Thursday, April 12, 2018

April 12, 2018 -- A Quick Run Around The Web

I don't know how many of you watch this guy's videos, but he focuses primarily on camouflage and gear, movement, etc., and tests a multitude of camouflage patterns so you can see how effective they are in different environments when viewed from a moderate distance. 


  • This is probably one of the most important self-defense articles you will read this year: "STAND, MOVE, OR SEEK COVER…WHAT WORKS IN A GUNFIGHT?"--Active Response Training. Using students in an advanced pistol class, Greg Elifritz decided to run a test on the probability of successfully shooting another person standing still, moving, and behind cover. (If I read it right, the shooter was moving while shooting). 85% were able to hit an opponent standing still, while only 47% could hit an opponent who was moving. The odds of hitting someone behind cover was even less. Greg also breaks it down as to torso hits (the percentages I quoted above were for a hit anywhere). Basic lesson: get off the X, and seek cover.
  • "Pistol Sights Under Various Lighting Conditions"--J.W. Ramp. The author of this piece decided to test a few different types of pistol sights under varying lighting conditions, photographing them to give you an idea of how each work. A couple takeaways, however:
         While I had my own feelings going into it, I found it interesting how similar the tritium and fiber options were with blacked out rears. Granted that was just when the tritium front sight came with a day-glo orange ring around it for extra highlighting, but I had expected the narrow fiber sight to have a clear advantage in all situations other than completely dark (which may be difficult to come up with a justifiable circumstance for).
             I also found the wider front sights (that cause less daylight on either side of the front sight) to be more difficult in the various lighting conditions. I much preferred a narrow front sight so it was easier to distinguish in darker, silhouetted situations.
      For the left being opposed to gun rights is nothing more than showing loyalty to the party elites. Rich white elitists are insulated totally from any real threats. The fact that 83% of all gun use is drug and gang related means any actions they take the will do nothing statistically to gun deaths. 50% of the counties in the U.S. had ZERO-gun deaths last year. In fact gun violence is an urban problem. 53% of ALL shooting are by young black men under 30. If you do the math 3% of the population does more than half the killing. To the anti-gun left only dead white kids are useful political props.
                China is engaged in large-scale theft of American research and technology from universities, using spies, students, and researchers as collectors, experts told Congress on Wednesday.
                  Compounding the technology theft, the administration of President Barack Obama weakened U.S. counterintelligence efforts against foreign spies by curbing national-level counterspy efforts, a former counterintelligence official disclosed during a House hearing.
          • Well, I always knew she was a witch ... just not literally: "Evil in high places"--Vox Popoli. Hillary Clinton publicly has accepted membership into a witches coven. Vox Day also discusses prior rumors that Clinton was a practicing witch.
                    Unless circumstances drive one to fight, the ordinary response to contempt is to create distance. Nobody wants to be around people who hold that attitude towards them, so they try to avoid such people. We saw this last year with the NFL. Numerous players began showing contempt for America during the national anthem, and Americans responded by watching less football and buying fewer tickets.
                     Even when one can’t help being around contemptuous people, one creates different kinds of distance. The henpecked husband, for example, increasingly retreats into work and hobbies to minimize dealings with his wife. It would be silly to think the same kind of dynamic wouldn’t happen in our congregations.
                He also adds:
                          Now, liberal churches don’t perceive this as an indictment. The whole point of theological liberalism was to “save” Christianity by baptizing fashionable politics. But among Christians who believe Christianity is actually true, this is a real problem, and our response must not be to ask how we can be better at hiding our contempt for men for the sake of fixing our stats. Our question needs to be how we can repent of it.
                             The first step is to recognize and repent of our fear. Like most Americans, American Christians are absolutely terrified of being labeled misogynist (and racist, homophobic, transphobic, etc.) Alas for them: popular culture judges anything contrary to feminism as misogynistic, and the Bible is by no means a feminist book.
                              So Christians “defend” the Bible by placarding a few passages that sound maybe-sort-of feminist (e.g. “Deborah!” “In Christ there is no male and female!”), while ignoring and even obfuscating all the passages that cannot possibly be reconciled with feminist philosophy (“Wives submit to your husbands as to the Lord.” “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man”).
                                Now we’ve arrived at this point as a country with illegal immigration because of an unholy and bipartisan alliance among certain members within the Republican and Democratic parties that allow and encourage it for their own selfish interests—and to the direct detriment of their fellow party members and countrymen.
                                   We saw this play out with the Tammany Hall machine in the 1800s. That machine harnessed the political power of immigrant votes to build a machine of enormous corruption. It was aided by business interests that viewed the relatively straightforward ease of simple bribery as a welcome and efficient alternative to the messy, slow and red tape-laden effort associated with any legal political effort.
                                     Now, as then, there exists an unholy alliance between the Democratic Party that covets as many Latinos as it can get, as it does in California, to lock down the state politically. Meanwhile, business interests see illegal immigrants as a source of very cheap labor. Why wouldn’t a business owner in Southern California employ dozens of illegal aliens, and do so at far cheaper salaries than he would otherwise be forced to pay a U.S. citizen? Further, if that employee comes with cheaper medical benefits or a lower likelihood of work-related legal suits, then the preference for this labor becomes all the more enticing. Now his natural inclination towards “conservative” ideology; hard work, capitalism, free markets, personal responsibility, may now be softened enough by his love of profit to quietly support Democratic politicians that will help keep this supply of labor abundant and thus cheap all in the name of being a “Moderate Republican.”
                                       Neither side of this equation really cares about what this alliance costs others in their own party. The Democratic politician does not care that this illegal labor degrades the power of one of its strongest supporters—union labor. They don’t care that the burden of millions of illegal aliens on a state safety net system has left even fewer resources for the poorer elements of the Democratic party’s voter base. It’s all about as many new votes as he can get today; to heck with tomorrow.
                                         And what of the moderate Republican business owner? He doesn’t care that his cheaper labor has undermined his party’s effectiveness statewide. He doesn’t care that the state now has one of the highest tax rates in the country. He doesn’t care that portions of his state are no longer physically recognizable as America. He doesn’t care that the educational system is teetering on destruction. He doesn’t care that the land that allowed him to prosper is being degraded. Why? Because it’s more important that he calls himself a Republican than actually do anything for the long-term success of the ideas that party represents.
                                  Molten salt reactors use fuel dissolved in a molten fluoride or chloride salt which functions as both the reactor’s fuel and its coolant, meaning that such a reactor could not suffer from a loss of coolant leading to a meltdown. Terrestrial’s IMSR integrates the primary reactor components, including the graphite moderator, into a sealed and replaceable reactor core. The reactor can produce 400 MWt (190 MWe) of energy, and is designed as a modular reactor for factory fabrication.

                                  No comments:

                                  Post a Comment