off-grid new years day for 2022

Growing goldenberries from seed

This was going to be just one video, but I noticed a couple of updates ( so far). Goldenberries are getting popular in the health food space. There have some good qualities that promote health, as you might expect.

The plant can be poisonous if not properly handled. Only ripe berries should be eaten, and nothing but the berries I would think. Get advice about this one.







Updated here:







Updated again:

Electron locking quantum effect

Comment:

This is interesting. As I was watching it, the question arises as to what is this good for? How can this phenomenon be put to good use?

There may be some applications for this, such as nuclear fusion. But how? Nuclear fusion usually means very hot temperatures, does it not? This quantum effect only works near absolute zero, which is as cold as it gets. But certain types of fusion techniques do not require high temperatures. In fact, if high temperatures occur, the technique cannot work. This would be Polywell fusion.

Polywell fusion attempts to overcome the Coulomb Barrier by concentrating a lot of electrons in a cloud, which creates a deep "well" of negative charge. The deep well is said to facilitate fusion through kinetic energy. There is another form of fusion which brings together a heavier negative charged mass called a "muon", which brings the hydrogen nucleus close enough together to create fusion.

The idea I had is to bring together the electrons in a well of very cold temperatures. It would be a frozen polywell, you might say. One of the problems of Polywell fusion is the difficulty in controlling the electrons. What if very cold temperatures controls the electrons really well? According to the video below, quantum locking actually does this very thing. Maybe the electrons act like a Bose-Einstein condensate, and clump together. In the video below, they pair together. Pairs or clumps could make for the mass increase that the muons do and then some. Maybe this could work in a fusion device.

The video starts below:

Criticizing The Starship--- A Video

Comment:

Before I start, a PSA---Let's Go Brandon. Even Biden agrees. Now for our regularly unscheduled post.

Methinks this guy comes not to criticize Starship, but to bury it. But being the reluctant dialectician, I come to offer the middle ground. Or let's say some constructive criticism.

As I've written before, I think he needs another vehicle if he wants to colonize Mars to the extent he is aspiring to. Assuming the concept he is developing actually works, he will be able to get 200k lbs of payload to low Earth orbit on a frequent basis. It is incumbent upon Musk to make the most of this accomplishment.

Critic says that using the Starship like a plane won't work. I think he has a good point there. One thing to keep in mind is that the Starship can get anywhere on Earth in 90 minutes or less. That's a capability that could be exploited. However, it doesn't mean that it will be. Only that it can be.

As for the technical aspect of launching and making it reusable with short turnarounds, he is somewhat skeptical. I agree that we need to wait and see on that one. The one really interesting idea is to catch the booster as opposed to landing it on the ground. By catching it, the booster will be in a good position to be serviced immediately. This will cut the time between launches to a minimum. That's providing that it works, and providing that the government doesn't stop it from happening, which is a real possibility.

If he gets by the government hurdles, and if the thing works, his next big problem is making use of his machine.

One caveat here for me personally: I would not want to fly on that thing. It is was too radical. This thing will need beaucoup testing and development before anybody will be allowed to get on it. Just my opinion...

So finding a use for it will be paramount. NASA has awarded him a contract to return to the moon. That's his big opportunity right now. By the way, the guy in the video says that to land on the moon is a problem. I would agree... But there's ideas on how to do that which could work. Or maybe not...

Rather than to build a new spacecraft, why not use what's available now? Here's a proposition. Rather than have a bunch of launches to refuel the Starship, just use the Starship to deliver the equivalent of a SIVB booster to low Earth orbit. During the Apollo Era, the SIVB is what delivered the Lunar Module and Command Module to a lunar trajectory. It's mass is close to what the Starship can get to orbit.

What's available now that is powerful enough and light enough? It could be something that NASA is already building for the SLS. If it could be somehow mated to the Starship and fit inside its cargo bay, then they'd have what you need for a lunar injection on one launch. By the way, Terran Space Academy had some thoughts on a combo Starship booster and SLS type rocket. A rendezvous will be necessary to mate the pieces together, I would think.

Then you need a command module and lunar module. A Falcon heavy could do those honors, with the Dragon being outfitted as both a lunar module and command module. You'd add a kick stage to get from lunar orbit back to Earth. You'd need enough fuel to land on the moon, and to get back. In the Apollo Era, that command module and lunar module massed out about about 100k lbs. If the configuration above could be fitted in, and come under the mass that can be launched by Falcon Heavy, the we're in business. If so, then that's two launches.

NASA wants to launch something too. That'd be three. Maybe they can send the kick stage home and the return capsule. So with three launches from three different rockets, and you'd get the job done. Maybe.

Given that the thing is reusable, you could do it multiple times. For that, you'd need a mission for it. The mission would be to set up the lunar base.

I'd say build your base on the moon for the eventual trip and colonization of Mars. It would be a shame to bury the Starship under a mountain of criticism because too much is being expected of it. So the guy is correct in that expectations for this one ship is going to be lowered just a bit. A trip to Mars is going to take a bit more than the Starship.

Procrastination

This is a really bad habit. Today is a rededication to the goal of eliminating that bad habit, but I put it off until just now. Dern that thing!

Anyway, how do I incorporate that rededication into a blog post? How do I know that this is just another way of putting something else off? Well, I don't know. But I want to write about it anyway. There is just so much rattling around my head, what the heck do I want to write about? It really isn't about procrastination, but it is in a way.

Just now I read something on Instapundit. Maybe reading blogs is a way to waste time too. Something grabbed me though, and so I got the idea to do a post. But then I hesitated and shazzam! That's how it happens. There is an idea to do something, and then it is put off until later. That dreaded procrastination bug bites again.

So settle down, I'm a gonna write stuff here. The thing on Instapundit was about "insurrection". There is some jackass editor on the rag called Atlantic that says "Let's go Brandon" is about insurrection. But you know what? It wasn't an insurrection. Sure, I've written that before, and I'm writing it here again. It wasn't about insurrection. It is said to be about insurrection because it puts forth the "lie" that Biden is an illegitimate President. Hmmm.

Let's go back 4 years. There was something about Trump being an illegitimate President because of the alleged Russian collusion. Trouble is, they could never prove that. Besides, back then it was about "rule of law". Except that it wasn't about rule of law. It is only what they claimed as an excuse to go on a witch hunt to find something that didn't exist. So why wasn't that an "insurrection" and this claim about a stolen election in 2020 an insurrection?

It is after all, only a claim that it was an insurrection this past January 6th. They haven't proven any insurrection existed. It is just a claim. But what about falsifying records to obtain a FISA warrant? What about setting up an entire investigation on a dossier that was false? It seems that that effort is being proven out that it was false, and the case of falsifying records to obtain a FISA warrant was also proven. It wasn't rule of law to lie about Carter Page being a Russian spy in order to get a warrant on Trump. It was flouting the rule of law. Why is that not insurrection?

It has been a long running theme on this blog that not enough people respect the truth anymore. The claim of insurrection has not be proven and is not likely to ever be proven and these people know that well enough. Basically and quite bluntly, they are lying about that. And they are lying about a whole bunch of other things too.

I thought the whole thing about Let's go Brandon was a bit silly. But if it is going to be illegal to just say a few words, then here goes== Let's go Brandon mofos! Time to stop procrastinating. Let's go Brandon!

Kandi cars

Nope, can't eat them. They aren't made of candy. They're Chinese made electric cars, and they supposedly are affordable.

Depending upon the models and subsidies, they could be had near 10k. That seems pretty cheap. But is it worth it? The range is short. Or shall we say, shorter than the Tesla. Plus the performance isn't up to Tesla's standard.

But these cars are available now. The Tesla has yet to make a car under 25k to my knowledge.

These cars would not be useful to me in any capacity. Looks like that is true with newly manufactured ICE cars too. Looks like I got real poor. Can't swing a new car anymore.

The Chinese Kandi car would be practical if it's range was much longer and it could charge in a reasonable amount of time. I never heard of this car before my recent research. Maybe it's common knowledge. Since I don't watch TV and don't go around in those circles of folks who might be interested in such things, I can explain away the ignorance.

This price point is said to be the lowest. That's probably true. So this may be the last blog entry on these types of cars. At least for now.

Researching Tesla a bit

Been checking out a few videos on those who have purchased the vehicle, and who shared their experiences with the electric car.

There are a lot of things that I don't care much about, like all the computer screens and such. Yours truly has become very anti-electronic on things. Sure electronics have a bunch of good things about it, but it is being greatly overdone. Putting everything under the control of electronics in a car is not my idea of a good idea.

I used to drive a helluva lot during my delivery days. I'm retired now, so all of this is academic. So, to evaluate the vehicle in terms of wanting to buy it, I'd say a big honking NO.

It just cost too damned much to own and to operate. Frankly I don't see the big attraction unless these people think they are helping the environment by doing so. I'd like to see a study on how this really helps much. These batteries need to be charged, and the energy has to come from somewhere. It seems awhile back that somebody did say that this thing is the equivalent of a Ford pickup truck in terms of emissions that have to go into making it work. If you think you are doing the Earth any good, maybe you should think twice about that.

In an earlier post I said that I was skeptical on Tesla. I may be too negative, but my latest study indicates that they are really just slightly better than what they were. I'm not impressed enough to want to purchase one even if I could right now. If I were still working I would STILL not buy one. If I was richer than Croesus, then maybe...

In an economic sense, Tesla's best chance may be with their big trucks. That's based upon one of my views of a video which made a few claims about it, so take all that with a grain or two of salt. It MIGHT make sense on a really big truck because weight is not an issue since the thing is already pulling around some pretty heavy stuff.

Tesla is a 1 trillion dollar company? I just don't see it. Sorry, all you Tesla fan boys and girls.

Ford says that they cannot ignore Tesla anymore

Comment:

Yours truly has been skeptical of Tesla. After watching this video, and a few more others like it, I was almost sucked into become a believer.

Upon further review, there can be no doubt that Tesla is making some big strides. It also seems that Tesla's demise was greatly exagerrated. Nevertheless, there are the same problems that I noted before.

Tesla has long promised a car for the average Joe. But these cars still seem pricey to this average Joe. Very pricey. The car is very heavy for its size. Still, there have been strides. The batteries are getting better, for example.

The main improvement is their manufacturing efficiency. But I note that this still has not filtered down to price reductions that will meet their goal of making the car affordable for all. If the ICE makers don't watch out, they will be overcome on the efficiency gains alone. Never mind the fact that ICE cars are still the low cost option, and therefore they should always have a market for their vehicles, PROVIDED that they don't get too complacent. That continues to be my opinion, but Tesla is gaining. The video follows:

Detail geek

Comment:

Not much else you can say here but that it is a great job. Very thorough and professional.

Ra has spoken

This blog has been going on forever it seems. It sometimes gets to the point where it just seems like a waste of time. But of course. Everything is always a waste of time, if you think about it.

Then it isn't a waste of time. I try so hard to try to write something intelligent here, but I think I've written about all I can write on that subject. At least for now. Nothing intelligent to write, so I'll either have to quit, or start writing about other stuff not so "intelligent".

I know what people are thinking--- do you really think all of this was "intelligent"? Meh, maybe not. It gave me the illusion for awhile anyway. As for the "Ra" reference in the title, I've just watched a free movie on YouTube. It was "Star Gate" with Kurt Russell. If you are familiar with the movie, then maybe that makes sense. Otherwise, look it up. Do I have to do everything?

I wanted to watch a Christmasy type movie like "It's a Wonderful Life", with Jimmy Stewart. But that costs some money, and I'm too tight-fisted these days. A freebie is more my style now.

Ra was supposed to be pretty smart. But the script didn't do him justice. Ah, but the movie was okay, and the good guys won. Yay.

That's enough intelligence for one sitting.

Nothing new under the sun

Another way of saying it is to say that history repeats itself. History is repeating itself today, too.

There seems to be instability everywhere. But there's always been instability everywhere. There is nothing new in that. But it seems different this time. It probably is different this time in this place. But it isn't new for this to happen in the world, for it has already happened in the past. This is just the latest iteration of the same old thing.

I've been spending time on the youtube lately. Going through the list of emperors of ancient Rome. What happened there then is happening here now. But I've written that before. I suppose I will write it again after this. Not that it will make any difference. People forget the past only to repeat it. There's nothing new under the sun.

Should I throw my hands up in despair? Nope. Nobody should do that. Maybe the insanity can be stopped this time. But eventually it won't be stopped. Maybe this is the time it won't be stopped.

There will be those who claim that people like me are crazy. And I will say that they are the ones who are crazy. Ten to one, the same damned thing has all happened before somewhere in some place. Maybe people will learn, but I wouldn't bet the farm on it. There really is nothing new under the sun. The thing that would really be new is if people really DID learn it this time and really did end the insanity. One could always hope.

Hope doesn't cost anything, but it requires everything to keep it alive. That's because there is always someone or something out there trying to snuff out your little fire.

Elon Musk biography

Comment:

No doubt about it. He is a big achiever. But this isn't hero worship. No golden calf here. But that is my opinion only. The video doesn't portray him as such, so I don't want to misrepresent it.

He has a long list of interests and business ventures. It's like a home run hitter that keeps hitting them out of the park. Has anything he has done ever failed? SpaceX almost did. He did get booted out of the venture he helped start which became PayPal. He has known some adversity. But to my knowledge, nothing has been a spectacular failure-- yet.

It would be a shame if he started failing now. It is almost like a storybook fantasy. The two biggest things he has going now is SpaceX and Tesla. Either one could fail for one reason or another. But there is a pathway to success for either one. Both of them have already achieved much even if they do ultimately fail.

Musk is getting older. We all do. He is over 50 now. A pre-ObamaCare doctor once told me that age 50 is when "the warranty goes out". That means stuff can start to happen. He may luck out or have the means and the desire to stay healthy for as long as possible. He will need some luck. If he has it, maybe his biggest moves are yet to come. The video follows directly below:

off-grid, 12-19-21

It has been mild around here so far. Last year was fairly mild too, until we got that really hard freeze in mid-February.

So there's still plenty of greenery around here. There's a chance to do some foraging skill practice. One thing I need to do is to get a lot better at this. One pleasant thing I learned is that a lot of wild plant and herbs are good for improving health. One not so pleasant thing is that modern fruits and vegetables have lost some of their nutritional value due to modern practices.

Not to be one of those Luddite types, but it is our food that they're messing with. Hopefully there won't be a tendency to produce cotton-candy like fruits and vegetables because they are easier and more profitable to market.

If I keep up with this I might even become a tree-hugger. /not

Anyway, I think I've positively identified a couple species of edible plants growing right around here. There may be more, but I've not learned enough to know what they are yet, if they exist.

Progress is slow, but it is progress. That is all for now.

Jan 6th was no insurrection

If you check around the so-called moderate to lefty sites, you can still see them calling the January 6th riot as an insurrection. But if it were an insurrection, it would be against the genuine sovereign power. However, this is not the case. The sovereign power of the United States of America is in its Constitution. Those who participated in the riot may have guilty of disorderly conduct, but there weren't trying to overthrow the Constitution.

The sovereign power also does not exist within any person or groups of persons. This is because all officers under the laws of the United States swear an allegiance to the Constitution. Look it up if you aren't clear on this. An allegiance to any group or person that is above the Constitution is itself an insurrectionary act. If those who claim that there was an insurrection, upon what basis is that made? An act against the Constitution or an act against a person or group of persons?

A person could be acting illegally, but not every illegal act is an insurrection. It is an absurdity to claim such. Need that argument go any further? To show how ridiculous that argument is, just imagine that the next time you get a speeding ticket. If everybody who got a speeding ticket was guilty of insurrection, the Republic would be untenable. The acts of January 6th are closer to a speeding ticket than a heinous crime. Anybody should be able to see that.

Even murder is not an insurrection. A riot isn't either-- even if it results in deaths. If that were so, there would have been more insurrections in our history than what is actually acknowledged as such. Certainly the riots of the summer of 2020 resulted in some deaths somewhere. Even if not, the property damage was far worse.

The riots on Jan 6th can arguably said to have been free of deaths. The only death was of a woman who was shot while attempting to go through a door inside the Capitol Building. The video showed that this was not a justifiable homicide. The worst behavior that happened that day appears to have done under the color of law.

Even if the riot resulted in many other deaths, including some members of Congress, it would not have been an insurrection. These crimes would have been against persons, not necessarily the Constitution itself. To make an assertion of otherwise would be equating members of Congress with the Constitution itself. Clearly this is at odds with the law in the document itself. In fact, it is defined in the Constitution as making war on the same. This wasn't a war, for heaven's sake. At worse, it was a riot. In some cases, it was merely disorderly behavior. Even that much can be challenged in open court.

If the people in charge of the government really had the facts on their side, and the law, why do they need to keep these people under confinement in such a manner that is not consistent witht the rights enumerated in the Constitution? They seem to be extracting forced confessions. One could argue that they may not even be able to win cases of minor offenses. If the people in charge were on the side of angels, why are they acting like this? I think the question answers itself.

Tucker Carlson is on right track here

comment:

He is on the right track. Why use the commie's language? But he goes off course to describe his opposition as being on the "right". This plays right into the hands of the commies, as I've mentioned before.

The dialectic or paradigm if you will, of this would not be the usual left-middle-right, but the freedom-civilization-tyranny paradigm of Ronald Reagan. It is important to stop using their language as well as their models. The left v right is a commie paradigm, so don't use it if you want it to prevail against communism. Make them argue on FREEDOM's grounds, not on their grounds. Their grounds will snuff freedom out. Hence, no lockdowns, masks, nor mandated jabs.

The video follows:

nuclear pulse thermal rocket concept

Comment:

The concept isn't merely thermal, which was tested in the sixties and seventies with the NERVA concept. No, this is a PULSED thermal rocket engine concept. The difference is that the energy level is turned up and down rapidly to give flash heating. In such a scenario, the propellant can get hotter and thus provide more thrust. The ISP is also higher, making it a candidate for advance rocket engines.

A pulsed rocket thermal engine can make trips to Jupiter and Saturn feasible. On the other hand, maybe you don't really want to go there because of the high radiation. Their moons may be quite interesting, though.

It could make it possible to go to Mars in just 39 days. A faster transit time would be most helpful. For instance, if you wanted to establish a Mars colony of 1 million, you could possibly get the people there, unload, and get back before the 2 year window closed. The vehicle wouldn't be stuck on Mars for two years.

Much could be accomplished with such a concept. But it wouldn't likely ever get approved for a launch from Earth. It could be done on the Moon, perhaps. The video follows:

Jan 6th committee

Some of what was on Bongino's show and other places shows the kind of thing that should be front row and center on the news. Maybe it is, but you'd think otherwise on some of the pages I usually visit. Perhaps it is all being dismissed as politics.

It would be pretty easy to dismiss all of it as just politics as usual, but there no "usual" about all this. I've never seen anything like it, and I'm in my late sixties. There is something quite unusual going on in this country right now, and it should alarm a lot of folks, but it doesn't seem to.

No, if you follow the news, they are trying to alarm others about what others are doing, but not what they are doing themselves. Once again, it appears that they are targeting Trump even though he is out of office, and the thing has been already litigated to death.

Bongino says the Congress doesn't have the authority to do this. I would agree. It doesn't have anything to do with the power to impeach. Clearly, that boat has sailed. But there is a clause in the impeachment powers that forbid the one found guilty to be prohibited from holding an office of trust in the US government. That might be what they're after. To stop Trump from running again and assuming the office again.

It does appear that they're stretching even that beyond the snapping point. The Congress has the power to impeach, but not to hold trials and find people guilty of crimes. Only impeachable acts, and in the disqualification from holding office again. They tried that already. Perhaps the hope is to pass it off to the DOJ and get their own kangaroo courts to find Trump guilty of SOMETHING.

The Supreme Court might stop it all, but you never know about this court now. In fact, it is quite a disappointment. If the Court had acted properly prior to January 6th, none of this would have happened anyway. That's because the States cannot change the election laws that are reserved for the various legislatures. The excuse was COVID, but it should be obvious that it was done for political reasons. The Court should have disallowed those states that violated the election laws that state legislatures already decided upon before Covid. Changing election laws is the powers of the legislatures alone. Anybody should have been able to see that the executive authorities of those states exceeded their authority.

All of this behind a backdrop of bad polling of late. Could it be that the Democrats (and their allies in the GOP) are in big trouble, and this is a desperation move? Maybe it works in the sense that the rule of law is over, and they can finally rule without any accountability at all. If it doesn't, these people need to be broomed and have the law turned on THEM for a change. Justice demands it, if justice still exists in this country.

Starship 2.0--- It is much bigger

comment:

This thing is so cavernous inside that you could spin it up with the axis down the center line of the ship, and you would achieve about 4% of Earth gravity at 2 rpm. Put two of these end-to-end, and spin it up at 2 rpm may give an approximation of Mars gravity at each end.

There may have been a write-up about this previously. Also, there may be an economy of scale with larger vehicles. By doubling its diameter from Starship 1, you get 8 times the volume. This may also lead to better mass ratios to orbit.

It would likely require a more powerful engine. The mass would be 8 times as much as well. It seems that someone said you'd need Saturn V engine size, and about 60 of them. Whoa! Just imagine that thing taking off. It would tear the sky apart with the noise.

A thousand people per trip would require a thousand launches to get your million people on Mars. A hundred ship fleet of these over the course of twenty years to get the job done. That's 10 trips per ship times a hundred ships times a thousand people per ship.

This probably stretches a few limits as to feasibility. The video follows:

Cashless society and restrictions upon trade that can be arbitrarily imposed

 

Comment:

He describes his problem with Paypal and the effect upon his business. He says that they claimed he was doing what he wasn't doing. It took him months to resolve the problem, and the treatment he received was like he had no rights they had any obligation to respect. If that sounds sorta "Dred Scott"-like, it is for a reason, comrades.

He also said that it wasn't about HIM personally, and while he didn't think it was anything nefarious, that it was scary all the same. You cannot do business anymore as a brick and mortar. These gatekeepers have monopolized the payment for goods and services, and if you violate their arbitrary "terms of service" rules, you could be prevented from doing business.

In my opinion, which is a bit different, I most definitely DO think that it is nefarious. In addition, I think that is the ONLY way to deal with these people. Giving them the benefit of the doubt is not the way to go. If they do ANYTHING like this, as they have been doing more and more across a wide spectrum of activities, it should be a GIGANTIC red flag. In my opinion, it is all about money alright, as he says; but also about power. By power, it is political, and politics is always going to be a big troublemaker with a capital "T".

He is right that nobody is talking about this. That is, in the political sphere. It should be one of those 80% issues that everybody would agree with, and a sure way to victory, but for some strange reason, the GOP isn't much interested in it. Therefore, for the GOP to get control again solves NOTHING. That is, it solves NOTHING, if you get the same kind of people running things that you already have now. There is NO DIFFERENCE in the parties right now. They are all-in on the idea that they can take a giant crap on everybody and make you call it perfume. They will get away with that too, because too many people out there have got their heads jammed straight up their backsides. Know what I mean Vern?

Comradeskies, all you've got to lose is your chains.

Guitar lesson Del Shannon's Runaway

Comment:

I remember this song, but the song is said to have been released in 1961. My recollection was a bit later than that. Maybe it was still getting air play in 1964 some three years later.

It is on the Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Hits of All Time. Number 472 it says on the Wikipedia. ( I suspect a bit of bias there. Just kidding.)

Not to make any disparaging comments here, but the song seems simple enough. But if it was so simple, how come I never learned it? Well, it may be harder to do this than it looks, but it doesn't look that hard. But I won't break out the gitfiddle and try it myself. I still got that old gitfiddle. Couldn't bring myself to get rid of it.

Here's the video for anybody interested...

Off-grid, 12-9-21

It may seem sometimes that this blog is way out there. But even being this far "out there" may not be far enough. That's because even I can be fooled sometimes. Yep, even though a person may be wary of what they're seeing and hearing, it still is possible for them to slip a weenie in on ya.

So, let's recap a bit as to WHY I set up the off-grid project in the first place. Back in 2014 or a bit sooner, I had read about the self-driving cars that were being developed. Since I was in the delivery business, I figured my job was about to become obsolete. That hasn't happened, even now. But the attempts to make self-driving cars is still there. These people aren't going to stop doing things like that. I think it is a type of economic warfare.

I got into a debate about this recently. Actually not a "debate" in a formal sense, but an argument really. That argument was about the mechanization of everything. I was attempting to put forth the notion that this isn't inevitable, that those who are pushing it can be defeated. The way is to become much more self-reliant. As with arguments in general, they don't tend to change minds. Mine wasn't changed and I didn't change anybody's mind on the self-reliance thing either. It would seem that there could be millions of people out there who will let themselves to consigned to an ever increasing dependency upon big government. It may not change anybody's mind to argue for a minimized state because they have convinced themselves of its necessity.

Now for the reason for this post. The mechanization of everything is just one aspect of it. Another aspect that I've overlooked is the medical aspect of it. Yes, it is about this COVID madness. The COVID madness is in lockstep with the generalized war against the people. They are waging it on multiple fronts. One is economic, and another is the medical. Since it is medical, it means that people are dying. Yep, the warzone is in the medical profession.

The medical will be used to affect the economic. Therefore, you won't be able to buy and sell without your med passport. All the more reason to stop depending upon them to provide the goods. The goods are just another way of controlling everybody and reducing us all to slavery. Keep in mind that slaves cannot defend themselves. Kyle Rittenhouse anyone? This push is all-encompassing, and the medical angle is but one angle of it. Or one front of the multi-front war on the people.

So I have to bone up on the medical stuff. It is a part of survivalism. If they are going to deny medical treatment because no jabs, then part of the off-grid aspect is to figure out ways to take care of your health when the health system has become degraded with corruption and government control. If it were up to me, I'd say develop a whole new infrastructure that is devoted to self-reliance, and amongst those skill sets would be the medical one. The current medical infrastructure isn't in the business of serving you, but it is in the business of serving itself at your expense--if that's necessary.

Theoretically the political system is self-correcting. But the system is starting to act totalitarian, because that option is being increasingly denied. If you think the GOP is the answer, the way it stands now, it isn't. There is a chance to correct that, but the people are disorganized and this doesn't appear to be gaining enough traction in my opinion. Folks may be getting more involved, but it may be too little and too late. Just because a politician has an "R" next to his name doesn't mean jack squat. The "R's" are not really any better right now. There may be a slight opportunity to change that now, but that window is closing fast.

Don't get too comforted that the GOP is doing better in polls. I find polls to be unreliable. Citing the latest poll shouldn't be a source of hope. In fact, it could well be another form of disinformation meant to mislead people into a false sense of hope. The way the GOP is now, they are at best only marginally better than the commies in the so-called Democrat party.

It is not meant to counsel fear and despair. Rather it is meant to inform anybody who wishes to know what is being hidden from them today. The news networks aren't news. Alternative news may be slightly better, but frankly, way too many who are supposedly on the side of freedom are themselves part of the problem. Part of this post is devoted to a sort of mea culpa about being fooled sometimes that this all pervasive propaganda net being thrown over us all.

So what does all this mean? It means that going off-grid may be the only way to fight back. They own the system and they are using all the power at their disposal to squash any real opposition to their plans. Their plans is what should concern anybody who cares about their freedom. Our freedom is under massive assault. Make no mistake. This is a war. The best way to win it is to survive it.

Off-grid, 12-8-21

comment:

Seems like there has been some important developments since I last visited this topic. In this video, there is a ton of small batteries that goes into making a power supply which will fit into a craftsman tool box.

The video is a little over 30 minutes long. There is a ton of detail in it. In fact, it is so detailed that it may be tempting to try this myself. However, it is not exactly what I had in mind.

There are some good ideas out there. This does appear to be an interesting option, if I wanted to go that way. Probably not, though.

The video beings directly below:

Graphene Supercapacitor type products coming soon

Comment:

Capacitors are quite intriguing as they are very long lasting. Unlike batteries, they can be charged and discharged more times than you'd probably ever use it. The down side is that they don't hold as much energy. They work best at delivering quite a punch in a short amount of time.

But with this graphene development, there will be an ability to store even more energy than before. In such cases, it can become a super battery. This video discusses the future of new products with this exciting new technology which could make it to markets soon.

If it is possible to make one that would allow the replacement of conventional batteries with this superbattery, it would be nothing short of revolutionary. A supercapacitor doesn't take long to recharge. Maybe it could be recharged like a gas powered car can be refueled. Imagine that. The EcoFlow product he links to isn't that fast charging, though.

As someone once said, "faster please"...





Here's a review of one of the products mentioned in the above video:

Reconquista time

New party in France

Twitter purges "right-wing" accounts

It has been a long term rant here about the so-called "right v left" divide. So I really am not too disturbed about banning of so-called "right-wing" accounts on Twitter per se. That's because I don't subscribe to that paradigm based upon that false dialectic.

But Twitter is supposed to be a neutral platform. Therefore it cannot ban anybody without being decidedly non-neutral. The law says it has to be neutral. Twitter is in violation of that law.

But back to the dialectics--- Ronald Reagan defined the correct paradigm with the following dialectic: ( A dialectic is a model based upon the following-- a thesis, its opposite known as an anti-thesis, and a composite with elements of both, which is called the synthesis) Reagan's dialectic is like this--- maximal freedom v totalitarianism, and the synthesis is an ordered civilization. It is therefore not based upon this idea that freedom is somehow "right wing" and that totalitarianism is necessarily "left wing". No, totalitarianism could be "right or left". For all intents and purposes, it matters not that it is right or left if it is totalitarian. They are not opposites because the end result is the same damned thing-totalitarianism.

This all may seem unnecessarily academic. Or splitting hairs. But keep in mind that the left ( which I use that part of their dialectic to describe them because it is THEIR terminology -- not mine), aka communists, like to call ANYBODY who disagrees with them as "right wing" and therefore FASCIST, even if that person objects to fascism just as much as against COMMUNISM, because they are both totalitarian systems that all freedom-lovers should abhor. In other words, it is a slanderous accusation, and it is propaganda meant to further their agenda of conquest and subjugation to the totalitarian state. It happens every time.

Therefore Twitter is acting like communists did. It matters not that they are purportedly a "capitalist" organization. This is just a nominal appearance of freedom with the suppression of all counter viewpoints as the hallmark of a totalitarian mindset. This is what communism does in all its iterations everywhere a country has fallen to its depredations.

If we are going to take back our country and our culture ( Reconquista), then we'd better know who the enemy is and how to fight him. Hopefully this distinction--- with a real difference, as opposed to the distinctions without a difference--- that the liars and frauds use to muddy the water, will aid in this goal of reconquest of our heritage of freedom.

NPR, COVID and Politics

 

This comment won't be linking to the article. It won't get one, but there will be something written here in response to it.

Trump has been out for nearly a year, but somehow NPR is blaming Trump for the so-called "vaccine-hesitancy"? The article claims politics is now driving the polarization. On that account, I would agree. This so-called "pandemic" has been politicized since the beginning. On that account, I decided to hold everything being put forth from Democrats negetively with extreme prejudice.

That should also go for articles like this. How does it have anything to do with Trump? He's been gone. Actually it was Trump who rushed the so-called "vaccine" into production. If it were about politics, then it should be Trump voters who would be all over it singing its praises. In my opinion, Trump was too hasty in bringing it online, but it was at least driven by the politics of the time. They had a so-called "Trump Death Clock" on Times Square. It was that kind of thing that made me realize that the whole thing was political from the start, and still is.

The article attempts to make a connection between death rates, politics, and the "vaccine hesitancy". Those who don't get it are doing it because of politics, it is claimed. It is also claimed that those who aren't getting the jab are at the greatest risk for death. I don't buy it because of Florida and my home state of Texas. Florida never had a mask mandate. Texas did, but there is no jab passports as of this time. Hopefully, there never will be. I can relate that as a non-jabbed person, that I am not dead. If by any chance I get the 'rona, I will guarantee you that I will not have an deathbed conversion. People are dying, but they always have, and always will. You'd think nobody ever died of anything until the dreaded 'rona came along. Hardly no masks in Texas either. Florida seems to be doing well. You'd think from the article that people were dropping like flies.

For the upteenth time, the "vaccine" isn't a vaccine. The "vaccine" doesn't work, and may do harm. No other legitimate vaccine ever was developed for a corona virus. Only this one purportedly does, and it was done in record time. For that reason, I am very skeptical. That would be true if Trump were still president. For me, politics doesn't have a damned thing to do with it. If 90 percent of Dems have gotten it, and only about 60 percent of the Republicans, I'd say it was because of politics. I think it is pretty dumb to make health decisions because of politics. If you really believe the so-called "vaccine" will save your buns, then go for it. I have my doubts, thank you very much. I don't appreciate being told that I am too dumb to understand what is good for me. But it looks like Democrats need someone to tell them what is good for them cuz evidently they don't think for themselves.

The article is just playing politics with COVID as the commies have been doing all along. I'm not falling for it.

Eurhythmics--Sweet Dreams

Comment:

An oldie and maybe a goodie. Not everyone would agree with that. It seems a bit gritty. It is a statement about human nature. "Everybody is looking for something". But all those "something's" mentioned in the lyrics aren't such good things to look for--such as the use and abuse of others for personal gain.

Why isn't it a goodie if it is the truth? That is the measuring stick. If it conforms to truth then it cannot be bad. To get someone to believe something that is false is evil. If Satan is the father of all lies, then how can the truth be bad? Lies are for those who worship the evil one.

A statement like that is likely to draw some fire from somebody somewhere. For a post- modernist, there is no truth. All things are subjective and nothing is objectively true or false; one perceptions, feelings, and beliefs transcend all others. But if you're doing things like that, and can get away with it, why care?

And there you have it. Like Mark Twain said, it is mind over matter- if you don't mind, it doesn't matter. Or as the sixties generation said--- if it feels good, do it. But there is always the opposing line-- like where's the standards? Where's the ethics? Where's the morality? It may feel good, but does that make it good? And so it goes... The video follows directly below:

Dick Morris says that 'woke' left defends looting as powerful tactic to achieve change

 

Dick Morris says that 'woke' left defends looting as powerful tactic to achieve change.

Comment:

Then the woke left are communists. What is the change they are seeking? Communism. Unless you want communism, then this has to be stopped.

By the way, communism isn't inevitable. If you believe that, then you believe their propaganda. That's what communists have always said---that communism is inevitable. The only way it is inevitable is if nobody opposes them. As anyone can see, to oppose them would require some personal risk. These people are crazy.

As for events like January 6th, patriots don't want to overthrow the government. It doesn't make sense to engage in sedition or insurrection unless the opposition is to the ones who are actually overthrowing the government.

You cannot have a sedition to maintain the current state of government! Geez, that should need no explanation. Therefore, whatever happened on January 6th could only have come from the type of people who Dick Morris is referring to. Law and order types don't break the law. The ones breaking the law are the ones who keep disregarding the law and attempting to establishing themselves as the law---as opposed to the Constitution and the laws arising from it.

It happens quite often that these people intend to "get around" the Constitution. After all, isn't that what Dick Morris is referring to? You have to support the laws, as the laws support free enterprise. That is, unless the Constitution is abolished. It is implied in the Constitution. Abolishing private property invalidates the Constitution. Therefore, what the so-called "woke" want is a revolution. Their revolution would be a communist one.

Call things by their right names. There is so many false things nowadays. This is just another one. Use of the word "woke" is just another way to say "communist". It is the same thing with a new name.

Jan 6th False Flag News

Jan. 6 Defendant Fingers Four Possible Undercover Agents

Comment:

The defendants are gathering evidence for a defense. As in the Flynn case, the gubbermint is withholding exculpatory information. Why would they ever do that???

This is government malfeasance and fraud. There needs to be a wholesale sweep of the bad elements. This might make DC a ghost town. But that would be an improvement of crap like this.

Why would anybody suspect a false flag on Jan. 6th? You'd have to be imbibing a lot of commie pinko propaganda not to see it.

In other False Flag "news"--- commie Yahoo doesn't get it, but maybe they will eventually.

The Jan 6th committee is fake like everything else in DC. The commies dominated committee went after Bannon. Note how Yahoo uses "right-wing". I see the use of such language as a dead-giveaway that the writer is pinko. That's pinko word usage, and nobody in the know would use it. Either the author is a numbskull or he is a pinko operative. I see no other alternative. Bannon is falsely accused. The committee is fake and is trying hard to come up with a reason for its existence. They need scalps and Bannon seems handy for them. Here's the link:

Steve Bannon’s Jan. 6 Legal Strategy: ‘Blowing Up the Whole System’

Usurpers gotta usurp

Florida has lowest COVID rate, Michigan has worst

Comment:

Yep, and Trump had the "better off than 4 years ago" poll and see what good it did him.

Usupation is the word. Performance doesn't matter. Truth doesn't matter. Logic, reason, and evidence doesn't matter. Usurpation is the word.

Why use usurpation with regard to this link? It is because the ruling regime doesn't want good governance. If we get that, they lose power. They can only gain power by inflicting distress. This is the way the communists did it throughout the Cold War. They are now doing it here, in the once Good 'ol USA.

Not to inflict distress upon those of you who deny the obvious fact that the ruling regime could care less about you, what you think, or even if you live or die- but the truth will set you free. That is the good news. Here's a bit of truth for those of you who still care about that. Too bad that not everybody does.

Everything that comes from the regime is a fraud. Fraud is a Federal Offense. The so-called election last year was fraudulent. The attempts to set this right are half-hearted, and also fraudulent. Usurpation is everywhere all the time. If it was not the case, then why was Trump punished for doing a good enough job so that the majority were "better off" than four years ago? It doesn't make sense unless the election was a fraud. It was made fraudulent by the COVID fraud. Fraud enables this usurpation. Without fraud, there would be no COVID, no lockdowns, no phony vaccines, and no phony "election".

The Media is a fraud, and is helping the usurpation. People's rights are being trampled upon by the very people who have sworn an oath to protect these rights. These rights were built into the law and guaranteed, but those who took the oath to protect those rights, are the ones usurping them.

There was no sedition on January 6th. Even if they did violence, they did so in reaction to this usurpation, and were defending the Constitution, not attacking it. Those who wouldn't investigate and uncover the fraud of the 2020 election were the seditionists who are usurping the document they swore to protect. The "riot" was probably instigated by malice aforethought by those who wish to paint patriots as traitors. This accusation of the usurpers is a cover-up for their own usurpation.

An honest investigation will never be allowed by the usurpers because that would uncover their fraud and end their usurpation. The usurpation ends when the usurpers are brought to justice for their crimes. This includes many on BOTH sides of the so-called divide. Just remember one thing---they lie continually. They can NEVER admit that. They can NEVER allow the truth to surface. That would be deadly to them.

General Longstreet and Gettysburg

 

Let's clear one thing up completely before I start. If it isn't completely clear already. I am no expert on the Civil War. No expert on war. Frankly, I don't know if I am expert at anything except running off my piehole. Yep. I like to expound upon things I know very little about. Having said that, here I go again...

Going by the movie by the name "Gettysburg", which is a Ted Turner production, General Longstreet comes out smelling like a rose. Not everybody at the time thought so. Come to think of it, I am not so sure he deserves at least SOME criticism. But the critical inference is there in the movie. You have to look for it, though.

Longstreet ( in the movie) sought to persuade Lee not to make the attack, and to choose better ground for a battle. In the end, he agreed to everything that Lee told him to do, but later seemed to be complaining about it. In the movie, he can be seen saying "we can take that hill"--meaning the hill on which Pickett's unit was destroyed. What else could he have done?

Again, according to the movie, Longstreet attempted to cede his authority to another general to lead the attack. Seeing that General Lee did not agree, he changed his mind, and went along with the plan. This is where Longstreet should have shut up about it. Or he could have resigned, and refused to lead an attack in which he knew could not succeed.

So why didn't he? That one is above my paygrade. I don't know why. But maybe he was the type of guy who would surrender his own judgement to somebody who he could not refuse. He joined the Republicans after the war. I think, and it is just my opinion; that Longstreet should have kept his mouth shut after that battle. That's if all this is factually correct, which it might not be.

Anyway, I talked out my ass again, so there's it all is. For what it is worth.

Colin Kaepernick

Earlier today there was this communication from the dude who claims that the Rittenhouse verdict was part of "white supremacy". He also said that they system needs to be overthrown. Why is such a statement not an incitement to violence and or sedition?

The truth is that the jury system works for everyone's benefit. It isn't racist because a white man went free while some folks thought he should have been punished. The jury system may not be perfect, because OJ Simpson went free after the murder trial in 1995.

Actually, a jury system is vital to restrain an oppressive government. Kaepernick ought to be more careful about what he wants. If a system is overthrown, how does he know that something worse may take its place?

From a conservative's viewpoint, the government is becoming quite oppressive. With all the lockdowns, masks, and mandatory jabs to mention only a few of these; it would seem that a jury system is one of the few things that we have left. To lose that could mean total government control over EVERYTHING. That might please the radicals in the government today, but it doesn't do anything good for the rest of us.

It might appeal to Kaepernick types, but when the government goes against YOU, and it WILL eventually, you might start to see why it isn't such a good idea to get rid of the jury system. As a matter of fact, a good many things that are being ignored today should be put BACK their high station in a free society. It seems like we have lost our freedom of speech. We have lost our right to do what we will with our own bodies, as well as our own land. Not to mention the UNLAWFUL holding of the January 6th protestors without a speedy trial, nor bail. There is also an unprecedented attempt to surveil people without probable cause-- "no unreasonable searches and seizures".

Our government is out of control. People like Kaepernick aren't helping to correct that.

Gettysburg, prelude to Pickett's Charge

Comment:

Further study on the subject reveals that the Confederates at the time didn't think they could hold Little Round Top for long. The attacks on the flanks on the previous day was a failure. General Lee believed that the Union Army was going to be watching for an attack on the flanks again. But Union Gen. Meade predicted the attack on the center.

Lee also thought his artillery could break up the enemy artillery before they had to make the 1 mile plus charge across the open field. That didn't happen. There wasn't enough ammunition. Their lines were too long to get additional help to support the attack.

There is also some discussion that Gen. Longstreet tried to call off the attack. But that did not happen either. Given the fog of war, even if he did, it was too late.

It all may have been inevitable. Lee was outnumbered and outgunned. His only advantage was the will to win, but after the battle on the previous day, it wasn't altogether certain that the South had the greater will to win than the North. If Meade was prepared for the attack, then Lee made a mistake in attacking. At any rate, he did attack and the attack failed.

Lee made a big gamble on winning it all on one battle. Recent history has shown that the long term approach may have had the better chance.

Mama's don't let your babies grow up to be commies

OregonMuse at the Ace of Spade HQ blog noted that the camera people wouldn't show the crowd at the Turkey Day Game in Dallas. Evidently they are afraid to show a lot of people in the crowd having a good time while they are home all locked down and wearing masks and being miserable, as leftists do best.

Here's the link: Random Observations Post @ AOSHQ

You hafta ax, what are they so afraid of? Da twuth.

Just hadda gloat, now didn' I?

Gettysburg

If you watch enough videos, you can get an education. Well, maybe something of one. Here are a few things I didn't know about American history that I'd like to discuss briefly.

The Battle of Gettysburg is considered to be pretty important in the outcome of the Civil War. Indeed, Lee's army was in big trouble just after the disastrous outcome of Picket's Charge. Lee threw a lot of what he had left into that battle, and not much came back to him. There was a fear of a Union counterattack, but none came. If it did, Lee would have had the decisive battle he sought. As it was, the war continued for two more years.

The thoughts I had were these 1) Could Lee have won at Gettysburg at all? , and 2) Was Lee's attack on that fateful day a mistake? As for the second question, the answer seems obvious. But upon further reflection, it would appear that Lee's belief that the center of the Union's lines was the weak point is not an unreasonable guess. He very nearly succeeded in the flanking move the previous day. You might expect that the Union would expect another attack just like it. Lee's decision makes sense if you think of it that way.

As for the first question, it seems that at the very least, the attack on Little Round Top was definitely a winnable fight. Actually, Lee's orders were to attack up the road, which was to the west of the two round top mountains. There were already troops on the bigger Round Top, which if exploited, would have given the Confederates a commanding presence on the high ground. They could have used their cannon to fire down upon the Union Army down below. They could have broken up the "fish hook" appearing Union Line amongst the high ground near Gettysburg.

General Hood wanted to take the bigger Round Top, but Longstreet wouldn't allow it saying that it wasn't what Gen. Lee ordered. So Hood obeyed, but was injured shortly after beginning his move up the road. There was confusion amongst the Confederate ranks as some went one way towards the road, and the others went the other way towards the Little Round Top. If ALL of them went up the Little Round Top, the outcome just might have been different.

It can be chalked up to the fortunes of war. The commander was injured in the midst of the attack and the fog of war took over. Confusion led to a division of forces that wouldn't have happened otherwise. We don't know if Lee's orders would have worked because his orders weren't followed to the letter due to Hood's injury. The North caught a break from the confusion amongst the Confederates. They held the line only after a desperate bayonet charge by the Union Col. Chamberlain.

After losing that opportunity, Lee ordered Picket's charge. The rest was as they say, is history. If either of those Round Tops had been taken, the Union Army would have been flanked on that day. The battle could have been won. They could have been driven off what they had believed was the high ground and would have had to fight uphill from there. The South would have had the advantage from that point.

Conservatism Ink

 

Ah, today's blogging entry. I've thought about this off and on today, and now I am finally going to write something. Drum roll please....

This one is going to be about those who claim to be conservative and aren't really. To get an example of why this isn't just my opinion, go to the Ace of Spades--HQ, and read this: David Brooks, remember him?

Comment:

It didn't take long for me to find an objection. Although I agree for the most part with what the author had to say, he used the word "right" in reference to conservativism. That's a big "no-no" to me. If I have said it once, I have said it on this blog a dozen times or more, you never, never, never should ever do that. It falls right into their hands when you do. Maybe I'm not a part of Conservatism then, because I do not ever, ever, ever want to be lumped in together with that word called "right". Never. NEVER.

Once again: the left, right, center dialectic is an invention of the communists that is meant to baffle everyone. That's the entire reason for its existence. Period. Oh, and by the way, Brooks is denying that there's anything such thing as the "left". Brooks needs to get around more. I wonder if he has noticed what has been going on for all these years. The Cold War? The Red Chinese saber-rattling about Taiwan? By the way, the Red Chinese have never renounced their communism. They are only using capitalism to build up their strength, and then they will move towards conquest. Did he bother to notice?

You'd think this guy lived in a cave somewhere and never saw or heard anything at all. But he probably does live in New York, which might explain a few things. He writes for the New York Times, he probably lives in New York. It may not be a cave, but it is a lot of things, and a few too many that aren't so good these days.

Back to this left v right dialectic. The left likes to do that because they like to categorize anybody who disagrees with them as fascist. This means EVERYBODY. Now---doesn't it seem kind of dumb to let them get away with this??? I remember some stuff back in the Nixon days when he went to China. There was a lot of talk amongst the commies about "backsliding" and becoming one of the "running dogs" of imperialists. They had plenty of uncomplimentary things to say about America. They probably haven't changed, but the commies sure look different now. It is all a ruse. To all commies, you have to toe the line, or you're a fascist. That's how they think. Why agree with them? Why validate their warped point of view? Notice how anybody on the opposition side is always the latest reincarnation of Hitler? This is no accident. To them, if you wander off the reservation, you are backsliding into fascism. That's the dialectic. Don't use it.

Brooks either doesn't know this, or he is pulling everybody's leg. Neither alternative is good. This is how guys like Brooks become "useful idiots". Actually, the term "useful idiot" is a leftist term. Those who support freedom shouldn't think of people as useful idiots, but uninformed. Supporters of freedom just want people to recognize that truth. The commies don't care anything about truth. It is all about fooling the public, because if the public really caught on to their spiel, they RUN, not walk, away. So guys like Brooks are not to be taken seriously. There has never been any shortage of "useful idiots" out there who the commies have no problem in fooling. None of them should be a part of the freedom faction. It takes a clear head when these commies are always blowing smoke in your face.

As for the author of this piece about Brooks, he needs to "get it" himself. If he doesn't get dialectics, he doesn't get it either. Ronald Reagan did, and that's why he won 49 states in 1984. There is no reason why that couldn't work again. People are always going to prefer freedom over slavery. Especially once there are people, like Reagan, who enunciate and articulate it properly. Brooks and this Ace of Spades author are both off that mark.

It should also be noted that Brooks mentioned "rage". If you are in a rage, then you are doing what the lefties want you to do. They need people to be angry. Don't get angry then. They need you to be afraid. Don't be afraid then. They need to dumb everybody down. Don't listen to them and raise your IQ a stardard deviation or two. Not only that, you will feel a lot better, because commies need you to feel bad. Don't give them the satisfaction.

Beer saved the world! Nah. I can't back that up

 

Comment:

Here's that Pawn Stars show snippet that I wrote about previously. It's only about 4 minutes long, and the first part isn't even about beer. Those with very short attention spans need to be patient...Don't watch this next one just below if you're in a hurry...



...just watch the one below to save a little time...

right here >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Rambling wreck type post

 

Looks like there wasn't a post yesterday, and I'm too lazy to organize my thoughts much, so this is a by-the-seat-of-pants type rambling wreck post. Be forewarned. /lol

Taking it back chronologically, yesterday was a day in which I watched a lot of videos. That alone was a rambling wreck. Just all over the place with what I watched. Youtube will send out some suggested vids, and if I see anything, I'll click on it. If I like it, I'll watch it all. If not, I'll move on to the next one. And so on and so forth.

Hard to say how much time I spent on that, but it was probably several hours. One thing that sticks out was a video about the Battle of Gettysburg during the Civil War. There was something that caught my attention. I have a video about that battle, and in one critical part, there was Col. Chamberlain of the ??th Maine, who "refused the line". It is a battle tactic. Chamberlain's men were out of ammo, so they had to do a bayonet charge or retreat. A retreat meant being outflanked, and that would mean big trouble. If memory serves, Chamberlain got a Medal of Honor for his heroism in making that charge.

So I was familiar with Chamberlain. The thing that was new was that THE SAME THING happened on the opposite flank. It wasn't at exactly the same time, but it was the same thing. Lee was attempting to flank the Union Army, but these two guys are what held the lines on that day, and the fateful Picket's Charge was the next day. With that, I think I know why the North won that battle, and that was the beginning of the end for the Confederacy. The point is that all of that came down to two men. If either them failed, it would have been a disaster.

That was one video. There were others. The next one is about one from the Terran Space Academy. It was about aneutronic fusion. Now I've written a bit about that subject here on this blog. What's different about this one is that it is about Helium-3 as a fusion fuel that could be mined on the moon. Here's a chart of the Helium-3 content that can be obtained from the lunar surface.

 

The point is that there are so many elements that could be mined from the lunar surface. These are the most rare of the substances, but if Helium-3 could be used in fusion reactions, it's value, which is the most rare, would also be the most valuable back on Earth. Helium-3 is useful because it can be used in aneutronic fusion. Neutrons are the most troublesome byproducts of nuclear energy. If you can remove the neutrons, you can have clean energy. He claims that it would be worth trillions. That alone could subsidize the entire operation. But NASA has tested a device that could mine oxygen, and it is said to be no bigger than a suitcase. Oxygen makes up about 80% of the propellant of Musk's MethaLox Rockets. That alone could be sufficient to go to the moon. The point is that how do you NOT go to the moon?

But it should be remembered that nobody has a successful fusion device as of yet. You could go to the moon anyway even if it weren't for that. There is plenty more good stuff there.

Which brings me to the next video! I didn't make a note of this next one at all, so I am winging it again. This one was about muon-catalyzed fusion as a rocket design to get us to the stars. Whoa! Heady stuff there. Nobody has figured out how to do muon-catalyzed fusion yet, either. It caught my eye because muons ALMOST work. You don't need net-energy to work in a rocket. A rocket doesn't have to be net energy. It just needs a reaction mass that is going out the business end of the rocket at near relativistic speeds. That's what this proposition is said to do. It is a bit fanciful, though. You would need a source of muons, and how the heck do you do that? Not only that, you'd need a whole helluva lot of muons. You need a lot of reactions and the muons are unstable. That means they don't last long. You could use helium-3 you got from the moon so that it can be radiation free. Almost radiation free, there's still that.

The last video to comment upon was about Tesla. I was skeptical of battery powered vehicles, but this dude is making progress. They believe that they can get the prices down to a competitive level with gasoline powered cars. If you can get an energy source to power the batteries, then you will have something. Otherwise, they are not better than what we already have, and they cost more. Nevertheless, the progress is impressive.

Oh, by the way. There were two more things. I told ya it would be a rambling wreck. The reason capitalism is better than communism is Elon Musk. Communists would never be able to do what this guy does. If they did, they wouldn't be communists. Communists have to lie because they are inferior and they know it.

One more thing! Just saw the Tucker Carlson video of Kyle Rittenhouse. Or some of that video. I thought what they did to the kid was bad, but I didn't know the whole story. It was even WORSE than I thought. That takes some doing. Communists really suck and his story shows that. All they got is lies and intimidation. To beat them, you need to stop FEARING them. They are INFERIOR. That's why they have to lie and they know it.

Talk to me Spuds

Talk to me, beer

Something like this may get me to start watching teevee again... This story is so good, that as soon I saw it, I had to shut it off and come write about it. It is about London in the middle ages. People back then had an excuse not to know things that we all take for granted. They didn't know about germs because microscopes hadn't been invented yet. They didn't know that you could boil water and kill those germs, and that would make the water safe to drink.

So back then, the story goes, everybody in the big cities would drink beer. Beer wouldn't make you sick, see? All the big cities at that time couldn't exist without beer! The reason being is that they boiled the water to make beer, and those folks back then didn't make the connection between getting sick and needing to boil the water. But the boiled the water to make the beer and nobody got sick.

This teevee show was about a couple guys who ran a pawn shop. People would bring in things to sell for money and the dudes would make offers for whatever people brought in. Somebody brought in "Spuds Mackenzie". It was Budweiser's Party Animal of the Eighties--- a dog. This item was in the form of that dog, and it lit up when you flipped the switch. So they started telling this story about beer being necessary for civilization. Something clicked about the modern situation we're in with the so-called "pandemic" and Ivermectin in Sub-Saharan Africa-- and beer.

But folks today aren't like the folks in the middle ages. They know better, or SHOULD. If there's people not getting sick and a lot of them are taking Ivermectin, then maybe you have a connection. Could be???? This is not hard, ya know?

They object by saying "Science!". Science is just a magic word they're using in order to lie to people. There's nothing wrong with science, don't misunderstand. It is the way that the word is being used in order to deceive people. That's the very opposite of what science is supposed to do. Science is not supposed to deceive, but to inform.

Anyway, the thing here is that ignorance will kill you. Or at least make you sick. Not to knock science or anything. But scientists that are worth anything would look at the info about people not getting sick in Sub-Saharan Africa and try to figure out why they aren't getting sick. Turns out that they take the malarial drug too. Homer head slap, and exclamation "D'oh"!

By the way, REAL scientists already knew that Ivermectin was a good anti-viral drug. There's no excuse for disputing the obvious fact that it is helpful in fighting covid.

Scientists mystified that there's no COVID problem in Africa

Scientists mystified that there's no COVID problem in Africa.

Comment:

Scanning through the paragraphs, and I find no mention of Ivermectin. It is widely prescribed for river blindness and has been for decades. It is not for horses. It works on this disease, and as it turns out, it works on COVID too. Sub-Saharan Africans would be prime candidates for receiving Ivermectin for river blindness. It should be obvious that it confers some protection against COVID too, doncha think?

A CTRL-F scan finds no references to Ivermectin in the piece. However, there are some other references to it in the news articles linked below it! ( psst! look below the article)

The impression is that they refuse to acknowledge the obvious. They aren't mystified, they are in denial. And we aren't talking about the river in Egypt.

Know what I mean, Vern?

SpaceX talks about Mars Plans

Space dot com has a write up about it. Plus this: Pockets of frozen carbon dioxide in lunar cold traps

Comment:

Musk is already going to the moon. Would a more robust transportation system be a good enough reason to go to Mars via the moon? What would such a system require? Why would the current system be less robust?

Taking the second question first, the current system requires a very long trip. It needs to be very robust to accomodate so many people for so long. An eight month journey is a very long time in a weightless environment. Not to mention the radiation. The system Musk envisions would not be good enough for the trip. There needs to be an artificial gravity system and more protection from radiation would be desirable as well.

Launching from the moon can give some advantages that aren't available on Earth. For one thing, the transportation system can be built there if you can get enough material there to do the job. But a lot of material already exists there. His stainless steel rockets could be manufactured with iron obtained from the moon itself. The moon has no atmosphere, and there wouldn't be the requirement to make it aerodynamic. It can take on an odd shape and still "fly". For example, the lunar module used during the Apollo mission had a skin as thin as aluminum foil, but it went hypersonic speeds. Regulatory approval shouldn't be an issue as nobody lives there.

He can let his creative juices flow in that environment. It may add a bit more time to the timeline, but if you are going to do a thing, then do it right. A direct flight to Mars for a small crew may make some sense, but a million people? He needs something even more extraodinary than his Starships. Yes, even more extraordinary than a bigger gargantuan version of Starship called version two. He could build that sort of thing on the moon, and it could fly there as soon as he can get it constructed.

It is the "constructed" part that may be the most time-consuming. He will need a lunar version of the starbase. It could be the collecting point for a lot of people, and it could be the debarkation point for the long journey to Mars. Instead of a direct mission from Earth, just have the thing take off from the moon. It will use less fuel to get the delta v needed, and the ship can be as big as you wish it to be. It could be heavier so as to allow for more shielding against radiation. A bigger ship could be spun up at fewer rpm in order to get the artificial gravity needed to help with the weightlessness.

Instead of a tall ship, a short donut shape could be considered. A torus could be spin up for artificial gravity. A 200 meter in diameter torus could be spun up to 2 rpm in order to approximate Mars gravity.

If it is too big to land on Mars, you could build a welcoming station in Mars orbit. Just launch it from the moon. Or use the ship itself to hold people while they are shuttled down to the surface.

Musk is already going to the moon. A lunar base is not that big of a stretch, and it would be a good training and proving ground for his starships no matter what he does with his plans. While there, why not try something really bold? If these aren't the best approaches perhaps another approach in materials or methods could be better. It may need to be because what he has now entails more risks. There is less risk in making something more robust which would launched from the moon towards Mars.

Tora, Tora, Tora

 

Comment:

These are a few snippets from the 1970's flick about the run-up to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Lots of folks at the time thought that President Roosevelt let this attack happen so as to get America into the war. The flick attempted to tell the story and they did a fairly good job of it. FDR didn't get much blame, but there was some suspicion.

I recall these scenes from the movie because it seems to go with the idea that what happened in Afghanistan and the other things that Biden is doing seems to go with the idea that he and his handlers are doing this deliberately for some reason. This is the kind of thing that goes with respect to Honorius and Ricimer. After Honorius and the sack of Rome, there were the deeds of Ricimer. Now Honorius was undoubtedly incompetent to the point of foolishness. But Ricimer was just downright hostile to the interests of Rome, which is who he was supposedly in service to.

Biden's deeds in Afghanistan and the other things are either incompetence or malice. It's all the same as far as the results are concerned. It seems to me that too many people out there are waiting for confirmation. Like the snippet below, waiting for confirmation of the true state is like the captain waiting for confirmation about the sub just outside the entrance of Pearl Harbor just before the attack. Just saying'. When the "confirmation" comes, what will we see?

The video follows....

Why the Roman Empire had to fall

Comment:

This video paints a rather dismal view of life under the Roman Empire when it was at its end. Perhaps a picture is worth a thousand words as the saying goes. A pic, then the embedded video for further explication, if you are interested.

Revisiting the fall of the Roman Empire

There is a supporting video recently found, and is attached below. The original post was back in early 2016.

Why write this?  I've already posted on it a couple years ago, if memory serves.  I've just spent a couple hours watching videos of what happened during that period of history.  It did confirm my opinion that the two most responsible figures for the fall of Rome were the Western Emperor Honorius, and the military commander Ricimer.

Honorius was Emperor during the time of the first sack of Rome in 410 AD.  He showed very little interest in the welfare of his people, and actually sabotaged efforts that could have held things together for another generation or two.  The sack of Rome pretty much opened the floodgates of destruction that was to overtake Rome in the following decades.

By the time Ricimer came along, the Empire was on its last legs.  But even here, there were competent generals, including Ricimer himself, who could have pulled things together for awhile longer.  Ricimer was like Honorius, as he cared little for the people he governed.

The point of the post is that when a society reaches a point where its leaders don't care about their own people, that society doesn't have much time left.  I get the impression a lot of the time that the leaders we have now are just like those two leaders of ancient Rome.

We can heed the warning of history, or we can fail to heed it, and repeat it.

We have an election coming up for the presidency.  It seems to me that we should elect someone who is vitally interested in its well being.  I don't get that sense from Hillary.  Actually, just the opposite.

As for the rest, I haven't analyzed them yet.  But Hillary is absolutely unacceptable.



Update:

The same for Biden and a many others in BOTH parties. It won't help much just to switch party control next year. It's going to take much more.

Possum innards

Possum innards and mustard greens, just as good the second day.

New York Times piece about GOP "violence"

New York Times piece about GOP "violence"

Something's on my mind, sure is. Normally, I'd put a link to what I'm referring to, but in this case, nope. People ought to know who the usual culprits are, so there should be no need to give them a link to their wretched sites.

The usual suspects are accusing the rest of those who don't agree with their bullcrap as having "violent" tendencies. There may be some anger out there, but speaking for myself, I've been sick and tired of these people for DECADES. Yet, I haven't done one thing that I would consider "violent". No, this isn't violence to merely disagree with them. It is not fascism just to disagree with a communist. It is just communists being themselves for them to lie like that.

The communists are at war with the rest of us. They are at war because that is what their ideology REQUIRES. Any ideology that defines itself on the basis of "class conflict" has it in their DNA. As Sun Tzu said, war is all about deception. Someone at war with another is not going to be truthful, nor honest. For to do that would give up all hope of victory.

I don't know how many other people see it the way I do, but if there were anywhere near the number that I think it should be, these commies should be worried very deeply about their very skins. If there's any violence, they will be at fault themselves.

There hasn't been any violence in this country except that which they either provoked or encouraged. For that is what they are. They are eternal troublemakers. It is in their DNA. We'd all be better off without them anywhere near in control of the high ground of our civilization. But there they are.

If that is violence, then it isn't anything that isn't being pushed upon us already. As for the GOP, or the Trumpists, there is way, way too much tolerance for the continual outrage that is being perpetrated. There is a lot of talk about "wokism". Too many damned people are still asleep as far as I'm concerned. They offend the living crap out of me, and that is before they open their filthy sewers of a piehole.

If commies think they've got problems now... As far as I'm concerned, the New York Times and their lookalikes in the so-called Mainstream Media, might as well be Tokyo Rose, or Lord Haw-Haw. They are enemy propagandists. Why any decent person would listen to them is way beyond me.