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.

Breakthrough in hydrogen storage -- solid hydrogen

Breakthrough in hydrogen storage -- solid hydrogen

Comment:

The key points in understanding how this works is buried within the video. You have to listen closely to get it. Well, for me, that took a couple listens. After that, I think I've got it.

The way this works is by adsorption of hydrogen on to a media, which can release the hydrogen via a laser light. Adsorption or absorption has been studied as a means of hydrogen storage and evidently this technology is a result of that research. How it can pull hydrogen out without using prohibitive amounts of energy is still not clear to me, though.

It appears to be a viable technology that could have been adopted sooner, but is being held up by bureaucratic redtape. Aah! While the politicians study ways to enslave the world, these guys ( a free market entity ) have come up with a solution that just might work. I don't want to keep beating that drum, but I don't have to. The guy who does the narration of the video is doing it. ( But without the extra commentary I just added)

Alright, you greenie types. Here's your tech. If you want to decarbonize everything, here is a possible solution for you that wouldn't be necessary to tax the world into oblivion. Let's see if the greenies actually care about solving the problem they claim exists.

Leading doctor files lawsuit so he can treat patients---wtf!

Leading doctor files lawsuit so he can treat patients---wtf!

Comment:

This kind of thing can set my blood to boiling. Yep, if I did this all day, I think I would have a stroke. In the midst of all this insanity, one has to keep their cool.

All the same, it is crazy as hell. Oh, and Govenor Newsom ( spit ) has been injured by the jab. They are hiding that fact, of course.

I tend to avoid writing about this stuff because we can only get relief from the courts, and the politicians; but these are breaking down bad. This doesn't leave us with good options.

Know what I mean, Vern?

Off-grid post, 11-11-21

This project is well over 7 years old and running, and the progress is glacially slow. But it is progress. The latest progress is in finding new sources for foraging for food. What good would it all do if you starve? If this skill is mastered, it will be enpowering. That is why I mention it.

For our current system is in a mode in which enslaves people. A slave has no freedom. You may have heard of Kyle Rittenhouse. He is accused of murder, and is on trial now. The significance of this trial is that it is a challenge to the very notion of self-defense. In the old slaveholding South, there were slave codes, and amongst those codes was the prohibition to self-defense. A slave has no right to self-defense. Think about that when you read about this trial ( if anybody bothers to read about it all, or even think about it if they do).

We have been on the wrong track for many years now, according to the polls that track such things. If the political class cared about such things, then why are they doing what they are doing? Try to think about that if you dare.

The current system wants everybody to be utterly dependent upon them. Isn't that what a slave is? A slave is not afforded the ability to help himself. He depends upon his master for everything. Ask yourself, if you dare to, why would a group of politicians want to make people more dependent upon them?

These thoughts are what motivate me to do things that to some people, would sound crazy. Why would anything want to eat weeds? You would want to because the alternative is worse.

Not enough people see it this way. If it were up to me, almost everybody would. In that case, there would be a lot of reason to be hopeful about the future. The future we are headed in is not a good one or a happy one, unless something changes soon.

Don't eat the grass

Eat the weeds youtube channel

Comment:

Not to over-think things, but what the hay? Hmm, that's almost a funny. Imagine being happy about finding things to eat. It says something about the situation, I do believe.

When I was watching some of this kind of stuff, I realized that we, in the USA, are supposed to be so well-off and everything. Stuff that is actually good for you, and is eaten in other countries, are considered weeds here. But wait! Could it be that in being forced into doing things, like we are more and more these days, that it really isn't necessary to buy things all the time. You can find stuff to eat in places you never figured on.

Maybe this point seems a bit too vague, the thing is that we could be becoming like in video ( and book) "Brave New World". The idea there is to encourage consumption for the sake of consumption. Yes, and another thing: In Brave New World, there is an over-reliance upon technology, and the government PUSHES it. Seems kinda familiar to me. There is also the coercive aspect of it. John the Savage is going to be punished ( as everybody is) for not being sufficiently conformist to this organizational model.

You could eat the weeds alright, but then they'll demand that you eat the food that the Big Agriculture pushes on you, like the other things they push on you, like Big Pharma, and Big Medicine. And like John the Savage, they'll demand that you act exactly the way they want you to. No freedom at all.

Elon Musk's Mars colonization project

Elon Musk wants to go to Mars. He has mentioned putting a million-person colony on the planet. Such an undertaking seems unbelievably complex and costly. To do it is probably going to require more than the ambitions of a single man. For Musk is mortal just like the rest of us. He won't live forever, and this undertaking is going to take sustained effort over a long period of time.

Even if he builds a spacecraft that can move 1000 people per launch, it will take a 1000 launches just to get those people on their way. The idea is to build a lot of spacecrafts, and be able to do many launches at a very quick pace. Even so, this is one helluva project. Not to mention, this is just getting the project off the ground. That leaves a lot of other details that are yet to be worked out even after he gets his basic transportation device ready.

His Starship will be quite an innovation, provided that he is successful with it. But there may be problems ahead. Let's look at some of those.

One problem is the long distance to Mars. The trip will take months. This brings into focus several problems with keeping large numbers of people alive for an extended period of time in the most hostile environment known to man. Getting to Mars is not that big of a deal. Getting to Mars with people is a big deal. Getting to Mars with a lot of people is off the charts kind of deal. How do you provide for so many people for such a long period of time in such hostile conditions?

The Starship is designed to be reusable and is designed to carry up to 200 tons to orbit. This is impressive in itself, but it may be asking too much to try to take something that is specialized and make it into a Swiss Army knife. Getting to orbit with a reusable vehicle is a big achievement, but is it enough?

He's probably going to need another vehicle for his purposes. Maybe two more. What to do about this? The development of new vehicles is a costly and time-consuming project. Perhaps it could be streamlined. Let's speculate on what could be done...

SpaceX has already won a contract to land on the moon. Why not start there? There are advantages to working on the moon that may make it worthwhile to build something there. What if he built another vehicle on the moon itself, and launch it into space? He could make it hold thousands of people at a time. It could provide a habitat that would shield people from the elements and would enable artificial gravity. He could build a cylinder that is much more massive that anything that could be launched from the Earth.

The cylinder would be sufficiently large that it could be spun up to produce artificial gravity. It could be made of materials obtained from the surface of the moon itself. The moon has plenty of iron. His Starships are made of stainless steel, so the jump iron to stainless steel, if desired, is not that big.

Or he could use a different substance. In any case, the craft would not need to be aerodynamic, since it wouldn't be built to land on the surface, but to stay in space indefinitely. You need to build it, then launch it. Getting a massive object off the moon is going to be a lot easier than getting it off the Earth.

An object that has a 200 meter in diameter and rotates at 2 rpm will generate an artifical gravity comparable to Mars. If you could attach the rocket to it and lift it into lunar orbit, then what you need to do next is to spin it up. It could be like a torus or donut. Perhaps it could have several levels. But the main thing is that it doesn't have mass out all that much because to get to orbit requires about as much fuel as mass. This compares with the Earth which requires 50 times more fuel than useful mass to get to orbit.

Let's say you could get 25 times more people than the biggest Starship. Maybe 25k at a time. Then you would need only 4 of them to transport a hundred thousand on each trip. That would take 10 launch windows, or about 20 years to get your million people on Mars. The biggest Starship might transport a thousand people at at time. This might be better to to launch a thousand people at a time from Earth to rendezvous with this bigger craft that would house the people on the way to Mars.

Once you get to Mars, you can use a fleet of Starships to transport back from the torus to the surface. Refueil on the surface, launch and get some more on each trip. Eventually, you empty the big torus, and send it back on its way to the Moon for another load.

Is it feasible to build such a large device on the surface of the moon? Maybe not, but the thing could be launched in pieces and assembled in lunar orbit, if the launching it from the surface is too difficult. You might even build a bigger one that way.

You could build rings of steel on the moon that would be welded into place in lunar orbit. Those rings could be launched from the moon with a mass driver--- no fuel necessary. If the rings were 60 feet in diameter and x degrees of the torus in length, they would need to add up to 628 meters in length when all assembled in order to be 200 meters in diameter.

Each ring could be custom sized so as to fit together perfectly into a donut shaped torus. The living space would be inside the empty area inside the fitted rings. A sufficient number of launches from the surface of the moon could get the large mass needed into lunar orbit so that it can be assembled there. From there it could be supplied and readied for its mission.

Perhaps it couldn't carry 25k people at a time, but it would have definite advantages over the Starship. It would be a specialized craft built to do the mission of transiting large numbers of people over long distances. The Starship is better suited to get through the atmosphere and from a deep gravity well. This craft wouldn't need to do that, and could be made bigger, if desired.

There are other benefits from starting from the moon. There's plenty of oxygen there. Water can be obtained there as well. So the idea could be considered. In any case, the decision will be Musk's.

Off-grid post, 11-8-21

Comment:

The channel name is Junkyard Fox. His videos are about surviving in the desert on the foods that can be obtained there. One kind of plant that can be useful is the yucca. It is not only for food, but the root can be used for making a type of soap.

He shows how to obtain the root, and how to extract the saponins which are in the root.

The other half of the video will be about creosote. As of this writing, I am aware of the value of the creosote bush, but maybe something new will be there, so I'll watch this after I post here.

The video is below:

Colonize Mercury it says

Comment:

Here's a video which advocates the consideration of a mission to colonize the first planet from the Sun, which is Mercury.

Mercury is said to have water. It also have some lava tubes that would provide shelter from the blistering Sun. The planet also has many resources that could be used in the making of a shelter, such as carbon.

Little is known about the planet because its proximity to the Sun is so close that it is difficult to observe. The intense solar radiation offers hazards as well as opportunities. It is many times more powerful than at the Earth. Mercury has a gravitation about on par with Mars. It would be easier to escape its gravitational field than from Earth.

He makes a rather dramatic speculation that Mercury could sustain billions of people. Quite amazing. The video follows below: