How to deal with child pornography?

Fred Reed confronts this conundrum.

The stuff is nasty. Children of eight or nine, mostly girls, forced to do naked live-cam chat with strange men on other continents, to engage in all the sexual behavior you can think of. No equipment is needed beyond a laptop and a webcam. In interviews, pedophiles say that they know it is wrong, but cannot keep themselves from consuming the stuff. Whether you buy this or not, they obviously will watch  when they know there is no danger of being caught. Which means that children will continue being forced to make it.

. . .

And it becomes morally tricky. What to do if you catch those making child porn? Simply drowning them, despite its appeal, doesn’t always work. Lawyers,  trials, appeals, delays, bribes. According to the documentary, in poor countries like the Philippines, the child’s parents are often the ones putting the kid in front of the camera, and they do it because the family has to eat. However one might regard this, putting mommy and daddy in slam doesn’t do much for the kid and, since in much of the world there are many hungry families, the jailed would just be replaced by others.

So what to do?

A supply-side solution seems impossible in the face of  an untraceable Dark Web containing lots of kid porn from many poor countries that can’t or won’t do much about it. That leaves demand side.

. . .

Legalizing kid porn is not a winning political platform. Sexual exploitation of children is nauseating, and most people would probably see legalization as pandering to people they would rather throw from helicopters. But leaving things as they are will, well, leave things as they are, with wretchedly bad treatment of a lot of children. Anyone have a better idea?

There's more at the link.

My approach is predicated on the reality that thought leads to action.  Only animals behave instinctively, without thought.  Humans are different.  As Mohandas Gandhi, the Mahatma, famously put it:

Your beliefs become your thoughts,

Your thoughts become your words,

Your words become your actions,

Your actions become your habits,

Your habits become your values,

Your values become your destiny.

That being the case, I believe that to possess and/or consume child pornography is functionally equivalent to being a child abuser, and should be treated as such.  The former is, in my opinion (based upon considerable experience as a pastor and prison chaplain) a "gateway drug" to committing child abuse, and often occurs simultaneous with the latter;  so I see no reason why it should not be regarded as child abuse as well, and punished in the same way.

I therefore have no problem with throwing the book at those guilty of possessing and/or consuming child pornography.  Let them be treated in the same way as a child rapist.  Lock them up and throw away the key, so that our children are protected against their evil, sickening presence.  Does that seem unmerciful?  Perhaps it is . . . but it's a matter of competing values.  Which has greater value, a child who can grow up to be a healthy, functioning adult if s/he is not abused, or one who is likely to destroy that child's faith and trust in others by abusing them?  I know my answer to that question.  What's yours?

My attitude is conditioned by being born and raised in Africa, where child abuse - theoretical or actual - is dealt with far more swiftly and succinctly in tribal society than it is in the First World.  Anyone caught with child pornography is likely to have the living daylights beaten out of him by his neighbors, and will be lucky to survive without permanent injury.  The latter is frequently meted out to those caught in the act.

I recall a "flasher" who was active in a suburb of Soweto during the 1980's.  This sick pervert would hang around schools, waiting for girls to walk home;  then he'd expose himself to them, chasing them with his penis hanging out of his trousers, screaming at them.  One such young lady arrived home, out of breath and in tears, to find her grandfather there.  This gentleman was an induna on the gold mines;  a sort of shift foreman, in US parlance.  Furious, he assured her he'd "deal with" the problem.

The next morning, very early, two burly mine workers arrived at the house.  They explained that the induna had sent them to look after his granddaughter.  While they were doing that, the others on their shift would all chip in from their wages to pay them, to make sure they weren't out of pocket.  For the next few days, they walked her to and from school, scanning everyone around them carefully.  In due course, she spotted the flasher and pointed him out to them.  He tried to run, but they were fit and very strong, and soon caught him.  They led him to the nearest low stone wall, with people pouring out of their houses to watch.  There they dropped his trousers, stretched his penis over the wall . . . and hit it once, overhand, with a twenty-pound mining sledgehammer.  The remains were described as "mincemeat" (ground beef, in US parlance) by the hospital that amputated them.

The police duly went through the neighborhood, asking for witnesses to identify the perpetrators of this "crime":  but for some strange reason, despite there being literally hundreds who'd watched proceedings, no-one could remember what the mine workers looked like.  The police, wisely, dropped the matter.  What's more, there were no sex crimes - of any sort, not just involving children - reported in that neighborhood for several years afterwards.  The word had spread.  "We look after our own.  Perverts and sex criminals had best steer clear."  They did.

A few years later, I was peripherally involved with an incident in another township.  A rapist dragged a young schoolgirl into the bushes as she walked home from the bus stop.  Her screams were heard, and several men ran to her assistance, catching the rapist in the act.  They didn't bother to call the police.  Instead, they searched until they found a discarded glass bottle.  They broke it against a stone, and used the glass shards to castrate him, removing the rapist's penis and both testicles.  He nearly bled to death before the police found him and took him to hospital.  Again, their investigations led to no arrests, much less convictions.

I was a pastor at the time, and tried to remonstrate with those I believed to be responsible.  I pointed out that such an injury was irrevocable.  What if they'd got the wrong man?  Indignantly, they responded that they hadn't got the wrong man - he'd been caught in the act, so there was no doubt about that.  Furthermore, why waste money on a trial?  They'd ensured that he'd never do it again!  I had to admit, they had a point.

(Sadly, such tribal approaches to child sexual abuse appear to have largely disappeared in modern African cities, where tribal culture has been overwhelmed by urban pressures.  The "virgin cleansing myth" has led to the widespread rape of young children [both male and female].  It's beyond sick . . . but it happens, and it's not punished in the same way as it would have been a few decades ago.  I can only wish that it was!)

For the life of me, I can't see any difference between people who actually behave like that, and those who fantasize about behaving like that while fueling their sick, warped minds with child porn.  I therefore can't see any reason to treat them differently from actual perpetrators.  Here in the First World, we're supposed to let the law deal with them;  but if the law doesn't do so, and as a result some people decide to adopt extra-judicial methods . . . I won't lose any sleep over that, provided that the offender's guilt is clear and certain beyond any doubt.  I place a higher value on the lives and well-being of the children who are no longer in danger of being assaulted by them.

Having had to deal as a prison chaplain with some really sick, twisted, evil child molesters, allow me to assure you that there are, indeed, monsters in human form.  I've met them . . . and I don't want them walking around.  As for NAMBLA . . . I have a very visceral reaction indeed to those monsters.  As far as I'm concerned, membership of or support for that organization should be regarded, in and of itself, as conclusive proof that the person(s) concerned is/are a danger to society, deserving removal from it by any and all means necessary.

As far as I'm concerned, child porn is directly equivalent to child abuse, and should be dealt with as such.

Peter

Modern relationships?

Unfortunately, one sees this in restaurants all the time.

(Click the image to be taken to a larger version at the cartoon's Web page.)

Peter

Heh

Matthew Pritchett, a.k.a. "Matt", is the "pocket cartoonist" for the Telegraph newspaper in London, UK.  Here's his take on President Trump's current visit to China.

Peter

Remember when Joshua made the sun and moon stand still?

You'll find the Biblical account in Joshua 10:1-15.  Turns out there may be more to that story than meets the eye.

Joshua may have asked the Lord to make the sun and moon stand still, but scientists have reconsidered previous objections, and now think the Book of Joshua describes a solar eclipse on October 30, 1207 B.C.E., over 3,220 years ago.

. . .

"That the eclipse occurred at exactly the time of the important battle that Joshua was fighting is either an amazing miracle of timing or else it was lucky chance (for Joshua!)," Dr. Humphreys wrote to Haaretz. "When one has a sequence of miracles, as there are in the Hebrew bible, which are either miracles of timing or lucky chance, it becomes inconceivable to me that they are all lucky chance! So I firmly believe that this was a miracle, an amazing miracle of timing."

To begin with the theory of eclipse, the authors suggest that rather than the sun and moon stopping in their celestial tracks, including based on the original Hebrew word, "a plausible alternative meaning is that the Sun and Moon stopped doing what they normally do: they stopped shining." This interpretation actually goes back at least a century, the authors themselves point out, to an article in the Princeton Theological Review of 1918.

"This interpretation is supported by the fact that the Hebrew word translated 'stand still' [dom] has the same root as a Babylonian word used in ancient astronomical texts to describe eclipses," Humphreys stated.

. . .

Was there an annular solar eclipse in the right time frame for Joshua? There was, calculate the writers: on October 30, 1207 B.C.E., which is within the possible dates of Joshua's incursion into Canaan.

There's more at the link.

I find it amusing how often science has tried to debunk a Biblical story, only for further investigation to uncover evidence that it might have more than a passing foundation in fact.  (The account of Noah's Flood and the Black Sea deluge hypothesis is another fascinating conflation.)  Wouldn't it be fun if the tale of the sun and moon "standing still" isn't just a religious myth, but based on actual historical events?

Peter

The debt tsunami is beginning to break over us

I've said on numerous occasions that the biggest single financial crisis staring us in the face is the level of debt - government, commercial and private.  Bloomberg points out that it's beginning to have a drastic effect on the US retail sector.  (Bold, underlined text is my emphasis.)

In the U.S., retailers announced more than 3,000 store openings in the first three quarters of this year. But chains also said 6,800 would close. And this comes when there’s sky-high consumer confidence, unemployment is historically low and the U.S. economy keeps growing. Those are normally all ingredients for a retail boom, yet more chains are filing for bankruptcy and rated distressed than during the financial crisis ... The root cause is that many of these long-standing chains are overloaded with debt—often from leveraged buyouts led by private equity firms ... The debt coming due, along with America’s over-stored suburbs and the continued gains of online shopping, has all the makings of a disaster. The spillover will likely flow far and wide across the U.S. economy. There will be displaced low-income workers, shrinking local tax bases and investor losses on stocks, bonds and real estate. If today is considered a retail apocalypse, then what’s coming next could truly be scary.

. . .

The ripple effect could also be a direct hit to the industry that is the largest employer of Americans at the low end of the income scale. The most recent government statistics show that salespeople and cashiers in the industry total 8 million.

. . .

Even before the e-commerce boom, the U.S. was considered over-stored—the result of investors pouring money into commercial real estate decades earlier as the suburbs boomed. All those buildings needed to be filled with stores, and that demand got the attention of venture capital. The result was the birth of the big-box era of massive stores in nearly every category—from office suppliers like Staples Inc. to pet retailers such as PetSmart Inc. and Petco Animal Supplies, Inc.

Now that boom is finally going bust. Through the third quarter of this year, 6,752 locations were scheduled to shutter in the U.S., excluding grocery stores and restaurants, according to the International Council of Shopping Centers. That's more than double the 2016 total and is close to surpassing the all-time high of 6,900 in 2008, during the depths of the financial crisis.

There's more at the link, including many very informative charts.  Recommended reading.  (Also, for an overview of just how serious the problem is in the retail sector, see Wikipedia's list of retailers affected by the current problems.  It's mind-bogglingly large.)

Back in July I pointed out that debt is killing us - as a nation, as a society, and as individuals.  It's now killing many of the retail chains on which many of us depend, not just for the goods we need every day, but for jobs, tax revenue for our towns and cities, and many other benefits.  If they go, so do all those goodies.  What's more, many of us are so deep in debt ourselves that the impact of the loss of such goodies will be much worse for us, because we have no reserves with which to afford to replace them.

My advice remains the same as I offered in 2014.  Reduce your personal debt burden (eliminate it entirely if possible), build up reserves, make sure you can continue to earn a living in some way (and if you can't, find ways to exchange your labor or expertise for earnings in kind, to help you keep your head above water).  There's no way we can entirely avoid the debt tsunami that's coming . . . but we can do our best to make sure it doesn't sweep us away.

Peter

A reminder that, despite all the trouble in the world . . .

. . . there are still some very good people in it.

An emphatic "Well done!" to everyone who made a young man's dream come true.  I suspect that somewhere, the shade of the late 1st Lt. Jonathan Rozier is smiling.

Peter

Overhead presses and "hinge points" - I have a problem!

One of the exercises I'm doing as part of strength training is the overhead press (sometimes called the "military press", or simply "the press").  Here's how it works.  (No, I'm not lifting nearly as much weight as shown in the video!  I'm just a beginner!)

I'm following that instruction, and doing the overhead press at least once weekly as part of my workout routine.  However, my spine is fused right at its base, where it joins the hips (the L5-S1 vertebrae, to be precise).  That means I can't do the "hip thrust" Mark Rippetoe mentions without that fused joint acting up.  Also, even if I leave out the hip thrust, my lower back protests vigorously as I add more weight to the barbell, feeling very unsteady and unstable and "wobbly".  I'm making good progress in other types of lift, but I just can't seem to get that part of my back to "go with the flow" of the overhead press.

That's where I'm turning to you, dear readers.  I know (from past comments and correspondence) that some of you have also had spinal fusions (sometimes multiple ones), and are also involved with weightlifting.  Can you offer any advice, from your experience, on how best to overcome this hurdle?  How can one strengthen the muscles around a fusion site like that, perhaps the most critical "hinge joint" in the body, so that one can make progress with the overhead press?  Ideas and suggestions are welcome.  I'll run them past my instructor, and we'll see what might be able to work for me.

In the interim, as soon as my new bench gets here, I'm going to concentrate on modified (and lighter weight) overhead presses at home, using dumbbells.  Here's how that works.  No, I don't look nearly as "buffed" as the man doing the demonstration!  Sorry about that . . .

That should provide enough support that my fused lower spine won't give me the same problems.  One can do the same exercise using an EZ curl bar (video at the link).  I have a curl bar, so I'll probably try to incorporate that in due course, too.  If I find everything goes well, I'll probably start doing seated overhead presses with heavier weights at the gym, too.

(I deliberately limit myself to lighter weights at home, because of the risk of injury if something goes wrong.  At the gym, I can have a "spotter" if I need one, and can work out inside a rack [the iron framework shown in the first video clip above], where I can position crossbars to catch a barbell if I fall, preventing it landing on me and injuring me.  I don't have any of those precautions at home.)

Thanks in advance for your input.

Peter

Is the recoilless rifle making a comeback?

I'm sure military veteran readers will remember recoilless rifles such as the US M18 57mm., M20 75mm., M67 90mm. and M40 105mm. weapons (six of the latter being mounted together on the famous M50 Ontos);  the Swedish Carl Gustav 84mm. (still in front-line service today, in upgraded form);  and the British Wombat 120mm.  Despite being called 'rifles', they were actually small artillery pieces.  The Soviet Union developed its own equivalents.

Most such weapons have fallen into disuse with the development of guided missiles, but now comes news that a modern version of a recoilless rifle - actually semi-recoilless, if I understand the article correctly - is under consideration for use aboard lighter armored vehicles.

This technology is called RAVEN, which stands for Rarefaction Wave Gun.

The operating principle behind RAVEN is similar to older recoilless guns, in that a limited amount of propellant gas is vented backwards in order to mitigate the recoil force of shooting a projectile. However, unlike recoilless guns, which lose velocity relative to conventional guns, RAVEN guns retain the same velocity and power as a conventional gun while reducing recoil forces and erosion to the gun. This makes this ideal for light vehicles, as the cannon itself can be made from lighter materials, and the vehicle does not need to “dig in” with a spade to stabilize itself before firing.

. . .

Unlike earlier recoilless guns, the chamber in which the propellant and cartridge is placed is sealed at the beginning of the combustion cycle. After ignition, but before the projectile has reached the end of the barrel, the combustion chamber opens and starts venting gas. This venting of the gas gives RAVEN guns their recoilless properties, as the mass of gas leaving the gun by moving backwards compensates for the mass of the projectile moving forwards. This venting of the gas creates a drop in pressure, which then propagates down the gun barrel. This is the eponymous rarefaction wave. The wave then helps propel the projectile down the barrel, allowing it to leave without any loss in velocity. The early venting of the gas means that the materials that comprise the gun heat up less, allowing the gun to fire faster without overheating. This synergizes with the possibility to make guns of a lower weight, due to the recoil reduction granted by RAVEN technology.

. . .

Overall, RAVEN guns present an interesting, high-caliber armament option that could provide America’s next generation of light vehicles the firepower they need to overmatch any current and future threat. While the technology is not yet mature, it is based squarely on concepts already understood and developed.

There's more at the link.

It appears that 35mm., 45mm. and 105mm. versions of the RAVEN cannon have already been successfully tested, and further development is ongoing.  The 105mm. version is illustrated below (click the image for a larger view).

If the technology can be perfected, we may yet see a ballistic equivalent to the M1 Abrams' 120mm. cannon, mounted on a platform weighing half as much, and much more mobile.  That would please organizations like the US Marine Corps, as it would be easier to land lighter vehicles like that from the sea, if necessary.

Peter

It's nice to see this behemoth in the air again

I've posted about the giant Antonov An-22 Antei turboprop transport in the past, particularly an incident in Angola during the 1970's that almost turned the Cold War hot.  That caused a lot of consternation and monkeyhouse in certain circles at the time.

The An-22 has long since been retired from front-line military service in the Russian Air Force.  However, Antonov Airlines, a heavy air transport division established by Antonov in the Ukraine, has restored one that was grounded for seven years, and returned it to service as a civilian freight aircraft.  I find this absurdly pleasing for some reason.  The sight of that lumbering propeller-driven giant has always made me smile.  It's like a monster that shouldn't logically be able to fly . . . but it does.  Also, the An-22 is still a very capable aircraft, particularly given its rough-field capabilities.  It can deliver up to 70 tons into dirt airstrips if necessary, a capability matched only by the much more modern (and much more expensive) Boeing C-17 Globemaster III.

Courtesy of Wirecutter, here's a video clip of the civilian An-22, landing and taking off at Ostende in Belgium.  Watch it in full-screen mode to get an idea of the size of this giant plane.

Note the huge Kuznetsov NK-12 turboprop engines, the most powerful of their class ever developed, and the massive contra-rotating propellers.  The same engines were fitted to the famous Tupolev Tu-95 Bear strategic bomber and its variants.

You'll have noticed how the plane has to "feel" for the runway, easing down gently, because the pilot is a long way above and ahead of the landing gear.  In the clip below, you can see over the pilot's shoulder as he lands the same aircraft in Zurich, Switzerland, last year.  Note how he has to almost wrestle the plane down, constantly making corrections to its flight path.  That's 1950's-vintage control technology for you, very much more demanding than the computer-assisted controls of modern aircraft.  Furthermore, the relatively small vertical stabilizer and rudder surfaces (in comparison to the overall size of the plane) make for sluggish directional response.  It's clearly a handful to fly.

And here's the same landing in Zurich, filmed through the glass nose of the An-22.  That's a relic of its military design.  The Soviet Union insisted that all its transport aircraft had to be able to drop parachutists and supplies to its army, if necessary;  so they all had windows in the underside of the nose, to allow the navigator to take ground observations, and to make it easier to drop troops and supplies right on the mark.  Some British transports of the 1950's and 1960's (e.g. the Blackburn Beverley, Armstrong-Whitworth Argosy, and Handley Page Hastings) also had a glass panel in the nose, for similar purposes.

An elephant of the skies!  Warms the cockles of my heart, so to speak . . .

Peter

They've still got it

It's hard to recall that the Canadian rock group Rush was formed in 1968 - that's 49 years ago!!!  Where did the time go . . . ?  Here they are in 2012, performing an introduction to their act that rocked hard.

I understand they're no longer touring, but they'll always be one of the perennials of the rock era.

Peter

"Wages, salaries, and benefits are all just overhead that can be eliminated by use of machines"

That rather ominous statement comes from this very interesting article.  It reiterates something I've been saying on this blog for several years - namely, that automation is threatening almost every job out there.  Here's an excerpt.

The chart is a plot of oil rigs in the United States compared to the number of workers the oil industry employs, and it’s an important part of a puzzle that needs to be pieced together before it’s too late. (Click the image for a larger view.)

What should be immediately apparent is that as the number of oil rigs declined due to falling oil prices, so did the number of workers the oil industry employed. But when the number of oil rigs began to rebound, the number of workers employed didn’t. That observation itself should be extremely interesting to anyone debating whether technological unemployment exists or not, but there’s even more to glean from this chart.

. . .

... notice how quickly this all happened. It took TWO YEARS. How did it happen so fast? Because the oil industry didn’t really need the workers it lost in the first place. It’s the oil industry. It’s used to making lots of money, and when you’re making money hand over fist, you don’t need to focus on efficiency. Being lean and mean is not your concern. However, that changes when times get tough, and times got very tough for the oil industry as oil prices plummeted thanks to new competition from yet another technological advancement — fracking.

So once it became important to increase efficiency, that’s exactly what the oil industry did. It let people go and it invested in automation. In the summer of 2016, oil prices were no longer under $30 per barrel, and had gone back up to around $50 per barrel where they remain. That’s half of the $100 per barrel they’d gotten used to, which is fine as long as they’re able to produce at twice the efficiency. As a result, like a phoenix rising, they emerged transformed. Oil rigs returned to drilling, but all the rig workers didn’t. Those who were let go became simply unnecessary overhead.

Sleeping Through a Wake Up Call

This is a story of technological unemployment that is crystal clear, and yet people are still arguing about it like it’s something that may or may not happen in the future. It’s actually a very similar situation to climate change, where the effects are right in our faces, but it’s still considered a debate. Automation is real, folks. Companies are actively investing in automation because it means they can produce more at a lower cost. That’s good for business. Wages, salaries, and benefits are all just overhead that can be eliminated by use of machines.

. . .

A landmark 2017 study ... looked at the impact of just industrial robots on jobs from 1993 to 2007 and found that every new robot replaced around 5.6 workers, and every additional robot per 1,000 workers reduced the percentage of the total population employed by 0.34% and also reduced wages by 0.5%. During that 14-year period of time, the number of industrial robots quadrupled and between 360,000 and 670,000 jobs were erased. And as the authors noted, “Interestingly, and perhaps surprisingly, we do not find positive and offsetting employment gains in any occupation or education groups.” In other words, the jobs were not replaced with new jobs.

There's more at the link.  Highly recommended reading.

The impact of automation on jobs that everyone thought, until recently, were "safe" from such influences is growing by the day.  I think younger people today have every reason to be concerned as to whether or not they'll be able to find jobs at all.  In many cases, traditional avenues of employment are being closed off at high speed.

For a lot more related information, see The Shape of Work to Come 2017. It's a special edition of City Journal, with many useful articles. It'll certainly make you wonder about your own job security!

Peter

The financial war on terrorism and terrorists

A new book, published today, lifts the veil on a hitherto highly secretive front in the fight against terrorism.  It's titled 'Harpoon: Inside the Covert War Against Terrorism's Money Masters'.

It's of particular interest to me because one of those involved in this effort is a person I knew back in South Africa.  S/he was particularly skilled in various forms of electronic warfare, including the infiltration of enemy communications networks.  Such skills are always in high demand in certain quarters:  so, some years ago, my acquaintance accepted an offer to move to another country, where abilities in that line were more highly regarded (and much more highly rewarded) than our mutual former homeland.  We've kept in touch off and on since then.  Whilst I don't know any details about what s/he is doing (for obvious security reasons), s/he knew that this book was coming out, and suggested I might enjoy it.  I didn't need to ask why they said that!

The blurb reads:

A revelatory account of the cloak-and-dagger Israeli campaign to target the finances fueling terror organizations--an effort that became the blueprint for U.S. efforts to combat threats like ISIS and drug cartels.

ISIS boasted $2.4 billion of revenue in 2015, yet for too long the global war on terror overlooked financial warfare as an offensive strategy. "Harpoon," the creation of Mossad legend Meir Dagan, directed spies, soldiers, and attorneys to disrupt and destroy money pipelines and financial institutions that paid for the bloodshed perpetrated by Hamas, Hezbollah, and other groups. Written by an attorney who worked with Harpoon and a bestselling journalist, Harpoon offers a gripping story of the Israeli-led effort, now joined by the Americans, to choke off the terrorists' oxygen supply, money, via unconventional warfare.

In his pre-publication review, Roger Simon writes:

Operation Harpoon dates back to the days  of Mossad chief Meir Dagan (1990s), who also saw the opportunities here, and "fights fire with fire."  The good guys hack computers too.  And they even call in missile strikes against bankers.  (Kind of makes you smile, as long as they choose the right ones.)

The book Harpoon, not surprisingly, reads like a thriller.  We get glimpses of the following -- how Harpoon managed to make several hundred million mysteriously vanish from Arafat's account, how Harpoon broke in and seized illegal accounts from Arab banks in the West Bank (this caused a White House uproar), how Harpoon unmasked Iran's proxy Hezbollah's involvement in drug trafficking from Venezuela to Lebanon's Beka'a Valley, how Harpoon and Israeli agents used malware and double agents to deplete Hezbollah accounts and so forth.

What I've read so far is most interesting.  If you're wondering how non-military methods are applied every day to the War on Terror, and how financially strangling terrorists is almost as effective as doing so physically, this book offers a lot of food for thought.

Peter

The most expensive part of my home strength training setup . . .

. . . is no longer the weights, bars and accessories that I bought (I wrote about them a few weeks ago).  It's now the bench I'll use to support several of my exercises at home.

As most of you know, I suffered a semi-crippling injury back in 2004, which (after two surgeries) left me with a fused spine and a damaged sciatic nerve on my left side.  I'm permanently partially disabled, and I'm in some degree of pain 24/7/365.  It's not fun, but I've learned to cope with most of it.  Unfortunately, my metabolism was damaged by a serious prescription drug interaction problem some years later, following a heart attack.  Putting all those things together, I was getting nowhere fast, and needed to find a way to restore as much of my health as possible.  After much investigation and research, Miss D. and I began strength training almost four months ago, and we're already seeing very beneficial results.  We expect to be doing it for years to come.

The idea of having a set of "consumer-grade" weights at home is to allow me to exercise more lightly on days when we don't go to the gym, and also to intersperse my sessions at the keyboard with physical activity.  I try to break every half-hour or so, to get up, stretch my legs, make a cup of tea or drink some water, and generally refresh myself before starting to write again.  With weights at home, during that time I can pick up my dumbbells, do a couple each of bicep curls, dumbbell shrugs, dumbbell squats and overhead presses, and then get on with my work.  If I repeat that every half-hour for five or six hours, that adds up to a respectable amount of work during the day.

That's all very well, but there are several useful dumbbell exercises (such as those illustrated here - there are many more) and EZ curl bar exercises (such as the lying triceps extension) that require the support of a training bench.  Furthermore, my balance isn't as good as it used to be, and it's made worse by the damaged sciatic nerve in my left leg, which can fold up under me without much warning at all.  To have that happen while lifting weights would be anything but good!  At the gym, I protect myself by lifting such weights inside the protection of a rack (similar to this one, for example).  It'll catch the barbell on crossbars if I slip and fall, preventing it from landing on me.  At home, I'm not working with such heavy weights, or with full-size barbells, so I don't need a rack:  but I need a bench strong enough to support my body in case of problems, and stable enough to let me exercise without worrying that it's about to collapse under me.

I bought a highly rated "consumer grade" weight bench, only to find out, very quickly, that it just wouldn't do.  This bench was nominally rated to take my weight plus the dumbbells I'd be lifting, but it creaked, groaned and rocked in a very unstable manner.  I felt anything but steady and safe on it.  I talked to the instructors at the gym, and asked their advice.  Unanimously, they told me that a good bench isn't just for exercise - it's a matter of safety, too.  Given my health issues, I needed to "bite the bullet" and spend money on a commercial-grade, heavy-duty bench.

I winced when I looked up prices online.  Most of the highly rated commercial-grade weight benches are in the mid-hundreds of dollars, with some approaching four figures.  I wanted one that could be used for both flat and incline exercises, and that was going to cost money, no matter what I got.  The one I've just ordered cost almost three times as much (including shipping - very expensive, because it weighs well over 120 pounds - and tax) as my entire weight and bar setup!  That's painful, but it's such a critical item of equipment for me that I didn't have much choice.  (I loved some of the reviews by others who'd bought it . . . "This bench is capable of surviving a nuclear blast or small children.")  I'll pay it off over a few months, with the help of readers who buy my books.  (Let's hear it for royalties!)

Here's what it looks like.

Having now worked out fairly intensively with both commercial-grade and consumer-grade benches, I can say with confidence that it's a worthwhile investment in your health and safety to get the best supporting gear you can.  One can buy cheap weight plates - they're just hunks of metal, after all - but the structures that support them - and you! - while you exercise with them, can hurt you very badly if they let you down.  I feel a lot happier knowing I've got a good bench coming.

Peter

More fun (?) with tractors

Following Saturday's video clip of an antique steam traction engine outpulling a 110hp. modern tractor, I found this collection of tractor pull errors, mishaps and disasters.

Boys and their agricultural toys, I guess!

Peter

The Texas church shooting: dancing in the blood of the victims

I note with real anger the display by various politicians and other commenters, who've jumped on the tragedy in Texas yesterday (sometimes literally within minutes of the news breaking) and used it as yet another excuse to promote their views.  Some of the comments, particularly from non-religious or anti-religious perspectives, have been sickening:

They were in a church that was full of prayers. They need a government who will enact common sense gun laws. #GunControlNow https://t.co/M1wTIe4G01
    — rosanne cash (@rosannecash) November 5, 2017

thoughts and prayers for people who were mowed down in a church sounds especially hollow.
    — Karen Tumulty (@ktumulty) November 5, 2017

They were in church. They had the prayers shot right out of them. Maybe try something else.
    — Michael McKean (@MJMcKean) November 5, 2017

“Thoughts and prayers” again, @realDonaldTrump, idiot? These people were in CHURCH. They WERE praying. pic.twitter.com/AABiR7Jnfo
    — Keith Olbermann (@KeithOlbermann) November 5, 2017

The murdered victims were in a church. If prayers did anything, they'd still be alive, you worthless sack of shit. https://t.co/iGHxPrYrLN
    — Wil Wheaton (@wilw) November 5, 2017

There are many more at the link.

One thing to note about those who rail against religion, and try to debunk it in the case of a tragedy like this:  they're all arrogating to themselves the right to tell God how he/she/it must conduct him/her/itself.  They aren't asking for explanations - they're providing them, according to their perspective, and more or less explicitly rejecting anything that doesn't fit their preconceptions (including the existence [or otherwise] of God, the operation of grace, and so on).

I'm not out to convince anyone of God's existence.  I believe He does;  but talking about it won't persuade many people.  It's my job to live my belief, so that others may see in my life (rather than hear about) the fruits of my faith.  That's why, when people want to tell me what they believe, I respectfully say to (or of) them I'd prefer that they showed me.  (As the famous quotation, wrongly attributed to St. Francis of Assisi but undoubtedly based on his teachings, says:  "Preach the gospel at all times.  If necessary, use words.")

Another aspect is the issue of gun control.  Yes, the gunman was aided in his violence by the possession of an AR15-type rifle;  but if he hadn't had access to it, there are many other ways in which he could have killed as many, if not more victims.  For example, the worst school massacre in America didn't involve firearms, except for the perpetrator's suicide;  explosives were the weapon of choice.  Some of the worst nightclub disasters around the world (e.g. Happy Land in New York, USA;  Blue Bird Café in Montreal, Canada;  Whisky Au Go Go in Brisbane, Australia;  etc.) involved arson using gasoline, not firearms.  In almost all the incidents mentioned, casualties were higher (sometimes much higher) than they were in yesterday's shooting.

As I pointed out after the Winnenden school shooting in Germany:

You can't stop criminal actions by banning things. You can only stop them by stopping the people who commit them. The tools used are basically irrelevant.

I said something similar a couple of years later, in connection with another incident.  Those words remain as true today as ever they were.  The tragedy in Texas yesterday won't change it.

Back in 1925, H. L. Mencken skewered gun control proponents in his usual inimitable style.  Kevin, over at The Smallest Minority, offers one of the best debunkings of gun control that you'll find on the Web.  Barry Snell has another excellent perspective on the gun control debate.  Finally, the late Weaponsman calculated that there may be as many as 660 million firearms in circulation in the USA.  Just how does anyone expect a gun control law to confiscate them all - particularly when those of us who value our Second Amendment rights have no intention of surrendering them?

I won't say more about the Texas shootings yet, because information is still coming out.  Those who are using it to attack religious faith, or agitate for more gun control, know no more than the rest of us;  yet they're gleefully piling on with their attacks and their insinuations.  They're dancing in the blood of the victims.  I don't know any other way to describe their behavior.




Peter

Heh

In honor of this time of year:

No s***, Sherlock!




Peter

Sunday morning music

Now and again, a composer comes along who transcends the boundaries between different genres of music, and appeals to a widely varying audience.  Mike Oldfield is one such artist.  From his 1973 debut album, Tubular Bells, which he recorded when he was only 19 years old, to his most recent new (rather than derivative) album, Man on the Rocks, he's produced an amazing variety of works that are often very different to each other, but all incorporate themes and elements from different genres of music and blend them all into a more or less harmonious whole.  In some cases, he's revisited earlier versions of the music and updated them to reflect his more mature outlook and greater musical experience.  The classic example of this, of course, is his "first love", Tubular Bells. It now exists in multiple versions, some close to the original, some derivative works, greatly expanded and modified to reflect new concepts:

1. Tubular Bells - 1973;
2. The Orchestral Tubular Bells - 1974;
3. Tubular Bells 2003 - a remastered edition of the 1973 album with some newly recorded elements;
4. Tubular Bells II - 1992;
5. Tubular Bells III - 1998;
6. The Millennium Bell - 1999.

In 2008, Mike released 'Music Of The Spheres', an album that not only appealed to his 'regular' listeners, but rocketed to the top of the UK classical charts as well.  Its various elements reflect many musical themes from Mike's earlier albums, transcribed for full orchestra and choir, and updated to blend with his more mature and much further developed musicology.  (For example, the first piece, 'Harbinger', is clearly derived from the opening sequence of the original 'Tubular Bells' album, but in a much more developed, lyrical form.)  Mike uses a choir, and invited New Zealand singer Hayley Westenra to handle the solo voice role, which she does with great distinction.

(The term 'music of the spheres' refers to the philosophical concept traditionally known as 'Musica universalis'.  Wikipedia notes that this "regards proportions in the movements of celestial bodies—the Sun, Moon, and planets—as a form of musica (the Medieval Latin term for music). This 'music' is not usually thought to be literally audible, but a harmonic, mathematical or religious concept. The idea continued to appeal to thinkers about music until the end of the Renaissance, influencing scholars of many kinds, including humanists.")

A full, uninterrupted version of 'Music Of The Spheres' is not available on YouTube.  However, there is a partial performance of the live orchestral debut of the piece in Bilbao, Spain, in 2008, performed by the Basque National Orchestra.  Mike Oldfield is (of course!) on classical guitar, and Hayley Westenra also sings in person.  The music is interspersed with interview snippets with Mike Oldfield.  I've chosen to use that today, to give you a flavor of the piece as a whole.  You'll find more tracks on YouTube.

Turn up your volume, and enjoy!

If your pocket runs a little deeper, I recommend buying the expanded 'live' edition of the album.  It contains not only the studio recording, but also the live Bilbao recording that you hear in the excerpts above.  They lend a new and interesting tone to the piece.

Peter

Steam vs. internal combustion - guess who wins?

I had to smile at this video of an antique steam tractor versus a modern internal-combustion-engine tractor.

I guess lots and lots of heavy steel, and a big flywheel, can still get it done!

Peter

Antifa unmasked, by a former leader of the movement in Australia

In the light of demonstrations planned today, I thought this article by a former Antifa leader in Australia might prove interesting.

ANTIFA is a growing extreme group who believe violence is legitimate.

. . .

I came to believe that war was a symptom of bigger systems at play in society and they were the real enemy, like white supremacy and patriarchy. Antifa believe these systems need to be smashed through a process of ‘de-platforming’ to save the world. People who don’t necessarily agree on everything are united to attack their common enemy — anyone in the right wing of politics.

This micro-society became my life for four years.

They believe historically their roots were fighting Nazi oppression. They run a website which is updated every couple of weeks with a hit list of right wing names. They believe if these people are allowed to speak, society will suffer. So, they must be pushed back.

There is no mission statement, rather, it’s a dangerous rhetoric. There are a lot of very damaged people who are drawn to it.

. . .

The radical left of Antifa presents itself as being about compassion and empathy; it’s a Trojan horse. All conversations are about entitlement and rights, not responsibility. When these people talk about freedom, they really mean freedom from responsibility.

Often the people who are drawn to this cult don’t have a strong identity outside it. I’m not a psychologist but, like ISIS, it gives people a sense of belonging to something and having purpose.

. . .

It’s a miserable mindset. When I got out of it and stopped feeling oppressed, I finally felt like I could take control of my life. That’s what I intend to do now.

There's more at the link.  Recommended reading.

I'm sure the same dynamic is operating in the US branches of Antifa.  I've met their ilk in this country, and also overseas.  I'd call it a nihilistic approach to life, which - in the absence of any 'traditional' purpose and meaning - makes tearing down the principles and beliefs of others its central objective.

Peter

A reminder: there are some great guns available in our fundraiser for Andi

I wrote about our fundraiser last week.  Briefly, a member of our Blogorado family, Andi, has suffered a stroke, which was misdiagnosed initially, leading to complications.  She doesn't have medical insurance, and is having to fund her rehabilitation on a pay-as-you-go basis.  Several of us have pooled our resources by donating guns from our personal collections, and we're offering them as an incentive to raise funds for her, along with some non-gun prizes (jewelry, books, etc.) for those who'd prefer them.  You'll find full details at the link.

You'll find photographs of all the prizes at Old NFO's place, in three parts:  here, here and here.  To whet your appetite, here are two of the ten guns on offer (click the images for a larger view).  The first is the Taurus Model 44 revolver in .44 Magnum that I tested at Blogorado a couple of years ago (you can read about that here).  It's in minty condition, and I can testify from personal experience that it's about as easy to shoot as a .44 Magnum gets.  Its size and heft, the ported barrel, and that big Hogue rubber grip, all combine to help tame the recoil.

The second is a custom AR-15 hand-built by aepilotjim. It's a very fancy rifle indeed.  Details of the build are:

BCM 18” SPR Mk 12 upper with PRI carbon fiber handguard, BCM BCG, all Wolff springs except buffer. KNS anti-roll trigger pins, JP Enterprises Silent capture buffer and spring, Magpul PRS stock, Magpul MIAD grip, Norgon ambi mag release, Teal Blue Bravo Ambi Bolt catch, AeroPrecision lower with 45° safety, Harris bipod adapter for front rail, full length top rail, BUIS front sight, Geissele SSA-E trigger, BCM gunfighter charging handle.

Jim swears it's a tack-driver, and I believe him. I'm kinda drooling over it myself . . .

Old NFO's most recent update on the fundraiser may be read here.  As I write these words, the funds raised stand at $11,250 (out of a goal of $25,000);  in other words, we're at 45% of our goal.  The fundraiser will run until the end of November.  Prize-winners will be drawn at the beginning of December, on a first-come-first-served basis:  i.e. the first name drawn will take their pick of the prizes on offer, the second name drawn will take the next pick, and so on until all the prizes have been allocated.  (Some contributors have already told us that if their name is drawn, they won't take a prize, so another name should be drawn instead.  That's very generous of them - thank you all! - as it increases the chance of winning for everyone else.)

I know this is a difficult time of the year to raise money, but please, readers, help us to make this Christmas a little merrier for Andi, her husband and her two sons.  They're facing crippling medical bills;  even if we raise our target of $25,000, that won't even begin to cover the initial hospital charges - only help with her rehabilitation expenses.  It would be very nice to give them one less thing to worry about.  It's a good cause, and there are some great prizes to be won.  What's not to like?

Thanks, friends.

Peter

Saturday, November 4th: a target-rich environment?

I note that Antifa is to kick off its demonstrations across the USA tomorrow, November 4th.  I've mentioned them before, and you can read the latest news about them here.

Frankly, I suspect they'll be more flim-flam than focus, and more smoke than fire.  I have little or no respect for these "useful idiots".  Nevertheless, in Berkeley, CA and elsewhere, they've shown a tendency to violence and disrespect for the law (let alone individual rights).  Therefore, I trust all my readers will be prepared to defend their rights against them, should that become necessary.

Round here we refer to that sort of thing as "a target-rich environment".  One hopes Antifa will have more sense than to try their nonsense around here . . . but if they do, they're very likely to meet with a warm reception.  The locals probably won't even wait for the police before they commence appropriate greetings.  We don't put up with that sort of thing in these parts.  We value our rights too highly, and we aren't about to surrender them in the face of thuggish intimidation.

Peter

The stomach boggles

I'm not averse to trying foods that are new to me, but I draw the line at some of them.  Among other things, Korean kimchi has been a gustatory challenge for me.  I've been able to tolerate a couple of relatively mild versions, but the full-on gag-reflex-strength stuff has defeated me for years.  I still find that odd, given that I like sauerkraut, hoisin sauce, soy sauce, and so on.  Those should have prepared my palate for kimchi, but somehow the latter just tastes . . . weird!  Maybe I haven't yet been exposed to good kimchi - if such an animal exists.  Some of my friends, including US servicemen who were posted to Korea, deny emphatically that it does.

That's why this article made me blink.

Plunging their pink-gloved hands into cartons of cabbages and slathering the vegetables with a bright-red sauce, more than 2,300 people on Friday got to grips with making the spicy, fermented Korean staple of kimchi.

About 60 tons of kimchi, which is made with salted cabbage doused in a spicy chili paste and flavored with garlic, ginger, fish sauce and fermented seafood, among other things, were prepared on the first day of the Seoul Kimchi Festival.

An acquired taste for foreigners, kimchi is traditionally eaten as a side dish at every meal. South Koreans consumed about 1.85 million tonnes of kimchi in 2016, according to the World Institute of Kimchi.

. . .

Organizers aim to make a total of 120 tons of kimchi over the three-day event, which will be distributed to needy households across Seoul.

“This kimchi, along with our warm hearts, will be shared with our neighbors in need of help,” said festival director Shin Myung-ki.

There's more at the link.

Making a hundred and twenty tons of kimchi over three days?  I can't help wondering what the air in, around and over that festival must be like.  I fear it'll smell like an airborne chemical and/or biological weapon has been let loose!  And as for "sharing it with our neighbors in need of help" . . . if they're in need of help now, they're likely to be doubly so after they get through that much kimchi!

No.  I'm afraid kimchi is one cultural and culinary artifact I won't be appropriating!




Peter

If you own a consumer-grade fire extinguisher, check it NOW!

It may be subject to a recall and exchange program affecting over 40 million units in the USA and Canada.

Name of product:  Kidde fire extinguishers with plastic handles

Hazard:  The fire extinguishers can become clogged or require excessive force to discharge and can fail to activate during a fire emergency. In addition, the nozzle can detach with enough force to pose an impact hazard.

Remedy:  Replace

Recall date:  November 2, 2017

There's more at the link.  Note that the extinguishers were sold under numerous brand names, not just Kidde.

Kidde has provided serial number lookup instructions to help you identify whether your extinguisher(s) is/are involved.  See the list at that link, as well as instructions on how to return your extinguisher.

Folks, I've been caught up in two building fires.  They're no fun at all - and that's putting it very mildly!  I think everyone should have a couple of extinguishers available, not just at home, but in your vehicle, too.  How many times have you seen a blackened patch on the road where a car burned out?  I've actually seen two vehicles in the process of burning out, due to electrical and/or fuel system faults.  It would have been very handy if the driver had had an extinguisher, to put out the fire before it got out of control and turned the vehicle into a total loss.

I've bought these 2½-pound and 5-pound fire extinguishers (follow the links for details).  They're filled with so-called 'Purple K', for use at home and in Miss D.'s and my vehicles.

They aren't as effective as water for fighting dry material fires, but they're a lot more useful for electrical or chemical fires, such as one might encounter in the kitchen or garage - and Purple K is non-corrosive on metal, making it ideal for putting out hard-to-get-at fires in chimneys that use metal flues and piping.  I researched the subject carefully, since there are an awful lot of cheaper "consumer grade" fire extinguishers that have proved less than optimum in dealing with an actual fire.  These aren't "consumer grade", but the kind of thing you'll find in refineries and manufacturing operations.  That makes them rather more expensive than the cheap stuff . . . but then, they're more likely to get the job done, and I have no objection at all to paying for that sort of reassurance!

Peter

Because . . . um . . . science???

I'm still trying to decide whether this is a belated April Fool joke, or a real news report.

Burying a pair of underpants in a field may not seem the obvious starting point for the perfect roast, but farmers are being urged to dig deep for tastier meat.

The Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB) and Quality Meat Scotland (QMS) claim interring a pair of cotton smalls in a pasture can reveal vital information about soil fertility.

According to the experts, sterile and lifeless soil will keep underwear intact, but organically thriving soil will eat away at the briefs, leaving nothing but the elastic waistband.

Dig up the pants after just two months, and it is possible to judge how healthy the land is.

. . .

Scottish farmer Iain Green, of Corskie Farm, near Elgin, in Moray, has been burying his pants in various fields since September.

"The theory behind the test is that the cotton will be devoured by the microbes and bacteria in the soil, so the more you have the better,” he said.

"We buried them in different fields, some which we think have healthier soil and others which aren't as good."

Earlier this week fellow farmers and officials gathered at Mr Green’s farm to dig up his underpants and analyse the findings. Some had entirely disintegrated while others looked like they had been recently buried.

Mr Green added: "I think quite a few of them were quite surprised and are away to try it for themselves.

There's more at the link.

Hmmm . . .

• I presume there's a different decomposition rate between various materials.  Is there a "cotton decomposition index" of some sort, to compare with a "wool decomposition index" or a "flannel decomposition index", to obtain accurate comparisons between them?
• I presume the origin of the underwear also has a bearing.  Would one use Chinese-made underwear to research a rice paddy, but American Carhartts to check a cow pasture?
• What about farmers' religious beliefs?  Is it licit to use (say) a Mormon temple garment as a test item?  Does a Catholic codpiece out-perform (so to speak) a Dervish diaper?
• How deep should the underwear be buried?  Too shallow, and it might get grazed, which might be bad for animal digestion.  (Can underwear be ruminated?)  Too deep, and it might find itself in the real nether regions!  What depth for optimum decomposition?
• Can (and should) the underwear be re-used for its original purpose (after laundering, of course!) if it doesn't decompose?

These questions, and many others, are very important - because SCIENCE!!!

(Of course, since the article concludes by informing us that "The ‘Soil my Undies’ challenge was first launched by the California Farmers’ Guild in July", we might conclude that it's not so much "science" as "Californians being Californians" . . . )




Peter

Some of the best magical military fantasy around

I'm thoroughly enjoying "The Fall of Dragons", fifth and last volume in Miles Cameron's Traitor Son cycle, which has just been published.

It's an impressive and profound conclusion to the series.  The only thing wrong with it is that it's the last book in the cycle!  The blurb reads:

In the climax of the Traitor Son Cycle, the allied armies of the Wild and the Kingdoms of men and women must face Ash for control of the gates to the hermetical universe, and for control of their own destinies. But exhaustion, treachery and time may all prove deadlier enemies.

In Alba, Queen Desiderata struggles to rebuild her kingdom wrecked by a year of civil war, even as the Autumn battles are fought in the west. In the Terra Antica, The Red Knight attempts to force his unwilling allies to finish the Necromancer instead of each other.

But as the last battle nears, The Red Knight makes a horrifying discovery...all of this fighting may have happened before.

I suggest reading the books in sequence, because the overall story arc will make more sense that way.  The five books, in order, are:

1. The Red Knight
2. The Fell Sword
3. The Dread Wyrm
4. The Plague of Swords
5. The Fall of Dragons

Mr. Cameron (a pseudonym - does anyone know his real name, or the name[s] under which he's published other books?) brings to his writing a thorough, practical background in medieval and early Renaissance arms and armor, and their use in battle.  He also displays an impressive knowledge of the magical school of hermeticism, and employs it extensively as a counterpoint to more traditional religious faiths, with emphasis on Christianity in a heavily Catholic context, but also involving Orthodoxy and Islam in their primitive forms, as well as animist beliefs and traditions.  It makes for a very interesting synthesis of myth and legend, faith and fantasy.

If you like military-oriented fantasy with a strongly-developed magical system, this series is for you.  Highly recommended.

Peter

A key player in the transgender "wars"

The Spectator in Britain has a very interesting article about Prof. Jordan Peterson, one of the seminal figure in the conflict over transgender issues.  Here's an excerpt.

At the University of Toronto, after receiving two written warnings, [Peterson] has been in danger of losing his job following his announcement that he would refuse to use the preferred gender pronouns of students and faculty who don’t identify with their biological gender, to the fury of radical transgender activists. The use of such pronouns is mandatory under a recently instituted Canadian law, Bill C-16. Peterson rejects the injunction on free speech grounds. ‘I’m not going to cede linguistic territory to post-modernist neo-Marxists,’ he says. He has expressed the view that he might use the preferred gender pronoun of a particular person, if asked by that individual, rather than having the decision foisted on him by the state.

. . .

Free speech is a core value for him — the core value — and one that is becoming increasingly pressing ... That elements of the left have begun to label free speech as somehow a ‘right-wing’ value is particularly rattling (although such censorious thinking has a long history in radical left ideology).

‘If I can’t say what I think, then I don’t get to think, and if I can’t think then I can’t orient myself in the world, and if I can’t do that, then I’m going to fall into a pit and take everyone else with me,’ Peterson says.

Peterson has been saddled by some of his critics with the label ‘alt-right’, which he views as a ridiculous slander. He describes himself as a ‘classic British liberal’ who makes those on both the left and right uncomfortable. He supports socialised health care and the liberalisation of drug use, and is libertarian on most social issues.

‘Alt-right’ is certainly one of the most inaccurate pigeonholes you could imagine cramming him into. His heroes include Dostoevsky, Nietzsche, Freud, Jung, Orwell and Solzhenitsyn. He is a Christian, but more on the pattern of existential Christians such as Søren Kierkegaard or Paul Tillich than anything to be found in the Midwest Bible belt.

Peterson’s thought-crime is that he disagrees with the view of transgender activists that gender is a social construct and has no grounding in biology (although he is not opposed to transgender rights in general). So why does his right to free speech trump a transgender activist’s right not to be offended? Why not just keep his thoughts to himself?

‘Because thoughts aren’t like that,’ he says. ‘People mostly think by talking. Not only do they think by talking, but they correct their thoughts by talking. If you deprive people of the right to think, then you doom them to suffering. You doom their stupidity of its right to die. You should allow your thoughts to be cast away into the fire — instead of you.’

. . .

‘The humanities in the universities have become almost incomprehensibly shallow and corrupt in multiple ways,’ he says. ‘They don’t rely on science because they are not scientifically educated. This is true particularly in sociology, where they mask their complete ignorance of science by claiming that science is just another mode of knowing and that it’s only privileged within the structure of the oppressive Eurocentric patriarchy. It’s appalling. We’re not having an intelligent conversation, we are having an ideological conversation.

‘Students, instead of being ennobled or inculcated into the proper culture, the last vestiges of structure are stripped from them by post-modernism and neo-Marxism, which defines everything in terms of relativism and power.’

There's much more at the link.

I've been reading about Prof. Peterson since YouTube and Google tried to shut down his accounts, apparently because of his political incorrectness.  They were restored after a public outcry, but if the left considers him dangerous enough to try to silence him, I think he's probably worth listening to.  His YouTube channel contains a lot of material, particularly the 70-odd videos in a series he titles "Professor against Political Correctness".  Recommended.

As one example, here's Prof. Peterson in February 2017, speaking about postmodernism, the philosophy that underlies most current liberal and progressive thought.  A transcript of his talk may be found here.

Wisdom indeed!

Peter

It's time to carefully assess your risk of attack

I've written many times about issues related to personal security.  In particular, I've quoted the sage advice of John Farnam on how to avoid getting into situations that threaten your security.  Since it remains as true as ever, here it is again.  (To see the original, click here and scroll down to the entry for 19 Mar 03.)

The best way to handle any potentially injurious encounter is: Don’t be there. Arrange to be somewhere else. Don’t go to stupid places. Don’t associate with stupid people. Don’t do stupid things. This is the advice I give to all students of defensive firearms. Winning a gunfight, or any other potentially injurious encounter, is financially and emotionally burdensome. The aftermath will become your full-time job for weeks or months afterward, and you will quickly grow weary of writing checks to lawyer(s). It is, of course, better than being dead or suffering a permanently disfiguring or disabling injury, but the “penalty” for successfully fighting for your life is still formidable.

Crowds of any kind, particularly those with an agenda, such as political rallies, demonstrations, picket lines, etc are good examples of “stupid places.” Any crowd with a high collective energy level harbors potential catastrophe. To a lesser degree, bank buildings, hospital emergency rooms, airports, government buildings, and bars (particularly crowded ones) fall into the same category. All should be avoided. When they can’t be avoided, we should make it a practice to spend only the minimum time necessary there and then quickly get out.

There's more at the link.

In the light of the terror attack in New York City this week, where a pickup truck was used as a battering ram to run over cyclists on a bicycle path, we should use Mr. Farnam's advice to reconsider what might be a "stupid place" in an age of terrorism.  We should also note the increase in violent crime in many cities, the escalation of random violence in public places (e.g. the shooting at a Walmart in Colorado yesterday, leaving three dead and the gunman still on the loose), more prevalent political intolerance (often expressed violently), and other risks, and plan accordingly.  It's all very well to say that we should not allow terrorists, criminals and violence to intimidate us into changing our way of life.  It's fine and dandy to say that anything else is cowardice, "letting the terrorists win" or "giving in to crime" or "being intimidated by violence".  However, if you follow such advice, remember that it's also a surefire, guaranteed way to increase your risk of becoming a victim.

I urge you, dear readers, to evaluate your own risk profile based on where you live, potential flashpoints for crime and/or terrorism and/or confrontation in your immediate vicinity, and the nature of culture and society in your area.  Some places will be far more prone to such risks than others, of course.  For example:

• If you live in inner-city Chicago or Baltimore, your chances of becoming the victim of violent crime are exponentially higher than someone like myself, living in small-town Texas.
• If you live in a place that's become an icon of all America stands for, such as New York City or Washington DC, you're almost certainly at greater risk from terrorists (who want to attack such icons because of the publicity they will generate) than those of us living in less symbolic locations.
• If you live in an area with a recent history of political volatility, such as Berkeley, CA or Charlottesville, VA, your chances of running into violent political demonstrations are significantly higher than someone living in an average farming community out in the midwest.

Another factor to consider is whether you're on or near a major road or rail link, one that might be targeted by terrorists in its own right, or might be used by others to get to and from a place where they plan to demonstrate, or riot, or commit crimes.  Any attack involving that link might suck you in, whether you like it or not.  There's also the risk to you if you use public transport such as Chicago's 'L' or New York City's subway system.  That's not a safe option if crime increases (as it apparently is in both cities, according to news reports).

Basically, if you're aware of the risks that you might confront, you can plan to avoid them as far as possible.  If you can't avoid some of them, you can prepare yourself for them, and take steps to reduce your vulnerability and/or defend yourself if necessary.  However, if you don't analyze your situation and plan accordingly, you're essentially operating in Condition White, an easy victim.  (If you aren't familiar with the Color Code of situational awareness, you should be.  Go read about it at the link.)

I can't assess your risks for you, or suggest the best way for you to deal with them.  That's in your hands.  However, I can and do encourage you to do so right now, if you haven't already done so.  It's become a cliche to say "Forewarned is forearmed", but it remains as true today as ever it was.

Peter

Timeless wisdom from a "third grade dropout"

Courtesy of Maggie's Farm, here's a truly outstanding presentation.  Please listen to the whole thing.  It's important, and only ten minutes long, so it won't take much of your time.

Well done, sir.  I'll be saving that video to my hard drive, and listening to it again when the mood takes me.

Peter

A coat made of salmon skin?

I wouldn't have believed it possible to make a coat out of something so fragile as fish skin, but it seems it was routine in times past in Siberia.

Along the lower reaches of the Amur River, where the water empties into the Pacific Ocean, the climate—unlike most of Siberia—is wet. To keep dry, the indigenous Nivkhi shrugged on fish skin coats like the one pictured here. These ingeniously constructed coats are a testament to the people’s holistic approach to natural resources; they also tell the story of a worldly culture and a wild place.

Fish skin is light, flexible, strong, and easy to work—the Gore-Tex of its day. Matchless as rainwear in milder seasons, layering fur close to the skin kept people cozy in winter. A Nivkhi woman—for only women sewed—prepared 100 salmon skins for this particular coat. She would have scraped away the flesh before washing the skins in salt water (women keeping the craft alive today use soap), then drying and beating the skins before piecing together the coat with thread fashioned from fish skin or sinew. “When it gets wet, [the thread] expands and fills the hole made by the needle, making the seams watertight,” says Cunera Buijs, the museum’s curator of Arctic regions. “It’s so clever.”

There's more at the link.

I'd never heard of clothes being made of fish skin, although I've owned a knife and a sword whose makers used shark skin to cover their hilts (it provided an excellent gripping surface, rough and raspy, a bit like a fine sandpaper).  I wonder whether modern clothes manufacturers could learn anything from this ancient "technology"?  Could we improve modern synthetic materials by "cloning" some of the qualities of salmon skin?

Fascinating questions . . .

Peter

Sheriff's car meets deer - at 114 mph!

The result is spectacular.  I won't put a detailed photograph on public display, because it will undoubtedly upset sensitive viewers, but if you'd like to see it, click here.

Here's a video clip of the collision.  It's not as graphic as the still image linked above, but it's still pretty raw.  Again, sensitive viewers should not watch it.

Yikes!  Hitting a deer at any speed is bad enough, but at 114 mph . . . !




Peter