It might not be a sail, but it's salient
As mentioned before, I'm inclined to respect Abraham Loeb's thinking because he has publicly opposed some (not all) of the usual "scientific" orthodoxies.

I wasn't especially impressed by his insistence that the long object called Oumuamua is alien tech.

After reading the details more carefully, I'm still not impressed by his set of statistical assumptions... BUT ... there's one basic fact about the object that IS distinctive and unusual. At least in what I've read, Loeb doesn't seem to consider this fact salient. (He may be hitting the point elsewhere.)

The salient fact is the rotation itself. The object rotates steadily every eight hours or so. Loeb uses the observed patterns from this rotation to draw conclusions which aren't nearly as convincing as the STEADY rotation.

Try rotating a metallic object in a permanent magnetic field. (EG the shaft of a stepping motor in a printer.) Hysteresis will fight hard to slow it down. You're sending energy into the field, which can be used to generate current if the device is set up properly.

If this thing is even partly metallic, it simply can't keep rotating in the sun's magnetosphere. It would have slowed to a stop long ago. Giant objects like planets have enough inertia to keep going, but even the earth is gradually slowing down from hysteresis. This skyscraper-sized object doesn't have nearly enough inertia to keep turning.
  ¶ 7:23 AM

  Mental immunity
During last week's power outage (3 days without electricity, 4 days without web) I relearned and refocused a broad decision I'd made a long time ago.

I always keep propane equipment and a battery-powered radio ready for outages. The radio is mainly for noise while sleeping. At the start of the outage I tried the "local" "news-talk" station and immediately turned it off. YAARGH! A huge blast of toxic poison!

I tried Tom Read's Christian station, and stayed there for relatively harmless noise, including even some OTR at night.

But some of the Christian talkers were also taking part in the poisonfest from the "other" "side". While the conventional networks were blasting FUCKTRUMP FUCKTRUMP FUCKTRUMP at 160 dB, the evangelicals were stoutly defending Trump. Why? Israel. In their minds the ONLY NATION IN THE WORLD IS ISRAEL. When they talk about patriotism, they mean loyalty to ISRAEL. They were either too stupid to catch onto the long-standing fraud perpetrated by Lee Atwater, or they're paid participants. Trump is NOT stupid. He played this game hard, and received the reward.

REMEMBER!!!!! TRUMP IS ROY COHN'S PROTEGE!!!

= = = = =

I've never been OCD about physical germs. I understand immunity. Since 2010 I've become increasingly OCD about mental inputs. After throwing out the TV in 2010, I was able to start THINKING again. Since then I've gradually decreased other inputs. About six months ago, specifically triggered by the BLM riots, I turned off the AM radio and left it off. I've also pulled away from several "alt" websites like RT and ZeroHedge, which are clearly paid participants.

Until the power outage, I was deriving a dim distorted echo of media concerns from chance mentions in various places such as the subject lines of spam emails. Like a vaccine, those previews kept the mental immunity fresh without overwhelming it. I could tell, for instance, that Congress was farting about an absurdly futile "impeachment", but I didn't have to receive and reject the emotional impact of the grotesquely hyperidiotic "discussions".

So the outage reinforced my resolve to avoid thinking about such matters and avoid discussing them here as much as possible.

Don't Be There. When you participate in protests "for" "the" "correct" "side", you're strengthening the side you don't like. When you argue details of a currently hot topic, you're helping Deepstate to use the topic for tyranny. There are no "correct" "sides", there are only toxic topics.

As long as Side B is visible and annoying, the demons of Side A will kill Side B. When demons can't see Side B, they get bored and find other outlets. Often the other outlets are insufficiently orthodox members of Side A. Witch hunts end when they burn the initial igniters. Revolutions end when they guillotine or purge the Trotskyites or Deviationists. You can't count on this self-consumption, but it's more likely when Side B remains quiet.

Labels: Sucker Filter

  ¶ 2:00 AM

  Nothing happened
After watching some fictional instant justice on old TV detective shows last night, a question popped up. Have I ever exposed a fraud? Done any "investigative reporting"?

Not in the conventional way, but I did properly and scientifically expose one fairly well-known racket a few years ago, and NOTHING HAPPENED.

I built an electronic replica of Hubbard's original E-meter as designed by Mathison.

The results were definite and scary. The E-meter wasn't a meter, it was an active nerve stimulator, with instant effects on the autonomous system controlling heartbeat and panic.

I hesitated before writing up the result, since Hubbard's cult has a long-standing reputation for suing detractors. But I went ahead anyway. REAL SCIENCE is a mission that can't be softpedaled. A real experiment must be written up. The show must go on.

Nothing happened. The blog item, like pretty much all of my blog items, was read by the two or three regulars, but it didn't even garner attention from the identifiable Deepstate connections like Amazon Ashburn. No lawsuits, no social media campaigns.

Conclusion: The Hubbard cult is vestigial. Its reputation for ferocity is based on past actions, not present strength.

Question: Where did those people go? Did they move into more fashionable cults like the "virus" cult, which exhibits the same types of ferocity?

Labels: Carver, meta-entertainment

  ¶ 1:23 AM

  Exactly dated prediction
Reading old Collectible Auto as usual while eating. In the Aug 1996 issue, this feature caught my eye. The car is completely uninteresting, but the text mentions politics and makes a specific prediction that can be checked today. CA wisely avoids partisan crap, and rarely mentions politics except for repeating the conventional nonsense about Henry Ford.



As for appreciation, forget it. This car will still be depreciating when Bill Clinton's fourth successor is in office.

Well? Clinton's fourth successor is in office exactly now. 1 Bush Jr, 2 Obama, 3 Trump, 4 Biden.

How did the prediction hold up?

From Hemmings price guide:

Prices for 1990 Oldsmobile Toronado

The average asking price is: $7,998.50
The highest asking price is: $8,000.00
The lowest asking price is: $7,997.00

Yup. In '96 the highest price was 10k. Inflation would have made it 16k this year. Now the only price is 8k, half of what the inflated '96 value would be.

Labels: Metrology

  ¶ 6:34 AM

  Zuhlsdorf's mysterious mission
Zuhlsdorf is setting out on a new mission, which is somewhat mysterious.

There are only a few publicly visible writers who have an unyielding unflinching HARDASS understanding of HARDASS reality. Zuhlsdorf is one. McAfee, despite all his Bitcoin nonsense, is another. Edward Curtin and Joseph Pearce are in the same category, though more specialized.

I started reading Zuhlsdorf occasionally when he was discussing Latin vs English. He GETS language, and especially the role of grammar in building mental spaces.

Then he showed a total understanding of the "both sides" game, and gained the skills and technology for REAL alt media by acquiring a ham license.

I hadn't read him in a while. Now, unsurprisingly, he GETS the "virus" holocaust.



His new mission is inchoate and not fully established, but after three unique exhibitions of total understanding, I'm inclined to trust his intentions and help concretely.

Equipoise. Pay for value, pray for value.

Labels: defensible cases, Equipoise

  ¶ 7:42 PM

  Decided to look it up.
Why do we put the $ before the numbers?

This question popped up on Quora. It's something I've often wondered about but never took the time to look it up. Now I've taken the time, and I know part of the answer. There are lots of discussions in various forums, but all seem to be conjectures and guesses.

In the 1812 ledgers from the Missoury Fur Company, the ledger entries have the letter P or S after the number, represented within the column by ditto marks, but the sum on each column (here a sum carried forward) has the Pesos symbol in front of the amount:



The use of specific symbols is relatively recent. According to wiki, the pound sign seems to have started in the 1600s.

The earliest preserved English ledger is the pipe rolls of Lancashire in the 1100s. One item with the translation and explanation, from a 1902 book:

Idem vicecomes reddit Compotum de lxvj. li. et xiij. s. et iiij.d . de Communi Assisa Comitatus de Lancastra, pro defaltis et miseri cordiis. In thesauro lxj .li . et viij . d . Et debet c. et xij . s. et viij . d .

The Sheriff renders an account of £66 13s . 4d ., arising from a general Assize of the County of Lancaster, for defaults and amercements, whereby it appears that this sum was not the result of an Eyre of the Justices, but was a composition or general fine, assessed by competent persons, to discharge the county from liability on account of various negligences, purprestures and trespasses within the widely extended forest lands of Lancaster. The Sheriff paid £61 Os . 8d . into the Exchequer and owed £5 12s. 8d . on balance.

Translating only the numbers:

lxvj. li. et xiij. s. et iiij.d.

becomes

66 li. and 13 s. and 4 d.

Li = libri or pounds, s = solidi or shillings, d = denarii or pence.

Pure conjecture: The £ symbol might have arisen, or become popular, to avoid reading li as 51? S and D wouldn't have been confusing, so they didn't need substitutes. (D means 500, but it was very rarely used.) BUT: Any confusion seems unlikely, since humans are extremely good at 'code-shifting', and bookkeepers have especially well-trained bimetral symbol vision.

At that time all of the units were simple abbreviations, not symbols, and all were after the numbers just as in speech, both English and Latin. (Some adjectives and articles were after the noun in Latin, but numbers were before the noun.)

This book of Worcestershire county records comes close to pinning down the transition point, which agrees with the mention in Wikipedia.

These two passages from English court documents were recorded and 'transliterated' by the same author.

1591:



1616:



Records are continuous and dense between these two years, but items with money amounts are sparse. I couldn't find a closer pair with money. In 1591 the units are all abbreviations, and Latin phrases are vestigial. In 1616 the whole text is English and pounds are £.

The author doesn't discuss terminology, so we can't see WHY the change happened, only WHEN. Presumably we can trust that he was consistent.

Incidentally, many of the items in these records read just like modern police blotters. OCD Karens complaining about trivial violations of etiquette, drunks doing what drunks always do. The one I quoted from 1616 shows that privately run prisons haven't changed in 400 years.

Linguistic sidenote: England was under Roman rule from about 50 AD to 400 AD. By 1100 the Romans had been gone for 700 years, but the ruling class was still writing in Latin. That's impressive permanence and persistence. Advantage: You don't need explicit encryption or secrecy when the commoners can't read or understand what the rulers are saying among themselves. Question: Were there commoners who quietly learned how to read and understand Latin, and used the skill to help other commoners prepare for the next psychopathic STOMP from the insane rulers? Vicilici?

Labels: Asked and partly answered, Jail mode

  ¶ 8:34 AM

  No longer anonymous!
I've been loving and appreciating and advertising the anonymous and PERFECT musicians who worked for Transco Syndication. Tonight I was looking for an alternate rendition of one of their masterpieces, heard in this episode of Can You Imagine That. The first item that popped up in Youtube:

Here they are!



The Transco Chorale! The same group (I think) was heard more intensely in Down Our Way.

This Youtube channel has dozens of numbers by the Chorale, including all the pieces I've heard within various episodes. Unfortunately the individual singers are still anonymous. The web doesn't seem to contain any further information. 'Transco' is a generic company name used by hundreds of more recent businesses, drowning out possible older references. The real Transco is mentioned a few times in broadcasting business journals of the '30s, but those don't discuss the music.

Labels: infinite GOOD

  ¶ 7:46 PM

  Community is self-sustaining when permitted
KSHS has a brief burst of activity again. They feature some pictures from Elk Falls, taken around 1890. A mill was built on the falls, which was already decrepit and abandoned at the time of the pictures. So the town never had a serious central industry.

Elk Falls is in the SE part of the state around Coffeyville. The town was never large, but in 1920 it had a newspaper:



Pop 271, weekly paper with circulation of 250. Enough to keep a business going. Before we burdened businesses with infinite compliance requirements and huge "health" "care" costs, a tiny town could support a variety of skills profitably.

Is anything left? Not much, but still more or less running and more or less maintained.

Googlestreet starts with a bonus '50 Buick plus two auxiliary Yugos, parked by a building that might have been a bar at one time:



Here's the rest of the business district, with PO and one active store. Note the wide sidewalk, typical of small towns.



Across from downtown is the city park, with a restroom that also seems to be maintained:



There are several other portapotties scattered around town. Maybe for migrants?

And in the leafy suburbs, the sidewalks continue. Streets are mowed and maintained, and there are trash bins out for collection. This corner shows an interesting remnant of a grand traffic circle, and a courageous local citizen who seems to recognize that the camera is the Eye of Satan.



Graybill doesn't apply to dogs. They continue doing their jobs and using their skills regardless of offshoring and mandates.

Later: The original town map shows a circle in the middle of a theoretical market square:



but it's not quite the same location. I was probably misreading an intersection of sidewalks, deluded by the mower's circular path. The local citizen wasn't deluded. He knows Satan when he sees it.

Labels: Patient people, skill-estate

  ¶ 5:54 AM

  Fussy semantic quibble about digital vs analog
The basic D vs A opposition is almost always misleading. It doesn't match the real distinction between ways of thinking.

Strictly, digital simply means on/off, and analog simply means continuous. Integer vs rational.

BUT: Many familiar digital and analog systems are a complete mix of the two modes.

Example 1: A light switch is strictly digital. It's designed to be either perfectly conducting or perfectly insulating, with as little time as possible between the two extremes. But it controls a light bulb which is strictly analog. An incandescent bulb starts to glow as soon as any current flows, and its light output rises smoothly (but not linearly) with increasing current. An LED lamp is mostly analog, with an area of zero conduction near zero voltage. Fluorescent is closer to digital, requiring a high initial voltage to start, but still varies with voltage after it starts.

Example 2: A thermostat on a heating system or electric stove is an analog knob or slider, controlling the pulse width of a strictly digital system. The burner itself is either all on or all off.

The important distinction is not on/off vs gradual.

The real distinction is digital software versus all other types of systems.

Digital software operates in a series of discrete snapshots of time, and operates in only one direction. There is never any actual feedback in a software system, and there is never any actual motion. Software CANNOT represent reality no matter how fast or powerful the CPU, no matter how many cores or threads are running in parallel. The boundary is perfectly unbridgeable.

It's hard to express this distinction accurately because the precise wording is syntactically clumsy.

So: When I say digital, I mean software, and when I say analog, I mean non-software, which generally includes both on/off and gradual elements.

Labels: Language update

  ¶ 6:50 AM

  Reviewing fluidic computers
Thinking about the natural basis of calculus reminded me of the Lukyanov fluidic computer, which reminded me that I've featured several fluidic computers this year.

First and most elegant, the Willson automatic buoy. Willson used nothing but natural forces, placed in constant and elegant equipoise. Water pressure counterbalanced acetylene pressure, with the rate of change supplied by combustion.

Next was the Dalen sun valve, using the heat of sunlight to control the flow of acetylene.

Willson and Dalen were practically useful and lifesaving beacons, tied to the Trinity House theme. They represented the original meaning of artificial intelligence, a self-sustaining machine with lifelike properties helping to solve human problems.

The most beautiful and mysterious is the Ridhwan water clock, which used a true fluidic computer to control a series of doors and bells and birds and pointers and lamps.

A medieval night clock used the combustion of oil by a flame versus gravity to count hours and signal end of work, without any mechanism at all.

The Gabry flame clock used combustion versus oil pressure to drive a mechanical pointer.

The Tiffereau water clock used water flow in equipoise to 'tick' a full-fledged clock escapement.

And finally the Lukyanov, a genuine analog computer using nothing but water flow for logic and calculation.

All of these devices are infinitely closer to the natural use of calculus than the lookup tables in books or silicon.

Labels: Equipoise, Patient things, Real World Math, Trinity House

  ¶ 4:22 AM

  Calculus is more natural than arithmetic
The position of math in the universe has been a constant pointless dispute among "philosophers", and it's still an active pointless discussion among tech-monster types and Intelligent Design types.

Plato and Aristotle staked out the two sides, which haven't changed and haven't settled the issue in 2000 years. A question that can't be settled isn't a real question. It's just a way for "philosophers" to justify their grants.

A possibly more fruitful subdispute arises in math teacher circles, as well as the AI and ID types.

Is calculus more important than arithmetic?

My teacherly position is that the fine details of calculus are only needed by engineers, and even engineers don't really carry on the type of thinking that happens in a calculus class. They just use lookup tables for the results of specific equations, and multiply the results by constants as appropriate. Before computers the lookup tables were paper, now they're silicon. Same thing.

= = = = =

Here's a somewhat fresh thought, based more on neurology than teaching.

Integrals and derivatives are basic and universal parts of life. Arithmetic is NOT a basic part of life. Arithmetic is an overlaid skill invented late in history by humans.

Every neuron is a derivative. We process only changes, not constants. As the signal moves up through higher layers in the ganglia and cortex, it is differentiated several more times. Some feature detectors respond to linear upsweeps in frequency. Second derivative. Others respond only to accelerated upsweeps. Third derivative.

Many neurons are also integrators. They pick up changes from a network of input dendrites, and sum up the total of the changes over time. Some of the changes are additive (excitatory), some subtractive (inhibitory). The neuron will typically emit a series of pulses when its integral reaches a threshold set by yet another field of inputs. These pulses may feed into higher-level integrators that sum up the readings from the first layer.

And the whole system is a constantly running infinite set of balanced equations. Negative feedback balances or counteracts inputs to maintain a steady state of temperature or muscle tension or anxiety or weight.

By contrast, simple arithmetic is rare in the nervous system. There are a few integrators specialized as counters, but there's no explicit addition or multiplication of counting numbers.

Labels: Equipoise, Real World Math

  ¶ 4:57 PM

  Hartness to Mont-gros, back to Hartness.
When I don't understand how something works, I build it. With electronic stuff I can build the real thing using tubes and transistors and capacitors and so on. With mechanical stuff I don't have the needed skills or tools or workspace, so I have to "build" it and animate it digitally.

I had previously focused on the Altitude-Azimuth way of reaching all available angles. When I read about the Hartness scope, I realized there were other systems. The Hartness scope itself was a mystery, so I followed his discussions and started with the two other equatorial scopes.

Rehashing the relevant parts of the Mont-gros item:

= = = = = START REPRINT:

This bit of graphics started from thinking about James Hartness, the semi-pro astronomer who became governor of Vermont in the '20s. Hartness invented a specialized form of telescope that enabled him to stay comfortably inside, without having to pivot around with the end of the scope.



I didn't understand how this worked, so I started looking it up. Turns out he didn't invent it. The system is called the Equatorial coudé or bent equatorial, and it was invented by Maurice Loewy in 1871. Loewy was a detail-oriented astronomer who spent his career compiling and editing tables and books of star locations and star photographs. Hartness himself, writing about his variation on Loewy, gave proper credit to Loewy. The claim of invention was only in popular magazine features about the telescope.

= = = = =

But why was it needed and how did it work?

One of the best known coudé scopes was at Mont-gros, an observatory in Monaco.

Here's the real Mont-gros around 1890:



My abbreviated version represents only the three buildings at the right end of the overview. (The big central observatory has already been modeled in the realm of Google Sketchup, so I didn't need or want to duplicate it.)



From left, the Coupole Schmausser, the coudé, and a small building housing a sidereal transit.


The Coupole still exists.


As does the coudé.


This small building is no longer there, judging by various pix.

= = = = =

The coudé was specialized from a more general Equatorial. The Equatorial reaches all parts of the sky in a peculiar way, unlike the more ordinary and understandable Altitude and Azimuth system. Here we run the Equatorial through all of its gyrations, with Happystar desperately trying to hold on and observe.



The coudé runs through the same pattern, reaching all angles of the sky, but it's bent (coudé) in the middle with two mirrors. The bend enables the eyepiece to remain in one place, so it can pass through a single weatherstripped hole in a wall without needing a rotating dome or a retractable cover. The astronomer can stay in one chair, comfortably heated or cooled, unhassled by birds or bugs, while the business end of the scope remains outside with no thermal differences to distort the air.



= = = = = END REPRINT.

Now I can finally return to the Hartness scope itself. He described its advantages and disadvantages clearly, but the mechanism still didn't look like it could even move. After studying his wonderfully clear patent, I finally grasped it well enough to animate it.

Here's an outer view of the mostly underground chamber:



And various inner views. The upper floor was the scope workspace, and the lower floor was for calculating and recording. The long tunnel leads back to the Hartness mansion.









Now animate, showing the two separate motions and the eyepiece wandering all over the place with Happystar hanging on and trying to observe:



After animating it, I can see the pros and cons, and it seems to me that the cons outweigh the pros. Hartness eliminated one of the two mirrors in the equatorial coudé, and expanded the range of available angles somewhat, but he lost the stable eyepiece. His version is certainly less mobile than the simple Altitude-Azimuth scope. The astronomer can stand in one small area, but he still has to move around and look up and down and sideways, in often uncomfortable or painful angles.





Hartness could have regained the perfectly still eyepiece while retaining the expanded range, by adding another mirror like this:



It's not clear why he didn't add this extra angle.

Labels: Equipoise, Metrology

  ¶ 10:29 AM

  Checking in with the ONLY FREE COUNTRY
I've been occupied with wind and power outages, and haven't checked in with Tanzania lately. This video by Mark was two days ago. He's in Mwanza now, which is just as free as Dar es Salaam. As usual he wanders through streets and stores. Precisely zero muzzles, zero fear, zero panic, zero distancing. Just NORMAL FREE HAPPY PEOPLE, working and living a NORMAL FREE HAPPY LIFE, in a prosperous-looking city.



Eternal infinite super-blessings to Magufuli, the ONLY NON-DEMONIC RULER IN THE ENTIRE FUCKING WORLD and not coincidentally the ONLY TRUE SCIENTIST IN A POSITION OF POWER.

Labels: infinite GOOD, Jackboot NOT stomping forever

  ¶ 10:15 AM

  Let's Riberty! Let's Lushmore!
Somehow I get the feeling that the Japs didn't enjoy being occupied by Yank troops in 1950. They gained a much more serious and meaningful revenge a few years later, by picking up all the industries and jobs we were suicidally discarding.

Labels: Entertainment, the broken circle

  ¶ 10:33 AM

  Helped by the record
I've been keeping this blog for 16 years, about 1/5 of my life. The near-daily record tends to keep me honest. I can't claim to have been "always right" or "always wrong" about any specific issue. There are a few exceptions, a few big things that I understood clearly almost from birth. Language and grammar, experiential education, constants and variables.

But most opinions have changed during these 16 years, and the record shows it.

This morning I decided to use the record to see when I clearly caught onto the Deepstate "both sides" game. The recognition feels fairly recent. Was it?

Answer: It was gradual. In 2005 I already knew the two-teams trick:

This has been obvious in any Internet forum for many years. Whether the subject is Mac vs PC, Windows vs Linux, Jesus vs Darwin, Universal Health Care vs Free Choice ... you name it, you'll find exactly two teams, and each team has a standard playbook of permitted opinions. As long as you stick to the playbook, you'll get cheers from your side and jeers from the other. But if you ask a deeper question, or (worst of all) favor side A for the wrong reasons, you'll be thrown out with remarkable alacrity and consonance.

But in 2005 I definitely DIDN'T SEE THE TRICK in the political realm. Just one illustration of hundreds:

The Red Cross is putting out some strange PSA ads. A dry-voiced feminist recites "I don't talk like you, I don't dress like you, I don't go to your church, .... but I will help you." Who is this appeal aimed at? Other feminists? Academic multiculturalists? It ertainly isn't aimed at traditional-minded Americans, or males of any stripe. I lost all faith in the Red Cross two days after 9/11 anyway. On 9/12 I gave a substantial contribution, then the next day the local chapter REFUSED a contribution from a local rifle range (gun club), because the club had put a picture of Osama on its paper targets. It was too late to stop my check, but I'll never give another penny to this pro-terrorist organization.

When did I start to see the "terrorism" fraud as just another two-sided stageplay? Hard to spot by keywords, but the first doubts showed in 2007. The 'Dubai port' thing helped me to see that Bush wasn't really fighting Saudi, but I still didn't see that fighting Saudi was a fraud. Using terrorist as a keyword, this 2009 item shows similar incipient doubts.

The strange 'buzzing' of New York by the substitute Air Force One may have been a really, really dumb mistake, but I don't buy it. In the first place, as everyone has noted, you don't need real planes to "update your photos". Anyone familiar with graphics could create this picture digitally in a few minutes, if you wanted this picture.

And that's the first question: Why in the hell would the gov't want this picture? How in the hell would a 9/11-style picture be part of your media publicity packet? What would the caption be? "Lookie here! We're still vulnerable! You can get away with another 9/11 easily!"

The second question: If it was just a photo-op, why was the fighter jet apparently trying to intercept the airliner? From what I've seen, the fighter looked fairly serious. I can't imagine the Air Force risking its aircraft and pilots on a just-for-fun gag shot.

This was either a real practice run (war game) or a real incident. Perhaps a pilot gone insane, rather than a real terrorist?

I wasn't able to stand back and see both teams on this question until I threw away the TV in 2010.

The point of inflection is shown clearly by a series of basic questions in 2011. From the first of the series:

Isn't it odd?

The whole point of the Enlightenment in religion and science was to trust your own logic and senses, and distrust the flat statements of the priesthood.

And who's Enlightened?

The Muslim world and the Soviet world are Enlightened. They understand from long experience that government lies 100% of the time. They want to see evidence that they can trust.

America's experience with 100% transparently false government is shorter, basically beginning in 1964 with the Warren Report. So the population of Enlightenment thinkers here is large but far from universal.

The American media, and the blind followers of the Parties, are pre-Enlightenment thinkers. Party members implicitly trust whatever My Party says and distrust what The Other Party says. Since the two Goldman Sachs "parties" create "fair and balanced debate" on only a few trivial and numerical points, the Party people end up trusting government on nearly all important questions, no matter how obviously absurd.

To the priesthood of media and government, Enlightenment thinkers are "conspiracists" or "paranoids" or "deniers" or "skeptics" or "truthers" or "birthers", who can be safely tossed overboard without a proper religious burial ceremony.

In those questions I finally stood back and saw the fraud.

= = = = =

And I'm still unable to see both teams on 'color revolutions' like Brexit. I'm totally bamboozled until the revolution (and the country) is finished. I was fully on Boris's side until Brexit was fully consummated. He immediately started to follow Greta's Gaian genocide, then smoothly switched to the "virus" holocaust. That's when I saw that Brexit was meant to free Boris from EU constraints, not to free Britain from EU constraints.

= = = = =

Why does this learning feel recent? The Skripal stageplay, though not especially important in itself, gave me a HUGE burst of learning in 2018. "Both" "sides" were starting from the assumption that a poison EXISTED. They were arguing over timelines and point of origin. Was the poison from Russia, or from the bioterrorism lab in the same city? Ockham orders us to eliminate all UNNECESSARY entities. The poison was an unnecessary entity. When you start from the assumption that no substance existed, the whole picture is perfectly clear and consistent. The only NECESSARY assumption is the FACT that the Skripals were employees of UK Deepstate. They were willing actors, not unwilling victims. Thus the entire thing was a stage production.

This Ockham learning helps to understand the current holocaust. There's no reason to assume that an actual microbe is involved. The entire picture makes vastly more sense from the viewpoint of branding and labeling. The deaths attributed to the "virus" are deaths that would have happened around now anyway, so the label doesn't change any facts and can't be logically traced by police procedures. Relabeling those deaths doesn't save or kill anyone. The "necessary" "measures" "to" "beat" "the" "virus" are doing all the killing. In order to prevent those inevitable deaths from being relabeled, we're killing everyone else. But we're NOT relabeling the inevitable deaths back to non-"virus", so we're not doing anything at all for those dead people, even symbolically. The deaths caused by lockdowns and loss of medical services and unemployment and despair and starvation and loss of immunity are NOT inevitable. These are actual new deaths.

Labels: Natural law = Sharia law, Natural law = Soviet law

  ¶ 7:53 AM

  Wonder if he'd regret....
Wandering through Gernsback magazines, found this from Feb 39.



Clearer picture from QST:



The tower was built as a rich man's toy by Frederick Smyth, who was NH governor just after Madman Lincoln's War. As governor Smyth was mainly concerned with trying to help the Union veterans.

WPA was planning to renovate the tower for use as local emergency communications center by hams. An unusual recognition of the importance of hams.

Did they finish the job? Yes. It took only six months, and the tower was used by the local club W1LVK until the war started. Then it was used for the same purpose by the city's official Civil Defense.

After the war the estate was turned into a VA hospital, appropriately following Smyth's main mission, and the tower was abandoned again. In '78 the VA was getting ready to demolish the tower, but it was preserved as a historical landmark through the efforts of the Smyth estate.

Wonder what Smyth would think now that the VA is a centerpoint of a "bioterrorism" war against the entire country? Well, since this "bioterrorism" war is a huge expansion of Madman Lincoln's genocide of Deplorables, and since the enemies are in Dixie again, maybe he'd approve.

[Sidenote: This tower is my kind of place. I'm going to 'build' one, which will provide an opportunity to 'build' some WW2 era electronics. I haven't done much in that decade yet.]

Labels: Entertainment

  ¶ 11:46 PM

  Unfashionable regrets
It's fashionable to say "I regret the things I didn't do, not the things I did."

I'm unfashionable. I mainly (but not entirely) regret stupid things I did. The potentially smart things I failed to do mostly turned out to be stupid in hindsight, or even in direct sight**.

Here's a nice pair of regretting action vs regretting inaction. The pairing is congruent in time and space, involving two 10th grade teachers whose rooms were adjacent.

= = = = =

Mr Dickerson taught history. He was a highly competent teacher. He wanted us to discuss rationally, and he actively and consistently encouraged discussion.

Since 1975, all requests for "discussion" mean I GIVE THE COMMANDS. YOU BEND OVER AND OPEN YOUR ASSHOLE AND TAKE MY COMMANDS.

Not Mr Dickerson. He meant it. So I took him up on it, idiotically correcting his pronunciation of Nazi as Naxi. He took the criticism rationally, without flaring up. But I wasn't really arguing, and I didn't have anything MEANINGFUL to say at that point. I was just being an adolescent dickhead. Like most older men in 1965, Mr Dickerson had actually fought the Naxis, so he was entitled to call them whatever he wanted.

= = = = =

In the next room, Miss Marley "taught" "English". She ruthlessly and rigorously enforced all the false and malicious grammarhoid "rules". And not just in class. When she heard us using "bad grammar" in casual discussions before class, she stormed over and "corrected" us.

These "corrections" always ended with YOU MUST SPEAK EK RIT LY. She carefully enunciated the three distinct syllables of EKRITLY, providing an example of EKRIT SPEECH to enlighten the unwashed masses.

I regret that I didn't stand up to Miss Marley. At that time I knew FAR MORE about real grammar than she did. I had been reading serious linguistics books for many years, and I knew the real grammar of English. I could have assembled a rigorous response to each of the grammarrhoid "rules", using real authorities.

= = = = =

In the first instance I was imitating Miss Marley, "correcting" Mr Dickerson's insignificant pronunciation "error". I should have been resisting Miss Marley, not imitating her.

= = = = =

** Footnote: There isn't a proper word for this. We need a midpoint word between hindsight and foresight, meaning clearly true by the facts available at the time when the judgment was made. Maybe nowsight would do the job?

Labels: coot-proofing, TMI

  ¶ 11:11 PM

  Storm note
Just for the record, we had a major windstorm here 1/13 morning. This neighborhood wasn't the main target; only a couple full trees down, lots of branches busted. Houses and roofs untouched. Previous windstorms ruined many roofs.

Power out for 3 days, managed with propane as usual. Thinking about getting a natural gas hookup to avoid the hassle.... also, cooking with propane always reminds me of the absolute superiority of gas over electric cooking.

Labels: Heimatkunde, TMI

  ¶ 3:26 PM

  Quora jackpot
Quora is 98% toxic shit, but every now and then it pays off. The personal stories are usually worth reading, sometimes funny, and occasionally important.

This long piece was written by the son of a German officer who took part in the siege of Stalingrad. His main point is that the Krauts knew they were done in late '42. They couldn't sustain petroleum or ammunition or food. They kept trying to fight because they had no choice, but the soldiers and officers knew it was futile after that.

An important piece of history, never heard in our books or media.

Labels: Alternate universe

  ¶ 8:11 AM

  Emerson vs Blood Money
Emerson says that undeserved money should be paid out as fast as possible.

I received a mysterious card in the mail which apparently represents the $2000 blood money from the federal demons. I don't need or want this money, so it goes out BEFORE it goes in.

The previous blood money in May went to a couple of local charities. Since then I've seen that the Spokane government is an eager participant in Mad Bomber Inslee's holocaust, so I won't help anyone here. All local businesses have worked with the Mad Bomber. None have offered even token fake resistance.

You chose not to help us, we choose not to help you.

Moving money around is the only TINY MICROSCRAP of power that ordinary people still have, so we need to use it.

So I sent $2000 to the dog sanctuary in Tennessee. Mostly just paying for value. I get joy and comfort from watching their videos. Partly because Tennessee is a sane state, and likely to remain sane. Tenn Gov Lee has been holding firm and preventing cities from imposing their own muzzle mandates. I can see in the OFSDS clips that their employees are unmuzzled, so the reality is verified. Taxes and other secondary outputs from my donation will go to support a sane governor.

Later, after "activating" the mysterious card, turns out I only got $600 blood money instead of the $2000 implied by the letter. That's fine. Emerson recommended overpaying.

Labels: Emersonian justice, NOW I SEE

  ¶ 9:51 AM