Test your instincts:
July 12, 2002 1:05 PM   Subscribe

Test your instincts: Evaluate your survival knowledge. Sharks and terrorists and tornados, oh my!
posted by acridrabbit (31 comments total)
ten of seventeen. I'm a fucking goner.
posted by ColdChef at 1:12 PM on July 12, 2002

I am an extreme survivor! *puts on Donna Summer t-shirt and taunts a highly dangerous sand flea*
posted by bargle at 1:21 PM on July 12, 2002

".. left you maimed for life" -- sad.
posted by fnirt at 1:24 PM on July 12, 2002

i got all mixed up, tried to inflate the dog, crawl under the bank robber and disarm the shark--which disarmed me instead.

posted by th3ph17 at 1:36 PM on July 12, 2002

I evidently should avoid situations more dangerous than, say, extreme shoe tying. This test suggests that my limbs are mere moments away from flying off my body.
posted by Skot at 1:39 PM on July 12, 2002

8 out of 17. very cool site thanks
posted by keithl at 1:57 PM on July 12, 2002

Nicely done, but only 10 of 17 right. I'll just barely make it.
posted by yhbc at 2:01 PM on July 12, 2002

I have to say I think this test sucks. Some questions lack detailed information, i.e. "you're being trampled by a crowd, what would you do: a) crawl under the seats." Who said anything about seats? The answer assumes you're in a stadium of some kind, as they state after you've answered.
"You're dying of thirst, what should you do: a) search for water, b) sit and wait" Well let's see... doesn't it freaking depend on where you are? What if you can hear running water in the distance?
These flaws just emphasize to me the lack of foresight or thorough planning used to make the test. It reminds me of the "five people are dead in the water, all wearing life jackets, and their boat engine is running... how did it happen?" You can create any bullshit context you want and then tell everybody else they're wrong.
I bet I could kick the crap out of the makers of this test in any survival situation. The End.
posted by zekinskia at 2:13 PM on July 12, 2002

16 of 17... I feel so vindicated for watching all those Ultimate Survival telly shows now...
posted by gloege at 2:22 PM on July 12, 2002

10.. ouchie... not a lot of material, but important enough to make me happy that i read it...
posted by lotsofno at 2:24 PM on July 12, 2002

Jeepers, zekinskia, are you better about getting a "You are so dead" score?

BTW, at least a couple of the questions have more than one correct answer (try different answes for some of them, you'll see).
posted by DakotaPaul at 2:34 PM on July 12, 2002

zekinskia: I totally agree. I posted it anyway, because I thought there was some interesting and valuable information in the answers. Not that I expect to be swimming with sharks anytime soon, but you never know...
posted by acridrabbit at 2:36 PM on July 12, 2002

Cheers acridrabbit ! That was fun. 13 leaves me badly maimed, but as long as I don't come across any deserts or tornados, which we don't get too many of in the UK, I should be ok (phew)
posted by Arqa at 3:06 PM on July 12, 2002

I bet I could kick the crap out of the makers of this test in any survival situation.

Yeah. When they avert their eyes and comply with your demands, club them to death immediately. That'll teach 'em. Especially if they curl up in a ball on the floor to protect their throat. I hate when they do that. It's so demeaning.

(10 out of 17. It's amazing I've survived as long as I have. Apparently I'm much safer among terrorists than I am at the beach, though, which is oddly reassuring.)
posted by ook at 3:57 PM on July 12, 2002

Looks like I'm dead in a dog, shark, or mob attack.

But I'll be okay if a snake tries to hold me hostage in the desert.

8/17. I'll be hiding under my bed if you need me.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:12 PM on July 12, 2002

I guess this 10 must be a magical number.. as I have also gotten 10 of 17 right. :-D Might as well lose some limbs now so I don't have to later.
posted by spidre at 4:12 PM on July 12, 2002

I got 13 out of 17. So long as I stay away from dogs, snakes and sharks, I'm good. So much for that trip to the zoo with my kid!
posted by headspace at 4:23 PM on July 12, 2002

I'm keeping with the 10 of 17. Animals will destroy me.
posted by dogwelder at 4:28 PM on July 12, 2002

I'm not sure under any circumstances if I would have the capacity to "stare down" a shark.
posted by brittney at 4:35 PM on July 12, 2002

nah it is not so bad... and it depends on the kind and type of shark...
posted by gloege at 6:07 PM on July 12, 2002

I was found severely wanting, mainly because: (a) I have no compuntion about injuring and crippling vicious or threatening dogs, and (b) I have no reason whatsoever to know one iota about what to do around a tornado. If they'd covered earthquake safety as well or instead, I'd have managed a passable score.

Also, I agree: the questions and answers were poorly thought out and not clearly phrased.
posted by majick at 7:05 PM on July 12, 2002

I took the test twice. The first time, I chose what I figured would be the "correct" answer. I scored a perfect 17 of 17.

Then I took it and chose the answer that most closely matched what I feel I would actually do. 11 out of 17.

I still feel much better about my chances of survival using my genuine answers.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 8:58 PM on July 12, 2002

the whole section on crime is bullshit.
in the one about being taken hostage, giving the option of slipping away unnoticed strongly implies that there is actually an opportunity to do so. and if there is, why the heck wouldn't you?

for the bank robber one: what if i happen to be some crack navy seals/delta force antiterrorist type guy? i think someone appropriately trained would have a fair chance at disarming a single bank robber (and the question only mentions 1, not a whole bunch...).

the being in a mob one is just stupid too. if you have time and space to lock arms with the people around you (what the hell kind of mob would it be if everyone around you was also on the ground? a mob of toddlers?) then clearly you have time and space to get the hell back up. that being the case, why would you choose to stay on the ground where you're just asking to get stepped on?!?
posted by juv3nal at 9:03 PM on July 12, 2002

I'm sure that none of the answers for the stupid snakebite question are correct. Don't you bandage the whole limb, or as much of it as possible? Or is my memory of first-aid classes failing me? And all those tornado questions, though easy, were somewhat annoying. I doubt that I'm about to be stuck in a tornado any time soon, but what about earthquakes, floods, fires, etc? Can't we have some variety of natural disasters?

That said, 11 out of 17. But I'll be okay in the desert, even if I'm surrounded by terrorists and a tornado's heading my way.
posted by eoz at 11:29 PM on July 12, 2002

Hey, 11/17 too. I'd die toot-sweet in the desert with water in my canteen. But the hostage-takers and bank-robbers would let me go first. To hell with the sharks and snakes!
posted by evixir at 12:13 AM on July 13, 2002

I got a -3.
Evidently, I'm part of the whole problem to begin with.
posted by dong_resin at 9:22 AM on July 13, 2002

Eoz: for rattlesnake bites, at least, you are *NOT* to use a tourniquet or attempt to suck out the venom. I live in rattlesnake country; the test's correct answer is consistent with the instructions provided in our media and park bulletins.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:11 AM on July 13, 2002

For a dog attack, I've always thought the best defense would be a really good offense.

If I could aim a really good kick at its head, I'm pretty sure I could do serious damage to it. Treat it like a football, and aim for a field goal: lots and lots of follow through.

But what I've always really figured would work best is to stuff one's hand as deep as freaking possible down its throat, and then make a fist. I'm figuring it ain't gonna be able to get my arm out, won't have good leverage for biting, and won't be able to breathe. Might have to visit a doctor after all is said and done and have the dog surgically removed...
posted by five fresh fish at 11:13 AM on July 13, 2002

fff: I know you're not supposed to use a tourniquet or suck the venom out, but I wasn't sure that walking around was a great idea either. Then again, I'm used to the Australian concepts of snakes being associated with hot weather where you don't want to be walking around, and help being too far away to walk to anyway.
posted by eoz at 6:28 PM on July 13, 2002

Well, it's not like lying on the ground and awaiting help from a random passer-by is going to do you very much good, given that you're not likely to have encountered the snake on a busy sidewalk...
posted by five fresh fish at 7:36 PM on July 13, 2002

fivefreshfish, I know that in Australia, the recommended treatment for snakebite is to wrap the whole limb, to slow the spread of the venom. Doesn't help much if you have to walk for help, though, because the other part of the treatment is to lie very still.

I got 8 right and only ended up seriously maimed. The tornados really undid me, but if you want someone to share a hostage situation with, I'm your man :-)
posted by dg at 5:46 PM on July 16, 2002

« Older The National Trust   |   21 songs plus ephemera. Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments