Serioso And His Discontents

The title of this article is an associative memory link to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization_and_Its_Discontents

By Sigmund Freud.

Why? Well, because it tickles me a little, and because that’s how my memory works (making wide associations between things based on even very small hooks, then filter to the relevant ones), and because Serioso wishes to psychoanalyze me at a distance, and because it is clear that my “civilization” rules here are causing him “discontent”. Besides, I had to read it for some class once and it’s sitting on my shelf and in my brain, though I don’t remember why I was studying psych… though I really liked my sister’s Abnormal Psychology books when I read them. (She was home from college and I was about 8th grade and bored. But I digress, which is how my brain works on pretty much all topics, [though I don’t type them all, or even most of them] until I prune a digression from boredom, which is now…)

In another thread on Soros, Serioso worked very hard to derail the discussion from the topic, to me. Now I personally find me a fairly boring topic and not very relevant to anything, really (more on that below… the empty vessel…) but for some reason, Serioso is fascinated with me, and especially my inner workings. So, OK, in the interest of having that thread not become a narcissistic extispicy, that particular bit of augury will be put here in its own thread.

Sidebar on me about me:

Please forgive the Druid practice references if, for some unknown reason, they offend your sensibilities. Along the way in life I picked up a Master Druid credential and, well, sometimes those thoughts fit a situation… But no worries, I don’t practice sacrifice of living things, animal or otherwise, just the odd sacrificial Cabernet with Leg-O-Lamb ;-) (Mostly I’m just happy that at 50-something I still had a sense of whimsy) I’ll be scattering some bits from me, talking about me, through this posting, in the hope that it helps Serioso to “know me” enough to let go of the fixation on me. Or at least have a reference page to refer to when looking for more about me.

The Quotes

In the other posting, the discussion distilled down to this plaintive bleat, after I’d admonished that he ought to talk about topics, things, thoughts, and basically anything but me, as ‘I am not relevant’:

End of a long comment by me:

Just follow directions, do not “personalize” or insult folks traits and abilities and we ought to be fine. Hopefully the above will help you with those social skills…

Speak about TOPICS, Theories, assertions, facts, claims, etc. No worries.

Question someone’s ability, sanity, qualifications: BZZZZT!

Oh, and avoid the classical logical fallacies if you can, it saves time…

Got it?

The response from Serioso:

Serioso says:
20 September 2016 at 5:05 am (Edit)

No I don’t get it at all! My mission here is to understand your thinking processes, and to try to figure out why some of these processes seem (to me) irrational, even crazy. So I cannot avoid what you see as insults. I do not know how to avoid making these insults, nor do you. My comments are necessarily personal because I cannot reconcile my two views of you: One view is rational and intelligent, the other irrational to the point of stupidity. It is therefore impossible for me to avoid comments about the person, because that is what interests me the most. So I plan to continue my questions about your ability, sanity, qualifications, etc. These matter to me.

That exchange is the reason for this posting, and for my “self explanatory” remarks at the top about how I chose the title, and the sidebar on choice of Druid terms of art for their descriptive imagery. Since Serioso wants it to be “about me”, and despite my having done one of these postings before https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2011/03/16/its-not-about-me/ (which really is about me), he wants more; so I’m going to annotate this post with some bits about how my cognition functions just so he has a ‘window on my world’. Though I doubt it will help.

Why NOT about me?

My basic persona is humble. I’m fond of Buddhism. “Be the empty vessel” speaks to me. “Mu! The Question Is Ill Formed!” is a fundamental part of my cognition. “Wanting what you can not have is the source of discontent” (something Serioso ought to ponder as he strives to understand inside of me). I also come from Amish roots where “Pridefulness is a sin” and find much risk of pridefulnesses in talking about me. I avoid pride, but some folks take facts as boast and then troubles begin. So at the risk of my mortal soul (we left Amish long ago, but were not shunned… Grandad was a working blacksmith, and that made him OK even if he wasn’t Amish, and Grandma kept a more or less Amish house. But I digress…) I’ll post some things about my abilities.

So we must first start with the fact that “there is no me”.

Certainly, there is a body, and a brain, and some kind of cognition that happens inside of it. But in terms of Ego (to use the Freudian aspect) there just isn’t. That is a fantasy created ex machina. At best, I see myself as a logic engine with a support system (that often demands attention to things like washing and sleeping via shoving discontents at the cognition engine against its will…) To quest for “who I am”, is a Mu! quest, a dive into a fantasy and void. “I’m the urban spaceman baby and now here’s the twist, I … Don’t… Exist!”… This is not MY novel thought. It isn’t even a new thought. It has been around for thousands of years. Embrace it. To understand “me”, internalize it. “I am but an egg in the process of becoming”.

I point at the Grosse Pointe Blank movie in the prior link, and in particular where the star complains ~”Why does everyone always think it’s about me?!”. The reason I point to it is because that is how it all impresses me. Feed data to a logic engine, find associative memory links, reduce to subset that contains all the information pertinent to the question and as little else as possible, type. There is no ‘me’ in that process. Yet Serioso wishes to find the ‘me’ in it… and is discontented when he can not get what he desires…

Oh, and also staunchly refuses to address the only bits that matter: Input data, associated memory findings, logic set (dumping things like non-sequiturs and ad hominems), reduction filter (I was extraordinarily high scoring on the GMAT portion that just looks at relevancy of a datum to the problem solution). All THOSE bits result in the posting he can’t believe comes from me (due to it not matching some ill described things he believes a priori…)

All of that, and a bit more, makes it very hard for ‘me’ to talk about me. How do you talk about something that doesn’t exist?

I can talk about the mechanism. I can talk about feelings. I can talk about the software ( as in: I had a formal symbolic logic class at university. For extra credit, I derived NOR and NAND operators in their symbology since they were lacking, at least in the class, and I was familiar with them from the semiconductor class I’d taken at the local Junior College while in my senior year… of high school…) But what of that has any meaning about this ‘me’ that Serioso quests for? I have no feelings about NOR and NAND beyond the vague feeling they are useful. I rarely use the formal logic tools anymore (mostly since writing them down is slow and simply having the brain set up the syllogism works faster). Saying that I’m that set of hardware, data, and logic gates doesn’t satisfy him. I’m at a loss.

When your core wisdom has realized “there is no me”, just some stickyware, it becomes very hard to talk about what is not real.

Sidebar on Links:

The frequent reader will have noticed a few more random links in this post than in most. I’m using that as an example of the associative memory effect. It’s what ‘fires off’ in the brain when I’m thinking. The nice thing is that hyperlinks let you do something similar in print. Now inside the stickyware, it just comes across as very fast flashes of visual memory, or auditory for things like songs, or smell and taste memories if I use words like chocolate or skunk. So, to understand ‘me’, or at least the hardware / memory parts, internalize the idea of constant flashes of association with every noun and many verbs. Swan Dive has a visual of a man on a board about 10 meters up, and the dive. Swim has a sensation of the pool water over my skin (about 6? years old?) and cool and wet, then a secondary echo of me at about 20 in a wet suit off Coos Bay Oregon, 40 feet down and purple lips from the cold, and shooting a Cabezon… that Cabezon linking to the web page on it that I read years later AND to the taste of it that evening…) Eventually the memory cascade dies down. (That bit on swimming happens in about 1/4 second or less). That cascade of associations then gets tied into understanding “whatever” it was that was the initiating question… It may be ‘that aspe thing‘… I don’t know how it works inside other folks brains.

But say the words “symbolic logic” and I’m back in class, visual of the prof and the paper in front of me, then in the dorm room reading the book, then… all in a rapid cascade. The chain of synapses fires, and is gone. “Like tears, in the rain”

and that clip plays on my internal screen…

The Hubris or The Facts?

Then there’s that thorny problem that I’m not normal. (Where normal is ‘average’).

It isn’t hubris on my part. I don’t have any real ego tied up in it. I’ve often said that “Intelligence is highly over rated; it does not bring joy.” or something similar. Yet “Reality just is. -E.M.Smith”, and I must acknowledge it.

In high school I took the Kuder Aptitude and Kuder Preference tests. (Hope I spelled that right, it’s been about 45 years…). I scored 99.9+ percentile (i.e. off of their scale) on everything but one that was 99.1 IIRC, and the other one, my worst score, 86 percentile in clerical. (Likely because I would get bored with string searching and the mind would wander…)

I know my I.Q. score (the ‘councilor’ didn’t realize I can read things upside down, or backward, or mirror imaged… and a glance at the upside down angled away ledger book in front of him was enough for me to pick them up. No, I’m not going to share them. I was told not to, and, well, it seems like good advice. But they are well away from average… both verbal and non-verbal nearly identical (within 1/10 of the error band).

On the PSAT scores, I was exactly the same, verbal and non, and well above average.

On the SAT scores, I was also exactly the same. They qualify me for Mensa. (99.5 percentile is their cut-off? I need to apply to them some day…)

On the GMAT, my score was high enough that Wharton School of Business solicited me. I’d not applied to them. (Some life issues caused me to not accept. I was making nearly 6 figures a year, and they wanted $50,000 a year (plus living expenses), that’s $150,000 a year net swing and I didn’t have it and would not accept that much debt. Then there was the new relationship with my now spouse…)

So those are the facts. I have hardware that works well. I’ve tried to be fairly careful about the software and got a complete and functional set (in school focused on useful things, like calculus, chemistry, logic, and avoided crap things when possible, though I did have one ill fated Sociology class where I learned they can’t think clearly… I’ve also been very careful about letting crap data in… that FORTRAN class in college and those dirty data traps in the homework had a big impact…)

So that’s “just the facts”. What do I think about them?

I think I’m lucky to have good hardware, I’m grateful to the folks who taught me good software and how to keep a tidy mind (special mention to Mr. McGuire in high school Chem & Physics – he was a champ at calling out Bull Shit and error.) I’m sad that high IQ is more burden than help in finding happiness and friends. (One of the ‘draws’ to Mensa is, as one member put it “Everyone gets your jokes!”) Imagine life where nobody gets your jokes, understands your explanations, or cares about what interests you. That was the first 18 years of my life. Well, really, about 16 for the explaining. Then I started tutoring other kids in math and science and learned how to explain things well…

BTW, that’s another point: Doing the math tutor thing, I’d look at an algebra problem and write down the answer. Then when I had to teach someone how to do it, I realized I didn’t know how to do it. It just happened. By finding ways to “explain how to do it” I taught myself some formulaic ways to go about it. That was the first time I realize not everyone has the “flash” of understanding. Many just plod through methods by hand… So to “understand me”, if you are a plodder, will be very hard, as explaining the “flash” has never worked well. Things just fit, or they don’t, and when they fit, the result is visible. FWIW, I don’t remember any case where “the flash” was wrong when subjected to a longer method proof. It has been wrong on details on first introduction to a field when I’m just learning the ropes of it, but usually it is wrong in a simplified way and does point to a ‘dig here!’ for more elaboration.

So given that, how likely is it that someone who is not 2 or 3 sigmas above the norm, who likely doesn’t have “the flash”, and who believes in the importance of the Ego (and who may not have the associative memory Aspe like firing off all the time) will come to have true understanding of the non-me of me? IMHO, the best response would be: “Mu! The question is ill formed” but I’ll leave it for him to reach that stage of enlightenment.

Specifics To The Quest(ion)

Note the parenthetical. I often have nested parenthetical thoughts. They come in “a flash’ too. 1/10 second or less kinds of things. (Now you can see how painfully slow typing it out can be…). So when thinking of a title “Specifics To Serioso’s Question” and “Specifics To His Quest” pop up in one ‘flash’ as a parenthetical construct, then I drop out the proper name putting in “The” and I’m done. Usually about that point I translate the parenthetical to normal English and “move on”, but here I’ve left it intact as an example of thought process. But internally I always hear the dual echo of “Quest” and “Question” whichever one I’ve typed for this heading…

So I had said, basically, speak to data, logic, processing, or filtering, not about me or personal traits. Serioso can’t (or won’t) ‘go there’. OK, here’s the dissection.

No I don’t get it at all!

I suspect Serioso is quite intelligent enough to ‘get it’ for “data, logic, processing, filtering”, but in fact meant “Oh No Mr. Bill, that’s not what I want!” Sloppy, at best, and being charitable. (Either that, or he’s way less smart than I think.)

My mission here is to understand your thinking processes,

Man on a mission, eh? And self centered too. I, and all of you others, are expected to indulge in a personal mission… OK, you get one posting, this one. (Well, really two, I went through the ‘not me’ one long ago, but I guess you forgot, so ‘one more’…)

Also note the “your thinking processes”, as though there is more than one “thinking” and it is a linear “process”.

First off, I just think. It’s a gestalt thing. I can also do tricks, like calculus and cooking, but those are processes, not thinking. So “on a mission” to decompose a gestalt into component parts… i.e. tilt at windmills.

and to try to figure out why some of these processes seem (to me) irrational, even crazy.

Crazy, eh?

Well, first off, you never bothered to look at the processes in postings, nor the data, nor much of anything of substance posted. Just toss insults at me, denigrate my character, intelligence, or sanity, and then bleat about it. OK, we all have our faults…

BUT, what you also seem to have been impervious to is that I have a set of certifications that make such bleats nothing but noise on the wind. (That last sets this “flash” playing in the sound centers of the mind…)

Along with the intelligence certification by many agencies listed above, I had hours of psych interviews and the MMPI, and more, to be selected for a NASA study to design the tests used to select shuttle astronauts. I’m NASA (the old, reliable one) certified sane, and a nice non-violent guy.

Now you can accept that, and see the absurdity in the “crazy” statement of yours, or reject it and continue wandering in the desert. Your choice. Just wander without me, please… if you chose that path. This is the 4th or 5th time I’ve pointed this out, yet you still like the ‘crazy’ and ‘insane’ line of attack. Slow learner I guess…

But back to the syllogism

Let’s look at some words.

[implied subject “I”] try to [figure out why] [noun clause] seem to “me” irrational, even crazy.

Note that this is “all about you” and not about me? I’m only in the noun clause and only as some ill defined “processes” of thought that in fact are indivisible in the gestalt. Now, just for moment, please, consider this:

For YOU to understand why YOU have feelings and / or attitudes about ME has a whole lot more to do with YOU than with ME.

We are all, each and every one of us, 100% responsible for our own feeling, wants, desires, attitudes, and anything else inside our head. I can not “make you angry” and you can not “upset me”. (That is the fallacy of PC speech, BTW, since only the offended can cause their own offense; to accuse someone else of doing it is daft. A Mu! thing.) Only I can let me choose to become upset, and only you can choose to make yourself angry through your choices of response to the world. (Basic Buddhism… really). So I choose to be centered, calm, and happy. (Pretty much all the time… I like it that way) You have chosen to “want what you cannot have” [understanding the ‘parts’ of a gestalt | knowing the inside of another persons brain | find fault in others to explain your fault] and so are unhappy. Sorry, I can’t help you with that. Only you can look inside yourself to find why you make yourself unhappy and seek what does not exist. Only you, the chooser of your mental state, can enquire into it and explain it.

Now, if your puzzlement is about some aspect of the data I selected to display, the associations I make of that source to other sources, or the filtering I’ve done to “leave bits out” (often called “Chiefio forgot” by those less attuned..), that I can help you with. Thus my emphasis on describing the work product posted and inquiry about it, and not “about me”.

So I cannot avoid what you see as insults.

Bull Shit. Flat out lies. It isn’t hard, at all, to avoid saying “You are stupid” “You are ignorant” “You are crazy”. People do it all day long every single day. I’m doing it right now, in fact… It is normal social grace. YOU CHOOSE to say those things, repeatedly, for your own reasons.

For example, it isn’t hard at all to say:

“I think your evaluation of Soros and his motivations is wrong, he is a fine man because of [his deeds]”

instead of

“You must be an ignorant idiot to think Soros is evil, or you are crazy”.

Very easy to choose… Well within your intellectual capacity, if not your emotional quotient.

Now I’ve spent a good 30 years forming, leading, coaching and counseling teams (mostly work teams, but also Pee-Wee Hockey… great fun, that) and happen to know my E.Q. is also quite high. And know that others, not so much, is usually true. I suggest you get an assessment done, it will help you greatly.

I do not know how to avoid making these insults,

Despite my laying it out for you with great clarity. Once again:

Do not address “to the person”, do not “personalize it”, do not attack a person’s attributes (such as intelligence, sanity, capability, etc. etc.) Basically, avoid the Alinsky Method.

I’ve chosen to Ruthlessly stamp it out whenever I encounter it. It is evil. Expect that.

BTW, “ruthlessly” always fires off “I wonder where Ruth is?” ;-)

Next up:

nor do you.

False. I did it just now. (Avoided expressing an insult). I’ve done it a dozen time above. I have also chosen a few times to put one in, since it breaks the boredom, and since they seem to motivate some folks to further learning… though you seem a bit impervious… Knowing how is not the same as choosing… If you truly don’t know how, I pity you and those you interact with. I suspect you are employing a debate device instead, though. (Feel free to correct that suspicion, and prove your limits.)

My comments are necessarily personal because I cannot reconcile my two views of you:

My [behaviour] because I [limited ability] about you…

Notice something again? The subject of that sentence is Serioso, not me… So if you would understand Serioso, why are you looking at me? Wrong target. It is YOUR limited ability to understand that’s the problem, not the “me” it can not grasp.

One view is rational and intelligent, the other irrational to the point of stupidity.

See, now you could just as easily have said:

“One view is rational and intelligent, the other seems to me irrational to the point I lost the plot. Please help.”

This puts the focus where it belongs, on you losing the plot from time to time and not following the connections. That I can help elaborate. However, helping you understand why you find me irrational for your lack of understanding, by looking at me, that is beyond my ability.

It is therefore impossible for me to avoid comments about the person,

“Argue for your limitations, and you shall keep them. -E.M.Smith”

Grow up a bit. Please.

because that is what interests me the most.

Well internet porn interests most people the most (per internet statistics and the $6 Million? price tag for sex.com) yet folks manage to not post it here… This place is, generally, for what interests ME the most. It is my notebook on the world. Feel free to study it to get clue, but do not feel free to insult me, or others, in your quest to attribute to others what is inside your own limitations.

So I plan to continue my questions about your ability, sanity, qualifications, etc. These matter to me.

As I have fully answered (well, mostly fully… I’ve left out some Community College classes and some technical training in things like router configs…) those above. No, I’m not going to post my transcripts nor my resume. They will show a pretty good student at University, a Bachelors Econ., a State College (teaching college) for the teaching theory and Community College Teachers Certificate, and a 1/2 finished MBA. All with good grades. That I learned ASL and See Sign at a local J.C. isn’t all that important… Nor is the Ph.D. Religion as it isn’t an academic qualification.

You also have my sanity and E.Q. rank, via that NASA study. (I’ll leave it for you to find the published peer reviewed paper about it… it isn’t a secret, but likely only in paper form as internet publishing wasn’t that hot then).

And you know a lot about my professional qualification that I’ve posted over the years while you have been a reader.

So any further inquiry along those lines will be met with:

We’ve already fully covered that HERE (where HERE is a link to this posting.

Now you can be a pig headed obstreperous pill and ignore that…

For illustration, I’ll now translate that last sentence to the polite form, so Serioso can see how to do it:

Now you can be stubborn about this topic, continue to bring it up in inappropriate threads…

See how it works? It really isn’t all that hard to avoid “insults to the person”, if you really want to…

But bring it up, and you will get a link back to here. For any given posting, if you discuss the input data, the associations made, the conclusions reached, etc. well, that’s a discussion worth having as sometimes folks find interesting things I’ve missed. (Really missed, not just filtered. Hey, it happens ;-)

In Conclusion or Bits & Pieces

I have strong “novelty seeking behavior”. Now, since I know pretty much all there is to know about me, I find myself a boring as hell topic. Just not interested in me.

That, BTW, is also why I have postings on so many different things. I have a “Squirrel!” moment and just run off chasing after some interesting new thoughts until I’ve caught them in the butterfly net. Then I’ll summarize it and put up a posting. That’s what I like to do.

Now Serioso wants me to spend my time picking navel lint out of my eyes. Sorry, just not interested.

I’ve said all I have to say already. Most of it here, some in the earlier postings.

“Life is too short to drink bad wine” and frankly, talking about me is thin gruel; and I certainly don’t need piss & vinegar added to that.

I may amend this posting over time, as more things come to me, or some may just end up in comments. But this is THE place to ask questions about me, how and what I think, etc. etc.

Any insult sentences will be ruthlessly deleted as they are semantically null

(Oh, I forgot to mention, I had a formal linguistics class and loved it…)

So don’t be surprised if over time, more bits and pieces like that linguistics note get added here.

Subscribe to feed

Posted in Human Interest | Tagged , , | 75 Comments

Claimed 100% Reproducible LENR From A University

Well this is fun…

From E-Cat World:

http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/09/19/report-stable-excess-heat-100-per-cent-reproducible-in-lenr-experiment-at-tohoku-university-japan/

Report: ‘Stable Excess Heat’, ‘100 Per Cent Reproducible’ in LENR Experiment at Tohoku University, Japan
Posted on September 19, 2016 by Frank Acland • 21 Comments

Thanks to reader Bob (not Greenyer) for a comment today which cites a new report by Kenji Kaneko, Nikkei BP Clean Tech Institute, translated from the orginal Japanese by Jed Rothwell and posted on the LENR-CANR website here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/KanekoKcoldfusion.pdf It reports on work taking place at the Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (CMNS) Department at Tohoku University, Japan where researchers are reporting successful production of excess heat in experiments that are apparently still ongoing.

Here’s an excerpt from the article:

Clean Planet has invested in joint research with Dr. Mizuno’s company Hydrogen Engineering Application and Development Company (Sapporo). Research professor of Tohoku University Iwamura and his colleagues’ first efforts were to reproduce the experiment devised by Dr. Mizuno, and they have made steady progress in observing “excess heat.”

The technique works like this. There are two wire-like palladium electrodes arranged in a cylindrical chamber, with the periphery surrounded by a nickel mesh. [5] High voltage is applied to the electrodes, causing glow discharge. After this treatment the electrodes are heated (baked) at 100 ~ 200°C. As a result, the surface of the palladium wire is covered with a film made up of a
structure of nanoscale palladium and nickel particles.

After processing in this way to activate the palladium surface, the chamber is evacuated, while being heating up to several hundred degrees with a resistance heater. Deuterium gas is then introduced at high pressure (300 ~ 170 Pa), enough to sufficiently ensure contact between the palladium and deuterium. Then, “excess heat” exceeding the heat from the resistance heater input power is observed. When researchers introduce deuterium gas in the same apparatus under the same conditions but without doing the activation treatment first, excess heat is not observed. The excess heat causes a temperature difference ranging from about 70 ~ 100°C.

This is an interesting site:

http://lenr-canr.org/

Home

This site features a library of papers on LENR, Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, also known as Cold Fusion. (CANR, Chemically Assisted Nuclear Reactions is another term for this phenomenon.) The library includes more than 1,000 original scientific papers reprinted with permission from the authors and publishers. The papers are linked to a bibliography of over 3,500 journal papers, news articles and books about LENR.Qualitatively, 100% reproducibility has been established. The future research target is
therefore: “how to increase heat generation, and how to use inexpensive materials such as nickel
with light hydrogen, instead of palladium and deuterium” says Hideki Yoshino, president of
Clean Planet.

This website includes:

The Introduction to LENR-CANR, and a list of books, videos and links to other sites about LENR.
News about LENR.
A look at experiments: photographs of laboratories and equipment.
Special collections of papers, including papers from ICCF conferences, the 2004 DoE review, the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) and U.S. Navy authors.
The LIBRARY is a collection of full-text papers and books integrated with our bibliography. You can access the folder directly here. The most recent papers are listed here.

And a lot more…

The linked PDF is also interesting, even beyond the bits that quoted:

Kaneko, K.,
“Cold Fusion” in U.S. patent, successful replication, re-evaluation is accelerating (translation), in Nihon Keizai Shimbun. 2016.
This is a translation of an article published here:
http://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXMZO06252800Z10C16A8000000/
“Cold fusion” in U.S. patent, successful replication, re-evaluation is accelerating
September 9, 2016 6:30 Nihon Keizai Shimbun electronic version
by Kenji Kaneko, Nikkei BP Clean Tech Institute
Translated by Jed Rothwell, LENR-CANR.org
[…]
The chamber (container) in which the nuclear reaction occurs is cylindrical. It is made of metal, so the inside is not visible, but the temperature is measured with a sensor. “The experimental project has only been underway for about a year, but it is going well and we already have excess heat.” said Yasuhiro Iwamura, research professor of the research department, while looking at the temperature log.

In fact, in April 2015 a newly established condensed nuclear reaction joint research department in Tohoku University was launched with by Clean Planet Co. (Tokyo, Minato-ku), which invests in ventures and laboratories in the clean energy field. Tohoku University provided the facilities and human resources.

Hideki Yoshino, president of Clean Planet, invested funds in the Tohoku University project. He believes that: “Enormous energy has been generated in stable reactions. A path to safe, low cost energy generation has been opened. Competing development projects in Europe and the U.S. have begun. Japanese researchers have a track record of leading in this field. As the research turns toward practical applications, we should apply the accumulated wisdom of the Japanese researchers.”
[…]
Research professor Iwamura of the Tohoku University Condensed Matter Nuclear Science Department, and visiting associate professor Takehiko Ito were both formerly involved in the study of CMNS at Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), and they moved to Tohoku University when the opportunity arose when this department was established. At MHI, they conducted low profile research with this as a technique to render harmless radioactive waste; research efforts under the name “new element conversion.” [3, 4] Their achievements in successful selective element conversion were cited worldwide.

Observed “excess heat” after just one year When Professor Iwamura moved to Tohoku University, he took this as an opportunity to switch the target of their research from the detoxification of radioactive waste to “heat generation.” The field of application of CMNS has two main directions: energy generation, and transmutation. The latter includes the detoxification of radioactive waste and the production of rare elements. The market value of a practical application for energy generation would be orders of magnitude larger than the market for transmutation, so companies such as Clean Planet and venture capitalists are concentrating on research to develop an energy source. In fact, even with respect to “heat generation,” results from Japanese researchers have been cited worldwide. Pioneer researchers include Dr. Tadahiko Mizuno of Hokkaido University and Dr. Yoshiaki Arata, Professor Emeritus of Osaka University. Currently, in Japan, practical application research has been promoted based on the heat generation techniques of these two researchers.
[…]
After processing in this way to activate the palladium surface, the chamber is evacuated, while being heating up to several hundred degrees with a resistance heater. Deuterium gas is then introduced at high pressure (300 ~ 170 Pa), enough to sufficiently ensure contact between the palladium and deuterium. Then, “excess heat” exceeding the heat from the resistance heater input power is observed. When researchers introduce deuterium gas in the same apparatus under the same conditions but without doing the activation treatment first, excess heat is not observed. The excess heat causes a temperature difference ranging from about 70 ~ 100°C. Iwamura describes the project with enthusiasm. “The experimental project has only been underway for about a year, but it is going better than we expected and we already have stable excess heat. We are applying the knowledge accumulated in our research at Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, demonstrating that highly reproducible element conversion techniques can also be applied to heat generation.”
[…]
In May 2008, Emeritus Professor Arata carried out a public experiment at Osaka University before news media. The technique he used at that time employed a zirconium oxide-palladium alloy in a nano-structure grid pattern, with deuterium gas forced into the structure under pressure. [6-8] He observed excess heat and helium production at room temperature. A Technova team forced light hydrogen into a nickel and copper-based nanoparticle structure based on Arata’s. They succeeded in generating excess heat after a long waiting period of more than a month, by heating the sample up to about 300°C.
[..]
Qualitatively, 100% reproducibility has been established. The future research target is therefore: “how to increase heat generation, and how to use inexpensive materials such as nickel with light hydrogen, instead of palladium and deuterium” says Hideki Yoshino, president of Clean Planet.

The amount of excess is not large ( 100 C out of 1100 C ) and they have a long way to go before something useful exists. Still, it’s claimed to be 100% reproducible. Once that is proven, the rest is “just” engineering…

One really hopes this isn’t just an error in the 10% range… I would be happier if it was ‘tested’ by mot just ‘activated’ surface vs not, but also by hydrogen vs deuterium which would tend to eliminate chemical interaction issues of gas and activated metal.

Subscribe to feed

Posted in Tech Bits | Tagged , , , | 17 Comments

Popper on Hegel to Soros to You

This will be more of a watercolor pastel sketch of a “Dig Here!” than anything with profound in detail conclusions.

Why?

Because the Popper tome is about 800 pages in two volumes all by itself. All of it is full of jargon-of-philosophy that is rich in insider terms named for various people or prior terms, none of it in generic English, much of it a bit daft, and all of it obstruse. Obstruse, btw, being an obscure and misleading form of abstruse, which can be interpreted as meaning obscure and misleading ;-)

So after that, you get to dig into Hegel and all the little Hegels. Left Hegelian, Right Hegelian, and the usually ignored Center Hegelian. (So far I’ve only found one of them…) That takes a few dozen volumes and a few tens of thousands of pages of further self congratulatory metal masturbation by the various authors. At the end of which you feel a bit sullied and find yourself in the bathroom with a tall vodka/rocks looking for the mental floss…

So I’m not going to inflict all that on you against your will. Heck, I’ve not even managed to inflict all of it on me. I’ve only read spots of Popper, and second hand summaries of Hagel and the Hagelites. Maybe 500 pages total? (Not counting the Marx I read in the past… yes, Karl Marx was a Left Hegelian… so yes, it matters.)

Basically, I’m going to give the minimum pointer to all that stuff, with just a few sample quotes to illustrate why it is the source rock for so much grief in the world today, link it to Soros and his goals, then suggest mostly that folks just read the Popper book as it is very well written, easy to read, and at times a bit juicy.

With that, when you start thinking this is a bit long and convoluted, just remember this is the very shortest form and with the jargon unrolled as much as I can.

So how to approach it. Historical forward? Soros to his roots in Aristotle and Plato? Middle out starting with Popper?

Maybe a top sketch, then some depth on bits of it, then some paint by numbers connections…

I’ll be putting the commentary on Hegel in a separate posting, just as this will be far too long if all done at once. Here we will give the sketch, then some on Soros and Popper.

The Big Bits

OK, Soros is the spider in the middle of a global web of organizations attempting to remake the world into his idea of what is best. He has spent $Billions funding Open Society Foundations around the world, supported “Color Revolutions” (more on that in some other post someday) in various countries, has an arrest warrant out from Russia (since they suspect he wants to paint them with a color of revolution), funds groups like Black Lives Matter to suddenly pop up tossing rocks at national governments and sends personal email to folks like Hillary Clinton… or her surrogates. Maybe knowing “why?” and some about his motivations would be helpful to understanding the upheaval in the world and why some folks, like Obama, are hell bent on the destruction of America and happy to import millions who hate us. Obama, too, gets pats on the head from Soros…

The clue is in the Open Society Foundations.

These are not named randomly, or from some flowery ideal. They are named after a BOOK and IDEA that is foundational to how Soros sees the world. That book is “The Open Society and It’s Enemies” by Karl Popper. Yes, that Popper…

That book is largely a critique of Hagel and those who follow him. For anyone not aware of who Hagel was, his musing laid the basis both for the Nazi attempt at empire, and the Marxism that is still trying to dominate the world. Now you might think it a noble act to attempt to support anyone who was against such stuff. It is my assertion that Soros has a warped view of what Popper is saying, and then runs off a cliff with it.

It is a common behaviour amoung the very bright to run to extremes of an ideal, and not see the vast gray areas that make up the real world real people live with. It is my opinion that Soros, growing up as Schwartz in Nazi “greater” Germany, saw first hand the results of a “State As Superior Being” as advocated by Hagel, and was left scarred with it for life. Popper critiques this as a horrible thing (and it was) via the term “Tribalism” and the occasional reference to Nationalism. Here’s where I think Soros went off the rails. IMHO, he now believes that the root cause of all the world’s problems are Tribalism and Nationalism, and if he can just stamp out Tribes and Nations, the world will be a happy ideal place. Thus the destruction of “Tribes” such as presently in the Middle east, and the destruction of Nations going on now with the EU and massive Muslim imports (and to a lesser extent, the USA and our non-border and massive muslim importation.)

OK, that’s the whole idea. Those uninterested in any supportive information can pop a beer now and turn on the TV…

Soros

There’s a decent bio thumbnail on the wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros

I’m going to stick some bits here so when the Wiki Langoliers re-write history, it won’t all be erased…

George Soros (/ˈsɔːroʊs/[3] or /ˈsɔːrɒs/; Hungarian: Soros György, pronounced [ˈʃoroʃ ˈɟørɟ]; born August 12, 1930, as György Schwartz; Hungarian: Schwartz György) is a Hungarian-American business magnate,[4][5] investor, philanthropist, political activist, and author.[a] He is chairman of Soros Fund Management. He is known as “The Man Who Broke the Bank of England” because of his short sale of US$10 billion worth of pounds, making him a profit of $1 billion during the 1992 Black Wednesday UK currency crisis.[8][9][10] Soros is one of the 30 richest people in the world.[11]

Soros is a well known supporter of American progressive and American liberal political causes.[12] Between 1979 and 2011 Soros donated more than $11 billion to various philanthropic causes.[13][14] He played a significant role in the peaceful transition from communism to capitalism in Eastern Europe (1984–89)[9] and provided one of Europe’s largest higher education endowments to the Central European University in Budapest.[15] Soros is also the chairman of the Open Society Foundations.

Early life

Soros was born in Budapest, Hungary, to a non-observant Jewish family. His mother, Elizabeth (also known as Erzsébet), came from a family that owned a thriving silk shop. His father, Tivadar, (also known as Teodoro) was a lawyer[16] and had been a prisoner of war during and after World War I until he escaped from Russia and rejoined his family in Budapest.[17][18] The two married in 1924. Tivadar was an Esperantist writer and taught Soros to speak Esperanto in his childhood.[19] Soros later said that he grew up in a Jewish home and that his parents were cautious with their religious roots.[20] In 1936, his father changed the family name from Schwartz (“black” in German) to Soros (a successor in Hungarian or will soar in Esperanto).

Soros was 13 years old in March 1944 when Nazi Germany occupied Hungary.[21] When Jewish children were barred from attending school by the Nazis, Soros and the other schoolchildren were made to report to the Jewish Council, which had been established during the occupation. Soros later described this time to writer Michael Lewis:

The Jewish Council asked the little kids to hand out the deportation notices. I was told to go to the Jewish Council. And there I was given these small slips of paper…. It said report to the rabbinical seminary at 9 am… And I was given this list of names. I took this piece of paper to my father. He instantly recognized it. This was a list of Hungarian Jewish lawyers. He said, “You deliver the slips of paper and tell the people that if they report they will be deported.”[22]

Soros did not return to that job and went into hiding the next day. Later that year, at age 14, Soros lived with and posed as the godson of an employee of the Hungarian Ministry of Agriculture. The official was at one point ordered to inventory the remaining contents of the estate of a wealthy Jewish family that had fled the country; rather than leave Soros alone in the city, the official brought him along.[23] The next year, 1945, Soros survived the Battle of Budapest, in which Soviet and German forces fought house to house through the city.

I think that pretty much set his persona. This next bit points out why I think the philosophy angle is an important one:

In 1951 Soros earned a Bachelor of Science in philosophy and an MSc in philosophy in 1954, both from the London School of Economics.

He was clearly interested in Philosophy… along with money.

Then, after a listing of his life working for other people, there’s this interesting bit. I note in passing that Krugman is at least willing to state the obvious…

In 1997, during the Asian financial crisis, the prime minister of Malaysia, Mahathir bin Mohamad, accused Soros of using the wealth under his control to punish the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) for welcoming Myanmar as a member. Following on a history of antisemitic remarks, Mahathir made specific reference to Soros’s Jewish background (“It is a Jew who triggered the currency plunge”[49]) and implied Soros was orchestrating the crash as part of a larger Jewish conspiracy. Nine years later, in 2006, Mahathir met with Soros and afterward stated that he accepted that Soros had not been responsible for the crisis.[50] In 1998’s The Crisis of Global Capitalism: Open Society Endangered Soros explained his role in the crisis as follows:

The financial crisis that originated in Thailand in 1997 was particularly unnerving because of its scope and severity…. By the beginning of 1997, it was clear to Soros Fund Management that the discrepancy between the trade account and the capital account was becoming untenable. We sold short the Thai baht and the Malaysian ringgit early in 1997 with maturities ranging from six months to a year. (That is, we entered into contracts to deliver at future dates Thai baht and Malaysian ringgit that we did not currently hold.) Subsequently Prime Minister Mahathir of Malaysia accused me of causing the crisis, a wholly unfounded accusation. We were not sellers of the currency during or several months before the crisis; on the contrary, we were buyers when the currencies began to decline—we were purchasing ringgits to realize the profits on our earlier speculation. (Much too soon, as it turned out. We left most of the potential gain on the table because we were afraid that Mahathir would impose capital controls. He did so, but much later.)[51]

In 1999, economist Paul Krugman was critical of Soros’s effect on financial markets.

“[N]obody who has read a business magazine in the last few years can be unaware that these days there really are investors who not only move money in anticipation of a currency crisis, but actually do their best to trigger that crisis for fun and profit. These new actors on the scene do not yet have a standard name; my proposed term is ‘Soroi’.”[52]

In an interview regarding the late-2000s recession, Soros referred to it as the most serious crisis since the 1930s. According to Soros, market fundamentalism with its assumption that markets will correct themselves with no need for government intervention in financial affairs has been “some kind of an ideological excess”. In Soros’s view, the markets’ moods—a “mood” of the markets being a prevailing bias or optimism/pessimism with which the markets look at reality—”actually can reinforce themselves so that there are these initially self-reinforcing but eventually unsustainable and self-defeating boom/bust sequences or bubbles.”[53]

In reaction to the late-2000s recession, he founded the Institute for New Economic Thinking in October 2009. This is a think tank composed of international economic, business, and financial experts, mandated to investigate radical new approaches to organizing the international economic and financial system.

All well and good, one supposes, but he does like to meddle inside governments and screw with nations, so I’d be a bit worried about what the goal of “new approaches” to the “organizing” might be…

Soros has been active as a philanthropist since the 1970s, when he began providing funds to help black students attend the University of Cape Town in apartheid South Africa,[68] and began funding dissident movements behind the Iron Curtain.

Soros’ philanthropic funding includes efforts to promote non-violent democratization in the post-Soviet states. These efforts, mostly in Central and Eastern Europe, occur primarily through the Open Society Foundations (originally Open Society Institute or OSI) and national Soros Foundations, which sometimes go under other names (such as the Stefan Batory Foundation in Poland). As of 2003, PBS estimated that he had given away a total of $4 billion.[61] The OSI says it has spent about $500 million annually in recent years.

The Russians see the “Color Revolutions” that came from that funding as a bit less good and disruptive. That those nations then didn’t really get to BE fully formed nations before being ‘encouraged’ to join various conglomerates ( such as the EU ) will not have gone unnoticed by Putin. This is the subtext to the “Eastward expansion of the EU”. NOT just liberation from Communism, but destruction of Nationalism and absorption into a non-National super-entity.

Want to know where the money comes from to “pop up” sudden coordinated “protests” by the left in the USA (and elsewhere in the world)? How about:

Political donations and activism
United States

On November 11, 2003, in an interview with The Washington Post, Soros said that removing President George W. Bush from office was the “central focus of my life” and “a matter of life and death”. He said he would sacrifice his entire fortune to defeat Bush “if someone guaranteed it”.[76][77] Soros gave $3 million to the Center for American Progress, $2.5 million to MoveOn.org, and $20 million[78] to America Coming Together. These groups worked to support Democrats in the 2004 election. On September 28, 2004, he dedicated more money to the campaign and kicked off his own multistate tour with a speech: Why We Must Not Re-elect President Bush[79] delivered at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. The online transcript to this speech received many hits after Dick Cheney accidentally referred to FactCheck.org as “factcheck.com” in the vice presidential debate, causing the owner of that domain to redirect all traffic to Soros’s site.[80]

His 2003 book, The Bubble of American Supremacy, was a forthright critique of the Bush administration’s “War on Terror” as misconceived and counterproductive, and a polemic against the re-election of Bush. He explains the title in the closing chapter by pointing out the parallels in this political context with the self-reinforcing reflexive processes that generate bubbles in stock prices.

When Soros was asked in 2006 about his statement in The Age of Fallibility that “the main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States”, he responded that “it happens to coincide with the prevailing opinion in the world. And I think that’s rather shocking for Americans to hear. The United States sets the agenda for the world. And the rest of the world has to respond to that agenda. By declaring a ‘war on terror’ after September 11, we set the wrong agenda for the world…. When you wage war, you inevitably create innocent victims.”[81]

Soros was not a large donor to U.S. political causes until the 2004 presidential election, but according to the Center for Responsive Politics, during the 2003–04 election cycle, Soros donated $23,581,000 to various 527 Groups (tax-exempt groups under the United States tax code, 26 U.S.C. § 527). The groups aimed to defeat President Bush. After Bush’s re-election Soros and other donors backed a new political fundraising group called Democracy Alliance, which supports progressive causes and the formation of a stronger progressive infrastructure in America.[82]

In August 2009 Soros donated $35 million to the state of New York to be earmarked for underprivileged children and given to parents who had benefit cards at the rate of $200 per child aged 3 through 17, with no limit as to the number of children that qualified. An additional $140 million was put into the fund by the state of New York from money they had received from the 2009 federal recovery act.[25]

On October 26, 2010, Soros donated $1 million, the largest donation in the campaign, to the Drug Policy Alliance to fund Proposition 19, that would have legalized marijuana in the state of California if it had passed in the November 2, 2010 elections.[83]

In October 2011 a Reuters story, “Soros: not a funder of Wall Street protests”, was published after several commentators pointed out errors in an earlier Reuters story headlined “Who’s behind the Wall St. protests?” with a lede stating that the Occupy Wall Street movement “may have benefited indirectly from the largesse of one of the world’s richest men [Soros].” Reuters’ follow-up article also reported a Soros spokesman and Adbusters’ co-founder Kalle Lasn both saying that Adbusters—the reputed catalyst for the first Occupy Wall Street protests—had never received any contributions from Soros, contrary to Reuters’ earlier story that reported that “indirect financial links” existed between the two as late as 2010.[84][85]

On September 27, 2012, Soros announced that he was donating $1 million to the super PAC backing President Barack Obama’s reelection Priorities USA Action.[86]

In October 2013, Soros donated $25,000 to Ready for Hillary, becoming a co-chairman of the super PAC’s national finance committee.[87] In June 2015, he donated $1 million to the Super PAC Priorities USA Action, which supports Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential race. Since then he has donated an additional $6 million to the PAC to support Clinton.

Now you know why Obama and Clinton BOTH want to destroy US Nationalism and make a weaker America. Their sugar daddy wants it.

But his desire to shape the world to his liking does not stop with the USA:

Central and Eastern Europe

[PICTURE left out]
Protesters in Tbilisi with flag of the Democratic Republic of Georgia blocking the way from the Open Society Institute office, 2005

According to Waldemar A. Nielsen, an authority on American philanthropy,[89] “[Soros] has undertaken … nothing less than to open up the once-closed communist societies of Eastern Europe to a free flow of ideas and scientific knowledge from the outside world.”[90] From 1979, as an advocate of ‘open societies’, Soros financially supported dissidents including Poland’s Solidarity movement, Charter 77 in Czechoslovakia and Andrei Sakharov in the Soviet Union.[68] In 1984, he founded his first Open Society Institute in Hungary with a budget of $3 million.[91]

Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Soros’s funding has continued to play an important role in the former Soviet sphere. His funding of prodemocratic programs in Georgia was considered by Russian and Western observers to be crucial to the success of the Rose Revolution, although Soros has said that his role has been “greatly exaggerated”.[92] Alexander Lomaia, Secretary of the Georgian Security Council and former Minister of Education and Science, is a former Executive Director of the Open Society Georgia Foundation (Soros Foundation), overseeing a staff of 50 and a budget of $2.5 million.[93]

Former Georgian foreign minister Salomé Zourabichvili wrote that institutions like the Soros Foundation were the cradle of democratisation and that all the NGOs that gravitated around the Soros Foundation undeniably carried the revolution. She opines that after the revolution the Soros Foundation and the NGOs were integrated into power.[94]

Some Soros-backed pro-democracy initiatives have been banned in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan.[95] Ercis Kurtulus, head of the Social Transparency Movement Association (TSHD) in Turkey, said in an interview that “Soros carried out his will in Ukraine and Georgia by using these NGOs… Last year Russia passed a special law prohibiting NGOs from taking money from foreigners. I think this should be banned in Turkey as well.”[96] In 1997, Soros closed his foundation in Belarus after it was fined $3 million by the government for “tax and currency violations”. According to The New York Times, the Belarusian president Alexander Lukashenko has been widely criticized in the West and in Russia for his efforts to control the Belarus Soros Foundation and other independent NGOs and to suppress civil and human rights. Soros called the fines part of a campaign to “destroy independent society”.[97]

In June 2009, Soros donated $100 million to Central Europe and Eastern Europe to counter the impact of the economic crisis on the poor, voluntary groups and non-government organisations.[98]

Now this is all couched in the Positive Flowery Language Of Leftspeak. IMHO, the critical eye of those more Eastern has spotted the Nation Destroying Rat and kicked it out. That is the fundamental philosophical fight today. Those who are “pro-Nation”, whatever their nation may be, and the “Non-Nationals” lead by Soros and his money.

IF you value your nation, be it Russia, China, India, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Germany, Australia, the USA or “wherever”, then do realize you are under attack by NGOs, funded and directed by Soros, who’s main goal is to eliminate “Tribalism” and “Nationalism”, that is, your Nation as a Nation. Your culture as a culture.

His history and track record show this is not a theory, but a report of historical fact.

Now, any wonder why Obama and Hillary are so “pro-regime change”? And for the destruction of “tribal” “nationalistic” societies such as in Libya, Egypt, Syria, etc. etc…

Africa

The Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa is a Soros-affiliated organization.[99] Its director for Zimbabwe is Godfrey Kanyenze, who also directs the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), which was the main force behind the founding of the Movement for Democratic Change, the principal indigenous organization promoting regime change in Zimbabwe.

Support of separatist movements

In November 2005, Soros said: “My personal opinion is there’s no alternative but to give Kosovo independence.“[100] Soros has helped fund the non-profit group called Independent Diplomat.[101] It represented Kosovo, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (under military occupation by Turkey since 1974),[102] Somaliland and the Polisario Front of Western Sahara.[101]

So he likes to overthrow regimes. Now I find some of those regimes despicable tyrannies, but that doesn’t give me the right to say they must go. More importantly, I’ve got no issue with, say, the Navajo or anyone else wanting a bit of pride in their “tribe”. Even beyond that, I’m quite happy to have a bit of National Pride in my Nation, made of all sorts of Tribes… Soros wants that exterminated and replaced with his concept of an “Open Society”. But one is left wondering just what that is.

The Wiki then goes into his theory of “reflexivity” that, as near as I can tell, just says that feedback systems are prone to overshot and rebound. Not exactly very enlightening. You can get a much better workup of that from control engineers… He then wants to apply this to politics. One must note in passing that Hegel was very into the idea of a force, rebound, and then final push through. More on that under Hegel. So IMHO we are just seeing some Hegel showing through in how he sees markets and governments.

The concept of reflexivity attempts to explain why markets moving from one equilibrium state to another tend to overshoot or undershoot. Soros’ theories were originally dismissed by economists,[114] but have received more attention after the 2008 crash including becoming the focus of an issue of the Journal of Economic Methodology.

Perhaps a controls engineer can enlighten the Journal Of Economic Methodology that this isn’t really very new…

Reflexivity in politics

Although the primary manifestation of the reflexive process that Soros discusses is its effects in the financial markets, he has also explored its effects in politics. He has stated that whereas the greatest threats to the “Open Society” in the past were from Communism and Fascism (as discussed in The Open Society and its Enemies by his mentor Karl Popper), the largest current threat is from market fundamentalism.

He has suggested that the contemporary domination of world politics and world trade by the United States is a reflexive phenomenon, insofar as the success of military and financial coercion feeds back to encourage increasingly intense applications of the same policies to the point where they will eventually become unsustainable.[120]

View of problems in the free market system

Soros argues that the current system of financial speculation undermines healthy economic development in many underdeveloped countries. He blames many of the world’s problems on the failures inherent in what he characterizes as market fundamentalism.[121]

Soros claims to draw a distinction between being a participant in the market and working to change the rules that market participants must follow.

Here we see his disdain for markets. Now you know why the American Left (and Hillary and Obama and…) hate it when you propose a market based solution… Markets must be managed by government, don’t you know… Soros, and his NGO money told them so…

Also note that military “unsustainable” line. This philosophy is what drives Obama to gut the US Military. Hillary too. By gutting US military, they think they can avoid pushing the world to “the point where they will eventually become unsustainable”.

I’m skipping over the ‘views on Israel’. It mostly comes down to claim and counter claim on anti-Semitism and missing the point that he is anti-Nation and anti-Tribalism… so Israel is both..

Views on Europe

In October 2011, Soros drafted an open letter entitled “As concerned Europeans we urge Eurozone leaders to unite”,[128] in which he calls for a stronger economic government for Europe using federal means (Common EU treasury, common fiscal supervision, etc.) and warns against the danger of nationalistic solutions to the economic crisis. The letter was co-signed by Javier Solana, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Andrew Duff, Emma Bonino, Massimo d’Alema, Vaira Vike-Freiberga.

Soros criticized Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and his handling of the European migrant crisis in 2015: “His plan treats the protection of national borders as the objective and the refugees as an obstacle. Our plan treats the protection of refugees as the objective and national borders as the obstacle.”[129]
Views on China

Soros has expressed concern about the growth of Chinese economic and political power saying, “China has risen very rapidly by looking out for its own interests…. They have now got to accept responsibility for world order and the interests of other people as well.” Regarding the political gridlock in America, he said, “Today, China has not only a more vigorous economy, but actually a better functioning government than the United States.”[130] In July 2015, Soros stated that a “strategic partnership between the US and China could prevent the evolution of two power blocks that may be drawn into military conflict.”[131] In January 2016, during an interview at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Soros stated that “[a] hard landing is practically unavoidable.” Chinese state media responded by stating “Soros’ challenge to the RMB and Hong Kong dollar are doomed to fail, without any doubt.”[132]

So now you know why an ‘ever closer union’ in the EU was a Main Goal, and why Brexit was so fiercely fought. Soros, his money and his Foundations and NGOs all are fighting it.

Note, too, that National Borders and having your own culture are “the problem”…

But the interesting bit is that Putin has caught on:

Views on Russia and Ukraine

In May 2014 Soros told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria: “I set up a foundation in Ukraine before Ukraine became independent from Russia. And the foundation has been functioning ever since and played an important part in events now.”[133]

In January 2015 Soros said that “Europe needs to wake up and recognize that it is under attack from Russia.” He also urged Western countries to expand economic sanctions against Russia for its support of separatists in eastern Ukraine.[134]

In January 2015, Soros called on the European Union to give $50 billion of bailout money to Ukraine.[135]

In July 2015, Soros stated that Putin’s annexation of Crimea was a challenge to the “prevailing world order,” specifically the European Union. He hypothesized that Putin wants to “destabilize all of Ukraine by precipitating a financial and political collapse for which he can disclaim responsibility, while avoiding occupation of a part of eastern Ukraine, which would then depend on Russia for economic support.”[131] In November 2015, Russia banned the Open Society Foundations (OSF) and the Open Society Institute (OSI)– two pro-democracy charities founded by Soros—stating they posed as “threat to the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation and the security of the state.“[136][137] In January 2016, 53 books related to Soros’ “Renewal of Humanitarian Education” program were burned at Vorkuta Mining and Economic College in the Komi Republic with 427 additional books seized for shredding. A Russian intergovernmental letter released in December 2015 stated that Soros’ charities were “forming a perverted perception of history and making ideological directives, alien to Russian ideology, popular.”

So WHY would Hillary and Obama be against Putin, while Trump says, basically, I can work with the guy? Simple.

Obama and Hillary are Soros Sock Puppets working to destroy nations.
Putin and Trump are nationalist advocates, each for their own nation.

Yes, it really is that simple.

Popper

I’ll be quoting just a couple of passages from Popper to give a sense of it. The books are full of gems, one after the other, and snippets will not do it justice. Yet it is pushing 800 pages and a long read. So a bit of summary about it too.

The originals can be found at:

The Open Society and it’s Enemies, Vol 1

The Open Society and it’s Enemies, Vol 2

Reviewer: garthus – favoritefavoritefavoritefavoritefavorite – October 10, 2010
Subject: Required reading?
This work should be required reading at the University level. Better than the pablum students are forced to regurgutate on an almost daily basis in our Social Science culture today.

Gerry
Reviewer: mafranco – favoritefavoritefavoritefavoritefavorite – October 9, 2010
Subject: Ethics
I agree with the previous two reviewers. I think that more than anything this books is the foundation for living an ethical life.
Reviewer: Graham W – favoritefavoritefavoritefavoritefavorite – March 7, 2010
Subject: Agreed, this book is Essential Reading for our day.

I can only agree with the apt and succinct words of the previous reviewer, FitzRoy, and with his conclusion that Karl Popper’s ‘The Open Society And Its Enemies Vol I & 2’ is ‘essential reading for our day’. Moreover, I believe this lucid and accessible work is a tour de force and one of the most important and significant books of the 20th Century. I first read it at university about 30 years ago and have read it several times since, and I still refer to it periodically.

Popper challenges accepted orthodoxies from long past and our longstanding deference to great historical figures such as Plato, and he so does because he believes that if we are to reconstruct society and avoid totalitarianism then we must break with mistakes of the past. Rather than plagiarize further, I refer you directly to the short well-written preface of this edition.

Whether one agrees with Popper’s assertions or not–and there has been some criticism of his position over the years–this erudite work forces us to reconsider and re-evaluate positions that have become almost axiomatic to most of us in Western liberal democracies. No matter what one’s political views, one has to acknowledge that ‘The Open Society And Its Enemies’ is the outpourings of a great mind; not only is it challenging, intellectual and authoritative but it also provides about the most solid defense of and argument for an open society, liberal democracy ever written.

‘The Open Society And Its Enemies’–along with Plato’s ‘Republic’, especially Part One about what is justice–have had a huge influence on my thinking with respect to governance of people in a free society, about democracy and of course, totalitarianism. These books have made me forever vigilant about authority, its motives and the propaganda that surrounds it.

With a substantial increase in authoritarian law across most Western democracies since 911, and with governments having almost unfettered access to and use of electronics and other surveillance technologies to monitor and control populations, together with their understanding of modern social engineering techniques and their application by way of sophisticated propaganda, we citizens, more than ever, need to understand what Popper is telling us in this invaluable and important work.

In ‘Nineteen Eighty Four’ Orwell describes a frightening dystopian totalitarian world; Popper, a few years earlier in ‘The Open Society And Its Enemies’ essentially explains how certain modes of thinking enable political climates wherein the formation of such dystopian worlds are not only possible but that they do eventuate. These books might have been born amongst the ashes of WW-II politics but they have never been more relevant than they are today.

Finally a thank you: The availability of such important and influential books on the Internet Archive is a testament to how very important this service is and I heartily congratulate Brewster Kahle and his colleagues for their broad and important initiative.

Reviewer: FitzRoy – favoritefavoritefavoritefavoritefavorite – March 7, 2010
Subject: Essential Reading for our day
I rate this book–along with its companion vol. 2–as among the top five most significant books of my life’s reading history. Just so you know, I have a PhD and I’m 52 years old, so I’ve been through a lot of books.

Popper understands the nature of totalitarian governments and what leads to them. In light of the way that so many people today are looking to government for their salvation, Popper is a must read. His insight into the way historicism is the root of totalitarianism is crucial if we are to avoid future totalitarian regimes and provides the reader with a key criterion for judging current political endeavors.

One caution, please don’t confuse Popper’s “Open Society” with George Soros’s “Open Society.” They are two totally different visions.

IMHO, that last sentence is key. Soros read Popper, hated Hagel, and then that hate mutated the Popper view into a hatred of all things “Tribal” or “National”. I think that dis-join is where the rational Popper turned into the Nation hating Soros.

Here’s the review from Volume 2:

The Open Society And Its Enemies Vol II
by Popper,K.R.

Published 1947/00/00
Topics PHILOSOPHY. PSYCHOLOGY, Philosophy of mind

Publisher George Routledge And Sons Limited.
Pages 366
Language English
Call number 33064
Book contributor Osmania University
Collection universallibrary

Reviewer: Graham W – favoritefavoritefavoritefavoritefavorite – March 7, 2010
Subject: See Review for Volume 1
I’ve reviewed ‘The Open Society And Its Enemies’ under Volume 1, here:

http://www.archive.org/details/opensocietyandit033120mbp

This is one of the most important and significant works of the 20th Century and both volumes should be treated as one entity.

What I’ve read of Vol. 1 spends a good bit of time connecting modern philosophers, such as Hegel, back to Plato and Socrates and Aristotle and generally is a good bit of background. It is heavy with philosophy terms, so be ready to hit the dictionary.

Then he launches into a strong criticism of Hegel. Hegel is where we find “Civil Society” coming into being, and where we get the roots of the Marxist “dialectic”.

Modern philosophy, culture, and society seemed to Hegel fraught with contradictions and tensions, such as those between the subject and object of knowledge, mind and nature, self and Other, freedom and authority, knowledge and faith, the Enlightenment and Romanticism. Hegel’s main philosophical project was to take these contradictions and tensions and interpret them as part of a comprehensive, evolving, rational unity that, in different contexts, he called “the absolute Idea” (Science of Logic, sections 1781–3) or “absolute knowledge” (Phenomenology of Spirit, “(DD) Absolute Knowledge”).

According to Hegel, the main characteristic of this unity was that it evolved through and manifested itself in contradiction and negation. Contradiction and negation have a dynamic quality that at every point in each domain of reality—consciousness, history, philosophy, art, nature, society—leads to further development until a rational unity is reached that preserves the contradictions as phases and sub-parts by lifting them up (Aufhebung) to a higher unity. This whole is mental because it is mind that can comprehend all of these phases and sub-parts as steps in its own process of comprehension. It is rational because the same, underlying, logical, developmental order underlies every domain of reality and is ultimately the order of self-conscious rational thought, although only in the later stages of development does it come to full self-consciousness. The rational,

If some of that sounds like psychobabble to you, don’t worry, that puts you in the Popper camp… But as Marx was a “Left Hegelian” it ended up in Communism as a foundation stone…

Civil society

Hegel made the distinction between civil society and state in his Elements of the Philosophy of Right. In this work, civil society (Hegel used the term “bürgerliche Gesellschaft” though it is now referred to as Zivilgesellschaft in German to emphasize a more inclusive community) was a stage in the dialectical relationship that occurs between Hegel’s perceived opposites, the macro-community of the state and the micro-community of the family. Broadly speaking, the term was split, like Hegel’s followers, to the political left and right. On the left, it became the foundation for Karl Marx’s civil society as an economic base; to the right, it became a description for all non-state (and the state is the peak of the objective spirit) aspects of society, including culture, society and politics. This liberal distinction between political society and civil society was followed by Alexis de Tocqueville. In fact, Hegel’s distinctions as to what he meant by civil society are often unclear. For example, while it seems to be the case that he felt that a civil-society such as the German society in which he lived was an inevitable movement of the dialectic, he made way for the crushing of other types of “lesser” and not fully realized types of civil society, as these societies were not fully conscious or aware, as it were, as to the lack of progress in their societies. Thus, it was perfectly legitimate in the eyes of Hegel for a conqueror, such as Napoleon, to come along and destroy that which was not fully realized.

But that bit of exploration is for another day. Just note in passing that it was Hagel who started that whole “Civil Society” thing, and anyone using that terms is flagging that they are a Hegelian even if they don’t now it. (i.e. they got it via that path through Marx…)

Now here’s the bit from Popper that I liked most. (Really, I liked dozens and dozens of pages… but this is what makes this cut)

The second volume spends much time on Marx. For that alone it is worth the the read. Here, about 30 pages in:

CHAPTER 24 : ORACULAR PHILOSOPHY AND THE
REVOLT AGAINST REASON

Marx was a rationalist. With Socrates, and with Kant, he
believed in human reason as the basis of the unity of mankind.
But his doctrine that our opinions are determined by class interest
hastened the decline of this belief. Like Hegel’s doctrine that
our ideas are determined by national interests and traditions,
Marx’s doctrine tended to undermine the rationalist belief in
reason. Thus threatened both from the right and from the left,
a rationalist attitude to social and economic questions could
hardly resist when historicist prophecy and oracular irrationalism
made a frontal attack on it. This is why the conflict between
rationalism and irrationalism has become the most important
intellectual, and perhaps even moral, issue of our time.

[… Popper then does us the marvelous service of defining a bunch of these muddy terms, like “rationalism”. Which I am skipping here… -E.M.Smith]

Having thus become
a tremendous success on the continent, Hegelianism could hardly
fail to obtain support in Britain from those who, feeling that
such a powerful movement must after all have something to
offer, began to search for what Stirling called The Secret of Hegel.
They were attracted, of course, by Hegel’s ‘higher ‘ idealism
and by his claims to ‘ higher ‘ morality, and they were also
somewhat afraid of being branded as immoral by the chorus of
the disciples ; for even the more modest Hegelians claimed 6
of their doctrines that ‘ they are acquisitions which must . .
ever be reconquered in the face of assault from the powers
eternally hostile to spiritual and moral values ‘. Some really
brilliant men (I am thinking mainly of McTaggart) made great
efforts in constructive idealistic thought, well above the level of
Hegel ; but they did not get very far beyond providing targets
for equally brilliant critics. And one can say that outside the
continent of Europe, especially in the last twenty years, the
interest of philosophers in Hegel is slowly vanishing.

But if that is so, why worry any more about Hegel ? The
answer is that Hegel’s influence has remained a most powerful
force, in spite of the fact that scientists never took him seriously,
and that (apart from the ‘evolutionists ‘ 7 ) many philosophers are
about to lose interest in him. Hegels’ influence, and especially
that of his cant, is still very powerful in moral and social philo-
sophy and in the social and political sciences (with the sole
exception of economics) . Especially the philosophers of history,
of politics, and of education, are still to a very large extent
under its sway.
In politics, this is shown most drastically by
the fact that the Marxist extreme left wing, as well as the con-
servative centre, and the fascist extreme right, all base their
political philosophies on Hegel ; the left wing replaces the war
of nations which appears in Hegel’s historicist scheme by the
war of classes, the extreme right replaces it by the war of races ;
but both follow him more or less consciously.
(The conservative
centre is as a rule less conscious of its indebtedness to Hegel.)

In this we see the cries of “racist!!” today being rooted in the Right Hegelian view of a war of races. Thus we who are not of the far left get plastered with it, despite it being a lie, since we are being seen as “right” from them so we must be for a war of the races in a Hegelian world view… We also see the “class warfare” of the Left Hegelian now reflected in the “wealth inequality” ravings of the Democrats. As Marxists and Socialists (even if Socialist-lite) they are firmly stuck in their Hegelian world view roots.

Also note that the “Center” believes in a ‘war of nations’ as the Bad Thing. How best to eliminate that than to eliminate Nations?, eh?

IMHO it is here that Soros goes off the rails. Seeing Hegel as a set of wars of races, classes, nations; and reading Popper to say “Hegel is dim”, the best answer must be to eliminate races, classes and nations, or at least their distinctions.

How can this immense influence be explained ? My main
intention is not so much to explain this phenomenon, as to
combat it. But I may make a few explanatory suggestions.
For some reason, philosophers have kept around themselves,
even in our day, something of the atmosphere of the magician.
Philosophy is considered as a strange and abstruse kind of thing,
dealing with those mysteries with which religion deals, but not
in a way which can be ‘ revealed unto babes ‘ or to common
people ; it is considered to be too profound for that, and to
be the religion and theology of the intellectuals, of the learned
and wise. Hegelianism fits these views admirably ; it is exactly
what this kind of popular superstition supposes – philosophy to
be. It knows all about everything. It has a ready answer to
every question. . And indeed, who can be sure that the answer
is not true ?

But this is not the main reason for Hegel’s success. His
influence, and the need to combat it, can perhaps be better
understood if we briefly consider the general historical situation.

Medieval authoritarianism began to dissolve with the Renais-
sance. But on the continent, its political counterpart, medieval
feudalism, was not seriously threatened before the French Revo-
lution. (The Reformation had only strengthened it.) The fight
for the open society began again only with the ideas of 1789 ;
and the feudal monarchies soon experienced the seriousness of
this danger. When in 1815 the reactionary party began to
resume its power in Prussia, it found itself in dire need of an
ideology. Hegel was appointed to meet this demand, and he
did so by reviving the ideas of the first antagonists of the open
society, Heraclitus, Plato, and Aristotle.
Just as the French
Revolution rediscovered the perennial ideas of the Great Gener-
ation and of Christianity, freedom, equality, and the brother-
hood of all men, so Hegel rediscovered the Platonic ideas which
lie behind the perennial revolt against freedom and reason.

Then here is the “money quote” and just the kind of thing to bend the mind of a young Jew fresh from under Nazi oppression:


Hegelianism is the renaissance of tribalism. The historical sig-
nificance of Hegel may be seen in the fact that he represents
the ‘ missing link ‘, as it were, between Plato and the modern
form of totalitarianism.
Most of the modern totalitarians are
quite unaware that their ideas can be traced back to Plato.
But many know of their indebtedness to Hegel, and all of them
have been brought up in the close atmosphere of Hegelianism.
They have been taught to worship the state, history, and the
nation.

In order to give the reader an immediate glimpse of Hegel’s
Platonizing worship of the state, I shall quote a few passages,
even before I begin the analysis of his historicist philosophy.
These passages show that Hegel’s radical collectivism depends
as much on Plato as it depends on Frederick William III, king
of Prussia in the critical period during and after the French
Revolution. Their doctrine is that the state is everything, and
the individual nothing ; for it owes everything to the state, its
physical as well as its spiritual existence. This is the message
of Plato, of Frederick William’s Prussianism, and of Hegel.
‘ The Universal is to be found in the State ‘, Hegel writes 8 .
* The State is the Divine Idea as it exists on earth. . . We
must therefore worship the State as the manifestation of the
Divine on earth, and consider that, if it is difficult to compre-
hend Nature, it is infinitely harder to grasp the Essence of the
State. . . The State is the march of God through the world.

. . The State must be comprehended as an organism. . . To
the complete State belongs, essentially, consciousness and thought.
The State knows what it wills. . . The State is real ; and . .
true reality is necessary. What is real is eternally necessary. . .
The State . . exists for its own sake. . . The State is the
actually existing, realized moral life.’ This selection of utter-
ances may suffice to show Hegels’ Platonism and his insistence
upon the absolute moral authority of the state, which overrules
all personal morality, all conscience. It is, of course, a bom-
bastic and hysterical Platonism, but this only makes more obvious
the fact that it links Platonism with modern totalitarianism.

So having been subject to Frederrick William’s sponsorship of Hegel, then the Nazi use of it as justification for the Super State, then seeing the Marxist version of it in Communism, the only rational conclusion is that it is all Hegel’s fault and that The State in the form of Nation or Tribe is The Evil Thing. So destroy it.

By putting it under the control of wise men like him… completely missing that this is just another form of Totalitarian Dictatorship.

In any case, we are to become one big happy non-family with everyone divorced from any tribe, nation, gender, religion, etc. etc. Free Sprits all in a Kumbaya world… Just stamp out anyone who disagrees, and the world will be wonderful. Stamp out borders, mix cultures and peoples from everywhere, and all your worries will be gone.

Except maybe for those pesky folks who don’t want to be exterminated culturally and those other pesky folks who want to do the exterminating…

Open Society

For those wishing to see what others think Open Society means, here’s the wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_society

The open society is a concept originally suggested in 1932 by the Jewish French philosopher Henri Bergson, and developed during the Second World War by Austrian-born British philosopher Karl Popper.

Popper saw the open society as standing on a historical continuum reaching from the organic, tribal, or closed society, through the open society marked by a critical attitude to tradition, up to the abstract or depersonalised society lacking all face-to-face interaction transactions.

In open societies, the government is expected to be responsive and tolerant, and political mechanisms are said to be transparent and flexible. Advocates claim that it is opposed to authoritarianism.

Popper is, however, considered to be an insider of Vienna thinkers, like Oskar Morgenstern and John von Neumann, who advocated and developed Game Theory, a theory of government lacking transparency. See f.e. Veblen, Thorsten: The Intellectual Pre-Eminence of Jews in Modern Europe.

History

Popper saw the classical Greeks as initiating the long slow transition from tribalism towards the open society, and as facing for the first time the strain imposed by the less personal group relations entailed thereby.

Whereas tribalistic and collectivist societies do not distinguish between natural laws and social customs, so that individuals are unlikely to challenge traditions they believe to have a sacred or magical basis, the beginnings of an open society are marked by a distinction between natural and man-made law, and an increase in personal responsibility and accountability for moral choices (not incompatible with religious belief).

Popper argued that the ideas of individuality, criticism, and humanitarianism cannot be suppressed once people have become aware of them, and therefore that it is impossible to return to the closed society, but at the same time recognised the continuing emotional pull of what he called “the lost group spirit of tribalism”, as manifested for example in the totalitarianisms of the 20th century.

While the period since Popper’s study has undoubtedly been marked by the spread of the open society, this may be attributed less to Popper’s advocacy and more to the role of the economic advances of late modernity. Growth-based industrial societies require literacy, anonymity and social mobility from their members — elements incompatible with much traditional-based behaviour but demanding the ever wider spread of the abstract social relations Georg Simmel saw as characterising the metropolitan mental stance.

Definition

Popper defined the open society as one “in which individuals are confronted with personal decisions” as opposed to a “magical or tribal or collectivist society.”

He considered that only democracy provides an institutional mechanism for reform and leadership change without the need for bloodshed, revolution or coup d’état.

Modern advocates of the open society suggest that society would keep no secrets from itself in the public sense, as all are trusted with the knowledge of all. Political freedoms and human rights are claimed to be the foundation of an open society.

Now contrast that lofty goal with Soros. He of the desire to overthrow governments (for the good the people…) and shape markets and all to suit his view of what is right. Can you say Authoritarian In Sheep Skin? Don’t let the little people choose to have a Nation as that is Tribal, and BAD. Let mature Daddy Soros give you a nice Open Society where you just have to accept a few road side bombs on Friday every week and people who want to kill you being put in your home town by a nameless international process… Say no and you are [Homophobic | xenophobic | racist | bigot | The Devil Encarnate] …

Me? I like my “traditions”. I’m perfectly happy with an Open Society rising from it’s own power as my Nation develops, and as we pick and choose what bits of our Tradition we choose to keep. I don’t need a little Troll off in a mansion deciding what my world must be… or my Nation.

More importantly, I reject the idea of a bi-polar world. This whole right – left axis. IMHO, there is a clear Libertarian world view that does not need an Open Society with the destruction of Nations, nor does it need a Hegelian Totalitarian be they Hegel Right or Hegel Left. We can have a world of free nations, with their own history and traditions, in which individuals are free to pursue their lives as long as they don’t screw around with other’s rights. That, IMHO, is where Soros fails. He does not recognize MY right to a Nation of Peers. My right to protection from those other individuals who will NOT accept my right to self determination and free will. The world of non-Totalitarian “just enough laws” but not a muddy sewer of “any idea at all, murder your neighbor for not believing what you believe is just fine too, so is gang rape of those who don’t agree”…

We need a certain amount of shared culture, shared rules, shared laws, and shared customs to have a stable society. Start saying “anything goes” and you get anarchy in short order. It is the balance between absolute chaos of unlimited freedom against Totalitarian Straight Jacket that is the best place, IMHO. A world of no nations and no shared culture becomes unstable and implodes. The Old Roman Empire fell that way to the uniform Arab Muslims. I’d rather not repeat that error.

It is my opinion that Soros, scarred in his youth by the Hegelian Totalitarian Nation State as an outcast Tribe, has responded by trying to eliminate all national pride and all tribal values. That he goes many steps too far and doesn’t see the middle ground as he pushes western culture, values, traditions and nations toward destruction. I also think that Russia has seen this too (as, I suspect, have China and India and the Muslim World [ though they are willing to exploit it, so keep quiet and plant mosques everywhere]).

OK, that’s the overview….

I’m going to do a bit on Hagel in more depth at some point, and likely add some more on Popper and Open Society. The purpose of this bit was just to point at the roots of some otherwise puzzling words and actions in the world. Hopefully it helps with that.

Subscribe to feed

Posted in Economics - Trading - and Money, History, Human Interest, News Related, Political Current Events | Tagged , , , | 64 Comments

Polk Co. Florida, Mosaic and GASP! Radiation!!!

For anyone who hasn’t already seen the news, a Mosaic Phosphate fertilizer plant in Florida, in Polk County, had a 40 ft diameter sink hole open up and swallow one of their “phosphogypsum stacks” I.e. a waste product pond full of gypsum byproduct from phosphate rock processing went down a natural sinkhole and back into the earth, and since Florida is a honeycomb of Karst rocks, into the groundwater. That Karst structure with dissolving rocks is, BTW, why they get sinkholes… Now you might ask just what the rock is that is dissolving, but I’ll leave that for another day. Though a bit of clue comes from the phosphate mine being right next to the drained ‘pond’ / stack, and that they mine phosphate rocks from between carbonate strata…

OK, this concerns me. Polk County was basically where I lived, fished, hung out, etc. most when in Florida. Fishing is good in the various ponds left behind by phosphate mining. I drank that ground water, and will again. So what is this “radiation” that’s gotten into the ground water and just how much ought I panic? That’s the question.

Oh, and a bit of chemistry. They dig up a Calcium Phosphate natural rock, crush it, add sulphuric acid, and get out phosphoric acid (used for fertilizers and in prior times laundry soap, though now that use is largely forbidden due to it also fertilizing wherever the city put your waste water and causing algae to be very happy…) This leaves Calcium Sulphate, that is also known as Gypsum. The white chalky stuff the drywall in pretty much all our homes is made from. Unfortunately, there is way more of it made than needed for wall board, and the natural gypsum has lower natural radiation levels, so this “phosphogypsum” mostly just piles up on it’s way to becoming a new gypsum rock deposit. Or eroding to return to the ocean from which it came when Florida was underwater a few tens of thousands of years ago.

My First Thought

My first thought was WTF is radiation doing at a fertilizer plant? Are they talking about K40? Bananas are radioactive due to the potassium 40 in them. I am radioactive for the same reason. So are you.

Well, it was only partly that. Partly too was that the phosphate rock they mine has some Radium, Uranium, and Thorium in it. Not really a surprise as sea water has those in it, and so do the sands from the mountains that make the monzanite sands of The Carolinas, Georgia, and down to the Florida coast. Nice sources of “rare earths” and Thorium. The decay products of U and Th also make basements without good ventilation a not-very-good-idea over much of that area too.

So ok, there’s U, Th, Ra and the breakdown product Rn Radon kicking around the place, and some of it ends up in the gypsum… somehow. Is it enough to be a worry? I go digging… but not in the phosphate mine…

Comes From, Goes To, Sizes

Things I always want to know about “stuff” and “data”:
Where’s the ‘comesouta” and the “goesinta” and how big is the flow?

All bolding, unless otherwise noted, done by me.

This article is about a plant in India, so we can assume the worst, with zero EPA oversight and few environmental standards. The Mosaic plant ought to be much better.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1687850714000053

Natural radioactivity assessment of a phosphate fertilizer plant area

S.K. Sahu, P.Y. Ajmal, R.C. Bhangare, M. Tiwari, G.G. Pandit,

Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Section, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Trombay, Mumbai 400085, India

Received 17 October 2013, Revised 1 January 2014, Accepted 2 January 2014, Available online 22 January 2014

Open Access funded by The Egyptian Society of Radiation Sciences and Applications
Under a Creative Commons license

Abstract

Rock phosphate ore processing and disposal of phosphogypsum contribute to enhanced levels of natural radionuclides in the environment. The concentration of naturally occurring radionuclides in soil, rock phosphate and phosphogypsum samples collected around a phosphate fertilizer plant were determined. Also the external background gamma levels were surveyed.238U, 232Th, 226Ra and 40K activities in soil samples were 21–674 Bq/kg, 11–44 Bq/kg, 22–683 Bq/kg and 51–295 Bq/kg respectively. The external background gamma radiation levels in the plant premises were ranging from 48 to 133 nGy/h.
Keywords

Rock phosphate; Phosphogypsum; TENORM; Radium equivalent activity

1. Introduction

Phosphate rocks of sedimentary origin contain Uranium (238U), Thorium (232Th) and its decay products in addition to phosphate minerals (Roesseler, 1990). Considerable variations are found in the chemical composition of rock phosphate from different mining areas. In general, sedimentary phosphate rocks, or phosphorites, originated in a marine environment, are characterized by activity concentrations of uranium much higher than those of volcanic and biological rocks. Reported values of 238U in rock phosphate range from 1.0 to 5.7 Bq/g (Barisic et al., 1992, Guimond and Hardin, 1989 and Heijde et al., 1988). These phosphates are largely used for the production of phosphoric acid, fertilizers and hence phosphate fertilizer industries are considered to be a potential source of natural radionuclide contamination. Their radioactivity leading to health problems from radiation at the level of the industrial processes which involves mining and transportation of phosphate ores and production of fertilizers. At the usage level, when fertilizers dispersed into the geo and biospheres, have a potential to transfer to living beings. Leaching of the minerals and wastes is another potential source of radioactivity dissemination which may contribute to enhanced exposure of workers, public and the environment to these radionuclides.

Phosphogypsum is a waste by-product from the processing of phosphate rock by the ‘‘wet acid method’’ of fertilizer production, which currently accounts for over 90% of phosphoric acid production.
The wet process is economic but generates a large amount of phosphogypsum (5 tons of phosphogypsum per ton of phosphoric acid produced)
[…]
3. Results and discussion

The levels of naturally occurring radionuclides (238U, 226Ra, 232Th and 40K) in soil samples are given in Table 1. The 238U activity in soil samples varied from 21.5 to 674.5 Bq/kg and that of 226Ra was ranging from 22.8 to 683.7 Bq/kg. At location 7 (gypsum pond) 226Ra values were found to be considerably higher than 238U, which is consistent with the nature of elemental distribution during chemical processes resulting in the generation of phosphoric acid. During acid attack of rock phosphate to produce phosphoric acid, majority of uranium along with thorium get partitioned with phosphoric acid while the radium, which follows calcium chemistry, finds its way with phosphogypsum (Poole, Allington, Baxter, & Young, 1995). The levels of 238U and 226Ra in soils at the two locations (location 4 and 7) were about 10–30 times higher than the rest of the plant locations and the average Indian soil levels of 20 Bq/kg. The open storage of such high radioactivity material could affect the surrounding in various pathways like emanation of 222Rn, atmospheric transport, leaching, dissolution and transport to aquatic environment (Bolivar et al., 1995). Activity concentration of all the nuclides except for 40K, were found to be maximum at location 4, at the Rock Silo, where phosphate rock is stored in large quantities. This is due to the fact that raw materials containing phosphorus show low activity concentrations of 40K but have significant activity concentrations of radionuclides belonging to 238U chain (Serena, Patrizia, & Luigi, 2005).

Gee… the majority of the radioactivity at a plant is in the rock INPUT to the process. The U and Th tend to end up with the phosphoric acid product, while the radium ends up in the gypsum. OK, so avoid the rock pile… which came out of the ground… where the ground water is percolating…

The article goes on with a fairly detailed and painful mapping of where there is how much of what. All nice to know, and yes, the gypsum pond is also hotter than ‘background’ at the natural surface, but not by all that much, and less than the natural input rock in the rock pile.

http://www.fipr.state.fl.us/about-us/phosphate-primer/radiation-and-phosphogypsum/

Radiation and Phosphogypsum

• Both natural gypsum and phosphogypsum contain radioactivity, but phosphogypsum contains more.

• In the manufacture of phosphoric acid, the acid is filtered through cloth to remove solids. The radium is filtered out with the solids. The solid portion is known as phosphogypsum.

Phosphogypsum produced in North Florida contains roughly 5 – 10 picocuries per gram (pCi/g) of radium while phosphogypsum from Central Florida contains about 20 – 35 pCi/g radium.

• The U.S. EPA prohibits the use of phosphogypsum. An exception is made for phosphogypsum with an average concentration less than 10 pCi/g radium which can be used as an agricultural amendment. EPA’s ban was based on a single scenario which assumed that the by-product was used in road building or as an agricultural amendment and 100 years later a house was built on the farm field or the abandoned road and the homeowner lived in the house 70 years, staying in the house 18 hours a day. Under this scenario the homeowner’s risk of radon-related health concerns only slightly exceeded the EPA’s acceptable limits.

• Phosphogypsum is primarily calcium sulfate, and plants need the sulfur it contains. Since much of the North Florida phosphogypsum is below the EPA restriction level, it can be used as a crop amendment, but for no other use.

• The Central Florida phosphogypsum is restricted to storage on land in large piles called “stacks.”

The overall radioactivity in the stacked phosphogypsum is actually less than what was in the original phosphate ore that was taken out of the ground.

OK, so this gypsum ‘stack’ (which is in Central Florida) is about 2 x 3 times the level that can be used to grow food… and if you are a prisoner in a home built on top of it, kept there for all but 6 hours a day, and live to 70 years old, you might, might be able to find some health impact base on EPA paranoid levels of concern.

The “stuff” is less radioactive than the rocks dug out of the ground under the plant, and through which the present ground water percolates.

It “moves with calcium” so will tend to bind into the rocks just like all the other calcium (which is likely why it was in the rocks to begin with).

IF it gets diluted by a factor of 2 or 3 as it runs into the huge ground water flows under Florida, it gets back to that “ok to put on food” level.

Somehow I’m not seeing much of a problem.

Though I’m pretty sure there will be panic all over central Florida, the EPA will be grandstanding and looking for ways to shut down phosphate production in the USA, the news will be endlessly Panties-In-A-Bunch about RADIATION!!!! in the groundwater of Florida, and a gazillion dollars of lawsuits will be filed.

Oh, and note that the quantity found in the soils and rocks in the first study were from 20 Bq/kg in clean soil up to a few hundred Bq/kg in ‘dirty’ places. Gee, that must be a lot..

http://solidsurfacealliance.org/G-radioactivity-radon-issues.html

China set standards on granite countertop materials, banning the export of
lower radiation level granites. They grade granite countertop material into four
grades : A, B, C, and below C. Only grade A can be used inside a home.
Grades B, C, and below C are allowed to be exported or used outside of homes
in China.

Finland 300 Ra bq/kg th 200 bq/kg 40K 3000
Latvia Residential interior use or Ra + Th 170 bq/kg 40K 1500 bq/kg
Industrial or exterior use residential ra + Th 250 bq/kg 40 K 2000 bq/kg
Industrial exterior or road use ra + Th 300 bq/kg 40 K 2500 bq/kg

Germany radium 226 levels below 300 Bq/Kg
Luxembourg Th less that 250 Bq/kg radon less than 350 bq/kg
Czech republic action level 150 -200 bq/kg for buildings occupied 1000 hrs or
more advisory level is 80 to 120.
Sweden says less than 200 Bq per cubic meter and gamma 0.5 uSv/h building
materials must be considered in the amount.
Nordic countries radium 300 thorium 200 40K 3000
Israel .5msv radium 150 thorium 185 40 K 3500

Oh… about as much in your granite counter top…

Never Mind…

Subscribe to feed

Posted in NCDC - GHCN Issues | Tagged , , , , , | 25 Comments

Electric Car Miles per Gallon?

Over at Tallbloke’s, there’s an article about Obama and his electric car promises
( a million on the road by last year, 150 Miles / US Gallon).

https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2016/09/16/obamas-electric-car-fail/

I did some math, and attempted to post a comment there from my tablet, and it failed, dropping the text in the process. That happens sometimes with the tablet ( I think it is a timeout of some kind from a long slow typing process). Rather than (painfully) do the math and type the text one finger at a time on the tablet again, I’ve decided to just put it up here as a posting. This also lets me flesh it out a lot more.

That article points to the original here:

https://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2016/09/15/obamas-electric-car-fail/

Which has this “promise” critique of the 150 MPG claim:

Despite spending billions, Obama delivered less than half of the electric cars in the time frame he promised. And let’s not forget his insistence that these cars would achieve the equivalent of 150 miles per gallon. A 2016 US Department of Energy list of the 11 most efficient electric vehicles indicates that not a single one meets that criteria. BMW’s i3 achieves 124 miles per gallon. The Chevrolet Spark is in second place at 119, and Vokswagen’s e-Golf is in third at 116.

The 11 best-case-scenario electric vehicles on the road eight years later fall 25% short of what Obama said would be entirely normal. Between them, they average only 112 miles per gallon. In other words, Obama and his speech writers were pulling numbers out of the air in 2008, confidently promising to meet goals they had no reason to believe were actually feasible.

Which has me wondering where the fish I’m smelling is hiding…

First off, how in blazes can you claim any kind of Miles per Gallon for electricity?

I presume this has to be some kind of Money-Equivalent-to-Gallon. But when I “do the math” with my local costs, it is nowhere near even 124 MPG-$-Eqiv. Let’s do some math, shall we?

Telsa Model S gets about 250 miles / charge. (It varies some by model and type of driving…
yes, YMMV ;-)

https://www.tesla.com/blog/driving-range-model-s-family

It varies some by model and driving cycle, but several values are near 250. And no, I don’t drive 65 on the freeway.

Variant 	65 mph Range 	75 mph Range
85D2 	 	295 	 	249

Now here in California, electricity runs 19 ¢ / kW-hr at the low tier. Anything over your lifeline rate jumps up to 35 ¢ or so. The PUC presently has a rate plan for $0.50 “soon”. My home usually bumps over into the 35 ¢ tier when using the AC which has, thankfully, not been needed this cool summer. Not Once. ;-)

In the Central Valley with Time Of Day pricing, there is a tier of a couple of pennies under $1 for middle of the day middle of the summer (right when you need AC most and it is:
“110 F in the shade and there ain’t no shade. -E.M.Smith”).

I’m going to use the lowest tier of about 19 ¢ in the calculations, even though it is a bit bogus. Anyone who charges a Tesla with any regular use is going to blow through lifeline rate almost instantly… Oh, and any “special” rate for charging an electric car is just “Subsidy Farming”, so would need to be un-subsidied for the comparison anyway, so why bother with it. It is an economic lie to use that number when we know the real price for electrons in the non-subsidy market. That is, the PUC tariff for home use.


http://www.pge.com/tariffs/tm2/pdf/ELEC_SCHEDS_A-1.pdf

Pacific Gas and
Electric Company
San Francisco, California
[…]
ELECTRIC SCHEDULE A-1
Sheet 1
SMALL GENERAL SERVICE
[…]
APPLICABILITY:

Schedule A-1 applies to single-phase and polyphase alternating-current service (for a description of these terms, see Section D of Rule 2*). This schedule is not available to residential or agricultural service for which a residential or agricultural schedule is applicable, except for single-phase and polyphase service in common areas in a multifamily complex (see Common-Area Accounts section). Customers that are otherwise eligible to take service on Schedule A-1, but are purchasing power to serve electric vehicle charging equipment, are not eligible to take service on this rate schedule.

Effective November 1, 2012, Schedule A-1 is closed to customers with a maximum demand of 75 kW or greater for three consecutive months in the most recent twelve months, or with usage of 150,000 kWh per year or greater, and who have at least twelve (12) months of hourly usage data available. Eligibility for A-1 will be reviewed annually and migration of ineligible customers will be implemented once per year, on bill cycles each November, using the same procedures described below for Time-of-Use (TOU) rates adopted in Decision 10-02-032 as modified by Decision 11-11-008.

So no car charging on the general tier tariff, how about that pure ‘residential’?

FWIW, there are dozens of odd tariffs listed on the top page, I’m only going to look at two of them, but you can amuse yourself with more if you like. This next one is the basic residential, not including all the time-of-use stuff:

http://www.pge.com/tariffs/tm2/pdf/ELEC_SCHEDS_E-1.pdf

APPLICABILITY:

This schedule is applicable to single-phase and polyphase residential service in single-family dwellings and in flats and apartments separately metered by PG&E; to single-phase and polyphase service in common areas in a multifamily complex (see Special Condition 8); and to all single-phase and polyphase farm service on the premises operated by the person whose residence is supplied through the same meter. The provisions of Schedule S—Standby Service Special Conditions 1 through 6 shall also apply to customers whose premises are regularly supplied in part (but not in whole) by electric energy from a nonutility source of supply. These customers will pay monthly reservation charges as specified under Section 1 of Schedule S, in addition to all applicable Schedule E-1 charges. See Special Conditions 11 and 12 of this rate schedule for exemptions to standby charges.
[…]
Customers receiving a medical baseline allowance shall pay for all usage in excess of 200 percent of baseline at a rate $0.04000 per kWh less than the applicable rate for usage in excess of 200 percent of baseline.
[…]
TOTAL RATES
Total Energy Rates ($ per kWh)
Baseline Usage
$0.18205 (R)
101% – 200% of Baseline
$0.24081 (R)
Over 200% of Baseline
$0.39984 (R)

Somewhat different from the last bill I inspected, but then again I’m not sure just which tariff I’m on. At any rate, I’m going to use the 19 ¢ number and ignore the 24 ¢ tariff bit as it gets blown through pretty quick. “Baseline” varies by location and last time I looked was based on average use in your area. It MUST be below average by some amount, by definition, so also by definition, most folks are not below it… even before they buy that e-Car…

Pasting in a chart from the pdf didn’t work well at all, so you get my summary. It ranges from about 6.2 kW-hr / day to 12.6 for the “basic” home, and from 7.7 to 29.6 kW-hr/day for the All Electric home (highest value in the winter time block, dropping to 16.4 in the summer for that same location, so hope you don’t meed much AC…)

Now notice that to charge your Tesla is going to suck up somewhere between 2 and 10 DAYS of your total electric service at the lifeline tier. Poor folks need not apply for an electric car… or better not drive it more than every other weekend…

The Tesla has about a 70 kW-hr battery.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=37233

2016 Tesla Model S (70 kW-hr battery pack)
[.]
89 MPGe
combined
city/highway
City MPGe:88
Highway MPGe:90

38 kWh/100 mi

While one wonders how they get to 89 MPGe, I’ll leave that for now. I’m more interested in my costs, here and now.

250 miles / 70 kW-hrs = 3.57 miles / kW-hr

The government number of 38 kW-hr / 100 miles gives:

100/38 kW-hr = 2.63 miles / kW-hr. Significantly worse, so I’m wondering how they got that number, but I’m going to use my number anyway.

19 &cent/kW-hr / 3.57 miles / Kw-hr = 5.32 ¢ / mile

Common cars in that class get about 30 miles / US gallon. It’s a wide range, but the new ones are quite good. Using a Diesel can get even better, but I’m looking at gasoline. Gasoline here sells for about $2.50 / US Gallon (often more with Super presently about $2.75, but cheaper in the Midwest). So:

$2.50 per gallon / 30 mpg = 8.33 ¢ / mile.

8.33 / 5.32 x 30 = 47 MPGe or Miles / gallon US equivalent by price.

Nice. Very nice in fact. But a very long way from 89 MPGe and not in the same State as 124 MPGe… or 150 MPGe.

Now what happens if we use the Midwest Regular gas price?

Right now, Gasbuddy has this listed for Oklahoma City, OK for Regular Unleaded:

http://www.gasbuddy.com/

1.72

Valero
2040 NW 10th St & N Pennsylvania Ave
Oklahoma City – NW

$1.72 / 30 = 5.7 ¢ / mile.

5.7 / 5.32 x 30 = 32 MPGe

Hmmm….. Clearly the MPG Equivalent is highly sensitive to the cost of a gallon…

But maybe it doesn’t cost 19 cents / kW-hr in Oklahoma… Some folks back there are paying a dime. So lets just call it a half of California rates. That would make it 64 MPGe. Very nice indeed, but still nowhere close to 89 or 124 or 150…

I note in passing that the electricity price is something else that the MPGe is very sensitive to…

The Future

But wait! I’m using “today pricing” for electricity in a world where I know that the California PUC has a $0.50 tariff on the planning boards (need to subsidize those solar and wind boondoggles, don’t you know…)

Furthermore, that “dime” rate is based on historical use of well depreciated coal plants. Facilities that Obama and Hillary have worked hard to kill. “Going forward” will not be based on cheap effective coal, but on more expensive new plant and very pricey solar and wind. So what tariff would that be? IMHO, it MUST be more than the 19 ¢ / kW-hr California Lifeline Rate. That is the MINIMUM that a household is expected to use just to get by at an OK minimal lifestyle. Oh, and California is consuming a lot of Arizona Palo Verde Nuclear power and a lot of Washington State hydro via the Pacific DC Intertie… and a whole lot of cheap and relatively efficient gas turbines. It isn’t like we’re running on the Solar & Wind Green Dream Power… and even with that, run your AC in summer or use anything but gas heat in winter and you are in the next tariff rate up.

So what this says to me is that the Electric Car MPGe is based on historical coal electricity costs, and very much not on the future power sources (whatever may survive Obama / Clinton) prices.

Aerodynamics dominates energy use by cars at freeway speeds. Most cars consume about the same energy/mile in town (acceleration) as they do on the freeway. Mass and drag are your factors. Everybody can get the same drag by designing the body right. Batteries add mass, but the regenerative breaking more or less makes up for that. Net, the e-car uses about the same energy as the gas car.

What changes the MPGe is assumptions about price of electrons vs price of gasoline, not energy used.

Price is supposed to reflect the combined efficiency and combined losses of the whole generation cycle. It often doesn’t as tariffs are set by political commissions, not competitive markets. Distortions of both gasoline and electricity costs via gas taxes, sales taxes, PUC rulings, subsidy farming solar and wind, and so much more makes direct comparison of MPGe in some ways an exercise in:
“Given these conclusions, what assumptions can we draw?”.

What is clear to me is that the 150 MPGe and the 124 MPGe and even the 64 to 47 MPGe figures are very price sensitive to both gasoline and electricity prices; AND the Global Warming / EPA / Obama Nation folks have all said “electricity prices must necessarily skyrocket” while fracking and horizontal drilling assure oil prices can’t.

Perhaps that is why the American Public is staying away from e-Cars in droves. They can look ahead while The Government can only see in the rear view mirror…

Subscribe to feed

Posted in Economics - Trading - and Money, Energy, Tech Bits | Tagged , , , , | 30 Comments

Who Started Birtherism?

Well, Trump played the media game rather well today. Suspense about his Birther statement had cameras on 20+ minutes of endorsements from Generals, 2 x Medal Of Honor winners, and a stage full of military veterans behind him (including a few black faces center stage at strategic times / locations. So his staff is learning how to stage manage.)

His big Birther announcement was that Hillary started it and He ended it (implied via his badgering Obama enough to get the Hawaii birth certificate issued).

True to form, in the news froth following this, MSNBC and CNN were ranting about how this doesn’t end the RACIST!!!! birther issue for The Donald. Even Fox had Democrat Representatives with their brains all DVR’ed up with the RACIST!!!! talking points. OK, what does this say? It says, front and center, that Hillary is betting it all on the RACIST!!!!! card at the moment. Ergo she is deathly afraid of her dropping numbers with the black voter. Race Bating at it’s finest.

We’ll see in the next few weeks if the American Black Voter is as dumb as Hillary thinks, or if they are as smart as Ben Carson thinks. If they take the Race Bait, or if they look at what Democrats have done to them, their inner cities, and their jobs over the last 50 years and decide they can do better without that kind of “help”.

Donald, perhaps a bit dimly, or perhaps ‘crazy like a fox’, started his statement with a “Hillary started it” claim. This had MSNBC putting up a line on the screen that “Trump {falsely} claims Hillary…” and the whole Loony Side Of Left with their panties in a bunch about it frothing and shouting RACIST!!!!! LIAR!!!!. Well, ether it was dumb to dampen the “I finished it” with a Hillary jab, or it was a great way to keep his name in lights. Time will tell.

When Did Birtherism Start?

I got to wondering, when / where did it start? Was Hillary in the area at the time? I dimly remembered it coming out of her campaign against Obama, but having little interest in either of them, I’d not paid much attention to their campaigns.

One of the things I like to do, when an advocacy laden issue comes up, is look at what “the other side” claims. If the response is fairly contorted or muddied, with only weak points, they are usually not possessed of the whole truth. (Or they would be giving strong pointers to that truth supporting their side).

In this case, I took a look at PolitiFact who rated the Trump statement about Hillary to be “False”. What is their evidence?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/sep/23/donald-trump/hillary-clinton-obama-birther-fact-check/

After a fair amount of Hillary-Good Trump-Bad position polishing, they get to:

It’s an interesting bit of history that the birther movement appears to have begun with Democrats supporting Clinton and opposing Obama. But Trump, and others who have made this claim, neglect to mention that there is no direct tie to Clinton or her 2008 campaign.

The story appears to have started with supporters of Clinton, an important distinction.

Trump goes on to completely distort the chain of events by claiming Clinton “was all in” on the birther movement. Most of the talk started after Clinton suspended her presidential campaign. And the only thing she officially has ever done is deny any accusation of starting a whisper campaign.

So the whole defense is that it started with supporters of Clinton, not with her, personally, getting on stage and shouting it?

What makes The Donald different is that he’s not well schooled in the skulduggery of politics. Those who are schooled in it, know that all negative slanderous things are to be initiated by “your supporters” and then you just say “I sure hope there is no truth to the ( mumble rumor ) that my opponent eats dead babies since that would make him totally unfit for office.”

Mr. Trump looks at it and sees it starting with The Hillary Clinton Campaign Supporters and just shortens that to Hillary Clinton. OK, he gets a D in Political Skulduggery as he still thinks a leader is responsible for their organization…

In Conclusion

OK, so we know how this will play out from here. Hillary, and her “campaign” and their “supporters”, will continue to promote “Trump the LIAR!!! and RACIST!!!! Birther!!!” at every turn. If it gets traction, the 4-walling be be put on steroids for the next 2 months.

Frankly, I’ve heard the RACIST!!!! Alinsky attack so many times it no longer does anything for me other than brand the shouter as a Saul Alinsky-ite in full faux rant. It would hurt me more if they called me something real, like old, or ‘hey grey beard!” or even ‘tubby’… When we elected Obama, it was a clear statement that a majority of Americans were quite happy with a Black President, even a Socialist Soros Sponsored one. America loved Colin Powell leading our troops. Condoleezza Rice is brilliant, talented, and caused many a guy’s head to turn. Oh, and need I point out that Oprah is extremely rich from all those RACIST!!!! “deplorables” watching her shows? (Not to mention the NBA and NFL stars being majority black and extraordinarily well paid…) That is what echos in my brain when someone shouts RACIST!!!! at me. Or at someone else. It doesn’t reflect at all on me, or the one shouted at, only on the shouter and their failure to grasp reality.

The question is just how many folks are dumb enough to buy the Alinsky Attack, and how many have such a tough hide now that it isn’t even noticed, or if it is, noticed as what it is, a faux rage over a non-issue.

Now, my bias. I like to state it so there is no doubt. I was, briefly, interested in the birthplace of Obama. Why? Because I believe in following the Constitution and there was some doubt that was being done. Democrats in particular, but Republicans too, have tossed out 90% of it by simply ignoring it or lying about what it says; so why not the rest?… Had the same issue been raised about, say, Ted Cruz (oh, wait, it was…) I’d have the same response. “Let’s take a look and see.” That Obama spent YEARS hiding his birth certificate, and that the ‘transition’ of his mother from Kenya to Hawaii while pregnant is a bit vague, and more; all ‘gave the story legs’. I’m about 99% convinced he’s a USA citizen. I’ve seen pregnant ladies on planes before, so the argument that she couldn’t just fly over seems a bit lame. I’d like to see a full on forensic analysis of the birth certificate, and some R&D into his mothers transport, just to assure that last 1%, but I’d also like clarification on Cruz as quasi-Canadian too… Can you just renounce your country of birth and be Natural Born American? (The same kind of issue was raised for McCain, who, IIRC, was born in Panama on a US Base. Was he, as a foreign born US registered birth to adult parents a Natural Born American? While I think so, it’s a legal question so my opinion doesn’t count…)

Now which of those three is RACIST!!!!, and why? McCain, Obama, Cruz? All three get the same Birther questions. McCain and Cruz less of it since they didn’t stay in the spotlight as long and had some clear evidence that put it in the “lawyer land” not the “no evidence public opinion” land. Obama kept things alive by staying in the spotlight and not releasing his birth certificate. Does that make HIM the source of the “racism”? Or is there no racism, just honest folks wondering what he was hiding and why he didn’t show it right out the gate?

OK, now we’re going to get a few weeks of Hillary Surrogates doing the Saul Slime with RACIST!!!! on every street corner, with “community organizers” getting the BL Matter folks worked up and in the news again, with other faux protests in the streets over non-events by Mr. Trump, and be prepared to hear David Duke!!! shouted far more than his irrelevancy deserves.

Me? I’m going to hit the “jump” button on the remote whenever that crap comes on the screen. I’ve got several places I can go for real news. Oddly, RT Russia Today has more straight news than does MSNBC and often more than CNN. Sad, that. Also the BBC America “news” (really a 30 minute teaser) is generally polite about things and avoids the rant camera clowns. I fully expect this to not move the needle at all for Hillary. When it fails, they will move on to the next line of attack. Until then, it’s just noise and nonsense, all ‘content free’, and I’ll find other things to watch, read, etc. They can preach to their own choir, but that won’t gain them any converts… While Trump is giving meaty policy speeches and laying out a sound set of programs and principles to fix the problems created by 8 years of Obama… Those I listen to ‘end to end’ as they are full of content.

Praise For CSPAN

I’ve grown to like CSPAN. While Fox & Fox Business had “talking heads” mumbling over the Trump introduction speeches, and while MSNBC / CNN had Racist-Ranters fuming on post speech, CSPAN just carried the whole thing, end to end, and without annoying “commentary”.

I how have the habit, when seeing a Big Speech show up on a news channel, of checking CSPAN (usually CSPAN-1). IF they are carrying it, that’s where I go. They start earlier, finish later, show more of the room and reactions, and most important of all, do not “interpret” or “comment on” events ‘for me’. I get it clean, straight, and uncut. I like that.

I will, from time to time, jump to any of Fox, Fox Biz, CNBC, MSNBC, CNN, etc. to ‘check in’ on their coverage. Usually followed by an immediate jump back as they are talking over a lead in speech that is of interest, or ranting over an exit speech that is also of interest. In several such samples over a dozen or so minutes, both before the main event and after, I was able to get the sense of what the others were “up to”, while at the same time getting to hear the heart-felt speeches of various Generals et. al. on the stage. Sometimes, the commercial carriers will have a speech that CSPAN isn’t covering. Sometimes they have better camera angles and / or better sound quality; then I’ll stay on them. Far too often, then, they cut to talking heads or start talking over the real action. Then it’s just “jump” and I’m back on CSPAN… There is a tangible feeling of relief then as my BS Filter can take a break ;-)

So if you have CSPAN but have just ignored it as “that dull place showing congress doing nothing”, do try it during the major speeches by candidates and / or the debates. It is a refreshing alternative. And they don’t keep screaming RACIST!!!!
;-)

Subscribe to feed

Posted in News Related, Political Current Events | Tagged , , , , , , | 27 Comments

Et Tu Fox? – “bad” Fast Food

So I’ve got Fox running on the TV. The cute talking head and the guy-in-suit-remote reporting on Trump, his medical report, and diet. They indulge in the now far too common “shaming” of Trump’s love of “fast food” and strongly imply (frankly, flat out say) that to lose weight he needs to let go of the “fast food”.

Sigh.

This is just so daft, I don’t know where to begin. I know it is a “push” form the left to put Food Nazis in charge of our diet and get us all to eat a lot less, preferably vegetarian, and never anything from an evil “corporation”… ( I have several family and friends from the vegetarian / vegan side of things); but really, can you just THINK for one moment?

OK, the “approved” meal:

A nice bit of French Bread, a light salad, perhaps with some Thousand Island dressing on it, a side vegetable, and at most 4 ounces of meat. Oh, and the French Bread not buttered…

Now consider the “evil” fast food burger and fries:

First off, the fries ARE a side vegetable. No, not a green one, but potatoes are on the “approved” and “good” list, after all…

Now take your French Bread, and make it shaped into a bun… The typical “condiments” of mayo, catsup, and mustard, with a bit of pickle, if mixed together makes Thousand Island Dressing ( I’ve done it often when needing a quick salad dressing. We did it in the restaurant when we’d run out of the commercial stuff in gallons…) Your lettuce, tomato, onion, etc. is a light salad. Put them on the bread / bun. Now add the “6 to a pound” patty, or 2.6 ounces of beef.

What you have in front of you is EXACTLY the same in terms of calories and diet as the “approved” meal, though 1.4 ounces “better” on the low meat side…

The “approved” meal:

A nice pasta with Marinara sauce including mushrooms, olives, and salami, topped with cheese.

The “evil” fast food:

A wafer of bread (same amount of wheat as the pasta) topped with Marinara, salami, mushrooms, olives and topped with cheese. Roasted. That is, the “evil” fast food Pizza.

Same ingredients, same calories. Slightly different processing.

The “approved” meal:

a 3 ounce fish patty, a small side salad with dressing, a medium dinner roll.

The “evil” fast food:

a 3 ounce fish patty, on a medium bun, along with a small salad topped with dressing. AKA “Fish Sandwich” from your fast food place.

The “approved” meal:

At home, you have a fresh salad made with cabbage, carrots, etc. and a touch of buttermilk dressing, a serving of baked beans, and 6 ounces of roasted chicken.

The “evil” meal:

Order up a 2 or 3 piece (size varies a bit by location) chicken meal at KFC with a side of slaw and baked beans. You can get it roast / skinless IIRC, or fried.

The “evil” meal:

Taco Bell. (This one is so blatant I can’t even find a way to hide it…)

The “approved” meal:

The very same burrito, taco, taco salad, “whatever” made at home or ordered in a fancier Mexican Place. Look, it’s a flour or corn tortilla along with some combo of refried beans, Spanish rice, salad, cheese, and salsa, with optional “meat stuff”. All in various combinations and permutations. Just Like Taco Bell.

Now there might be some difference in the particulars of the tortilla or refritos, but I’d guess both of them come from a factory somewhere in either case. When cooking at home, I use canned refried beans as they are as good as I could make, vegetarian available – i.e. no lard, and very convenient. I also used packages shredded cheese just like the “pros” and tortillas from a major commercial maker, just like everyone else. At “higher end” places like Chipotle Mexican Grill, you get more choices of bean color and smashed or not smashed, but that isn’t going to change how healthy it all is.

In Conclusion

I could go right on down the list of ethnicities, but why bother. You get the picture. When I travel, I typically hit Jack-In-The-Box for their Breakfast Jack. It is a bun (bread) with a fried egg, slice of sandwich ham, slice of cheese, and nothing else I’ve noticed. Essentially identical to a small ham and cheese omelette with toast. Now how is my health improved by ordering a ham and cheese omelette with toast at $10 / plate instead of 2 BFJacks at about $3? Not at all. (Oh, and both can be ordered with hash brown potatoes).

So please please please, can folks start giving some “push back” on the “Fast Food Evil And Fattening” meme? It isn’t the shape of the food (typically sandwich) nor the ingredients (substantially the same) that’s the issue. It’s how much of it you stuff down the gullet and if you wash it down with a 1/2 gallon of Fructose Syrup pretending to be a soda. (Fructose is directly metabolized to fat in the liver…) At “fast food” places, I typically order a bottle of water or get UN-sweetened iced tea (no fructose) and add my own sugar (sucrose) in moderation.

Does nobody bother to look at what ingredients are used to assemble their meals and notice they are the same things? Maybe it was growing up in a restaurant and having a very early introduction to “how to make 100+ different meals from 10 different ingredients”…

Somehow I thought Fox News would know better… I expect that kind of stupid from MSNBC, as they have bought into the Left POV Food Shaming thing…

Subscribe to feed

Posted in Food, Political Current Events | Tagged , , , | 17 Comments