field off), and pray for them.  
    
    Whatever they find when they "arrive at the future", they
    will have to deal with in their own way(s), as best they can.
    Why saddle them with "experts" from the current time, who
    will have a hard time UNlearning what things WERE like, and
    then RElearn.....   Young folks (up to late teens?) will
    just manage to adapt / cope / whatever you want to call it.  
    
    EXPECT civilization to fade out or disappear.  Whatever
    emerges when the population gets larger, or the need
    arises, will be something new.....  maybe they won't make
    ALL the mistakes we made, probably they will invent some
    NEW ones, and likely they will have a hard time doing it.  
    I just wish I could "drop in" a few hundred (thousand?)
    years later, and see what they came up with....
    
    				- Ed -

    	I think the human race has the best chance of surviving a disaster
    on Earth by not being on the planet at all.  See SF Topic 353 for the
    details.
    
    	Larry
                    

    
    
    They should at least bring lots of good reading material.
    

A nit - 

10 people do not a stable gene pool make.

Even if eight are pregnant by other men, the odds of a sucsesful cary to term 
and delivery of a baby in a potentialy wilderness environment are slim.

The rule of thumb I have always heard is about 500 specimens are needed to 
create a stable pool, assumeing no close genetic relations (brother and sister,
etc...)

grins,

clark.

According to ST - TNG (an undisputed technical source, to be sure! :^)
you need 35 people as a minimum for a stable gene pool.

I couldn't resist. After all, they're so accurate about our 21st century
events...

Karl B.

    The experience of people who work with breeding-back almost-extinct
    species implies the minimum is one (a pregnant female of a species
    which has large litters).  You do, however, have to work hard to avoid
    losing genetic variety by ensuring that each female of the second
    generation has children by each male of that generation, and so on.
    
    In the human case, if you could schedule matings without regard to
    individual preferences, then ten might well be enough.  If you rely
    only on chance to preserve genetic variety, genetic drift is active,
    and you'll need about 200 breeding pairs (Wright's limit).
    
    			-John Bishop

    Hey ladies, what a great job! Be pregnant for the rest of your life.
    I'm sure artificial insemination is great fun too! :*) All the first
    generation of kids should be female too with a large sperm bank on
    hand.

    I wonder if any of the folks on a mission such as this would be able
    to retain much of their "civilization" and knowledge with the presing
    need of every day survival. Being near the end of a pregnancy makes you
    pretty vulnerable and 10 women in the same condition might have trouble
    coping. Even having two men around is slim support. And if we have a
    mix of sexes personal prefernce is bound to cause some social problems.
    liesl

    I think it would cause a LOT of problems.  I dont' think you can
    find 10 people, or even eight women, who would wish to bear the
    brunt of repopulating the earth.  I sure know I wouldn't want to
    be a broodmare for the rest of my life. ("And how many children
    to you have, Kim?"  "Neigh! Neigh!" ::stomping foot several times::) 
    Just discussing this makes me uncomfortable, but since this aint'
    =wn= I won't go off on a tangent.
    
    Anyway....                                 
    
    Sociology plays a factor.  People aren't herd animals, they tend
    to pair off.  I think we've evolved socially too far to break down
    into the elk-herd mentality and as liesl said, conflict and favoritism,
    jealousy, greed, etc. would probably tear our happy little clique
    apart.
    
    ---kim 

    Real data: almost all the French Canadian population is descended
    from 3000 initial settlers.
    
    This population increase (over a thousand-fold in 300 years) is
    given in the Encylopedia Brittanica as the longest known sustained
    increase of a human population at the presumed maximal "natural" rate
    of increase.
    			-John Bishop

    The present taste for two kids MAX is an extremely recent phenomenon.
    The pill is only thirty years old! My parents are from families of six
    and seven children, and altogether I have 72 first cousins! My Uncle
    Lindy's 13 are a good start on the total, and Aunt Dorothy would deeply
    resent any characterization as a brood mare: she never let the frequent
    pregnancies and child-care duties stop her from writing and painting
    and otherwise living life to the fullest.
    
    - Hoyt

                72!!!   Wow!!!  I have 3 now that as of last year
                (my 53 year old uncle's 27 year old 2nd wife just
                had one...  :') ).  Before that it was only 2.  I
                couldn't imagine having a family that large...
                
                
                Geesh!
                
                

    My great-grandmother ALSO had thirteen children, several of whom are
    still living (my "Aunt Hazel" turns 90 this summer). Great-grandma
    lived to be 99, and at that time had something on the order of 500
    descendents. That was about sixteen years ago, so by now the figure may
    have hit four digits. Hazel was keeping track for a while, but you can
    imagine what a problem it is. It's an incredible legacy. I'm amused
    when I read time-travel stories in which crushed grasshoppers result in
    reversals of the Presidental election 20 million years hence. Imagine
    if Great-grandma had been fatally kicked by a mule in 1900 or so?!
    
    - Hoyt

    	Actually it was a crushed butterfly from about 65 million years
    in the past.
    
    	Just in case anyone doesn't know what this exchange is about, 
    it is a reference to Ray Bradbury's classic short story, A SOUND OF 
    THUNDER.  It dealt with a company which time-traveled from 2055 A.D. 
    to the age of the dinosaurs so that big game hunters could go after 
    the thunder lizards.
       
    	Larry
    

    re: -.1 
    
    	Did A SOUND OF THUNDER reference the reversal of an election?
    	Its been so long, I don't remember the details.
    
    					-St

    re:.20
    
    Yes, it did. And more.
    
    --- jerry

    Actually, we're all just role-playing a theatrical piece in which the
    fate of all humanity (a species made up for the play) depends on my
    reply a few back... and it turns out that we are NOT obliterated
    because I wrote "grasshopper" and "20" instead of "butterfly" and "65."
    Therefore we all get to continue role-playing for another few millenia.
    
    - Hoyt