Firearms & Self-Defense:
- "Useful Training References- Shooting Drills"--Active Response Training. Greg Ellifritz covers a few products (a couple books and a card deck) that he has found useful for creating practice drills for his defensive pistols.
- "How Do I Choose Which Carry Gun?" by the Tactical Professor. More precisely, the question from a reader that he is attempting to answer is how does he decide which gun he carries most often. He responds: "The short answer is that I don’t change guns very often. My EDC handguns all are sufficient to deal with what I consider my most likely threat profile. Because that’s so, I don’t feel the need to scale my armament up and down." He then delves into some reasons he might change which appear to be to gain and/or refresh his knowledge and familiarity with a system in order to teach it in classes. He also notes that if he does happen to change his carry firearm, he will spend an hour in dry-fire practice before venturing out with that firearm.
- "Skill Set: How Much Gun Is Enough?" by Tiger McKee, The Tactical Wire. Short answer:
“Never met anyone in a gunfight,” the old saying goes, “that wished they had a smaller gun.” But I have met people who were in fights that wished for a smaller gun. The gun they “normally” carry was too big; it was left in the safe at home. A smaller pistol would have been easier to carry/conceal and it would actually be on their body somewhere.
- "Concealed Carry Corner: A New Look At Off-Body Carry"--The Firearm Blog. The key point he raises is that off-body carry gives you options in what you can carry that you may not have if the firearm is on your body. He writes:
Whether it’s a classy man satchel or sling bag, having a dedicated gun bag will allow you to conceal handguns you may otherwise never be able to carry on your body. Carrying something like a Glock 17 with a red dot and weapon light is possible with the right holster and time of year, but it’s certainly not practical for carrying on your body every single day. This is where off-body carry really starts to shine. You have the ability to carry not only a full-size pistol with all the accessories you need on it but can also easily use a magazine extension allowing you to have a full-size firearm with extended capacity in arms reach at all times.
In the comments--and something I see frequently--there are references to fanny packs (probably because of this article published by TFB about the same time on a new concealed carry fanny pack) in the context of "off-body" carry. Not to be pedantic about it, but a fanny pack is most assuredly NOT off-body carry. The pack (the holster) is attached by a belt type strap around the person's waist. It is no more off-body carry than an outside the waistband holster. The hallmark of "off-body" carry is that the firearm is carried in a bag or container (e.g., a purse, a satchel, a sling bag, etc.) that is carried in the hand or over a shoulder, but is not secured to the body. Meaning, that someone could easily grab it and take off with it. A backpack or daypack, when it is properly worn and secured with its waist strap or belt, is also not "off body" (although it has other problems for using it to carry a concealed weapon); but could be if it was simply slung over one shoulder (as is popular when using such packs to transport books). Some sling bags can also be secured around the waist with a strap and, when done so, are not really "off-body" carry. Of course, just like a holster, a fanny pack or daypack can become "off-body" carry if it is taken off.
- "A .30/30 Is All You Need (If You Know How to Hunt)" by Richard Mann, Field & Stream. The provocative title aside, Mann makes the interesting observation that at 100 yards using some pretty standard hunting ammunition, the .30-30 will have better penetration and expansion than hunting loads for the .30-06 and .308. That is, he relates, "[a]t that distance [i.e., 100 yards], your typical 150-grain .308 Winchester hunting bullet penetrates about 19 inches and deforms to a frontal diameter of around 0.55 inch. The same conventionally designed but heavier 180-grain bullet from a .30/06 will push to around 22 inches and expand a little wider, to about .6 of an inch." But, a 150-grain from a .30-30 at that same range will penetrate 23 inches and expand as much or more than the .308 or .30-06. Moreover, it will do this with only 13 foot-pounds of recoil energy from a 7-pound rifle. "That’s 6 and 11 foot-pounds less than the .308 and .30/06, respectively." The remainder of the article discusses some .30-30 history, its effective range and using skill to get inside that effective range, as well as the best bullets and commercial loads to use.
- "Democrat Gov. Ned Lamont: AR-15s ‘Should Not Be Allowed in the State of Connecticut’." The article reports that "Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont (D) is weighing a push to end or repeal a grandfathering clause in a gun control bill in order to force residents to hand over any AR-15s." His excuse is, he states: "I think they’re killers … I think they’re incredibly dangerous in our community. You’re not serious about crime if you leave them on the street." The article goes on to note that more people are killed with knives than all rifles combined (not just AR15s). However, you know what is really driving the spike in crime? Streetwise Professor relates that "[t]he increase in gun homicides documented in the Emory University study is attributable almost exclusively to one factor: a nearly 60 percent increase in homicide fatalities among black men," and it happened over a period of about a year: in 2020 which saw the George Floyd riots and the defund police movement. What the Streetwise Professor does not add, perhaps thinking that it is obvious, but these black men are not dying at the hands of police or whites, but at the hands of other black men. In the late 1980s and 1990s there was a real push to get violent offenders off the streets and it worked: violent crime fell and the homicide rates amongst blacks and Hispanics in particular fell precipitously (as illustrated in the graph that accompanies the Streetwise Professor's article). The logic is clear: what needs to be removed from circulation are not AR15s but violent offenders. But because that would disproportionately fall on blacks and, to a lesser extent, Hispanics, it won't happen. But those of our leaders that attempt to disarm us while lying about the real cause of the crime in order to protect their power and authority are evil. Ergo, Gov. Lamont is evil.
- Related: Case in point: "Crime plunges in El Salvador as criminals are sent to prison"--Liberty Unyielding.
- If an armed society is a polite society, what does that make a disarmed society? "Chaos in the Outback: Inside the rural town where a gang of out-of-control teens known as '6770 boys' run riot - as locals fear for their lives and don't dare leave their homes." The Daily Mail reports:
Halls Creek, in Western Australia's Kimberley region, has descended into chaos in recent months with a group of boys terrorising locals and bragging about their antics on TikTok.Videos shared to the social media platform show them hooning around the streets in stolen cars, driving on to the wrong side of the road and performing donuts.The teens have also been damaging homes at random and hurling rocks at businesses and locals.In one viral clip, two cars are seen driving erratically around a suburban street in the dead of the night, with the vehicles nearly smashing into each other.'Aw s**t,' a girl filming the group cries out before bursting into laughter.Two boys can also be seen hanging onto the car in the back of a ute's tray as it spins around in a burn-out.Similar videos have been shared to TikTok with young men wearing shirts over their heads to cover their faces - and referring to themselves as the '6770 boys', the postcode of the town.Another clip shows boys hooning across a dirt field leaving behind a huge cloud of dust, while a police car follows closely in pursuit.The boys taunt police by performing a donut right in front them, before speeding off down a suburban road.One of the town's estimated 4,000 residents, Kirsten Thomson, said the community had become 'totally lawless'.'These kids are now attacking people to steal from them . . . so I don't go out at night anymore,' she told The West.
We know that low crime societies are those that have high social trust and are homogenous. But I would argue that, in addition, it is also a result of people policing each other to enforce social norms, whether it is shaming someone for inappropriate dress and behavior at one end of the spectrum, or delivering an educational beatdown at the other end of the spectrum.
- Mass shootings only happen in America: "Gunman shouting 'I'll kill you all' shoots three women dead after storming apartment residents' board meeting at coffee shop in Rome." From the article:
A man opened fire at a board meeting for residents of apartments in northern Rome today, killing three people and injuring others.
Gunman Claudio Campiti, 57, was heard shouting 'I'll kill you all' before opening fire in the outdoor seating area of the Il Posto Giusto cafe.
The assailant was known to the members of the association, was a consortium member and reportedly lived in one of the apartments.
- "The Multiple Uses of Cat-Eye Tape in a Tactical Night Time Environment"--Mason Dixon Tactical. Not just for putting on a hat or helmet to identify fellow team members at night, the author describes using it to mark the location of the front sight in firearms, but to also label equipment so you can see if it is yours, or provide other information you need to see at night.
- And another from Mason Dixon Tactical: "A Trait of Successful Survivalist Groups, Past and Present." And that is, he explains, "they are organized around a group of long-time Friends, Family, or both."
- "SELF SUFFICIENCY SUNDAYS: Guerrilla Gardening"--Stop Shouting! The author goes over some reasons to consider guerilla gardening (surreptitiously planting or encouraging the growth of edible plants within your AO) even if you have a large garden on your property and/or a large stockpile of food. Those reasons, in a nutshell, are: (i) confiscation or (ii) deliberate destruction of crops/gardens by the government. I would add indifferent destruction of crops/gardens such as when your garden is destroyed by government jackbooted thugs looking for your hidden cache of weapons or MAGA hats. This is only a small part of the article, however, and the majority of the article is about gardening methods and selecting plants for your guerrilla gardening plan.
Just a couple of personal notes. The author really likes the "Square Foot" gardening approach. I had very poor results with that approach. I had set up two planter boxes per the directions in the book and initially everything seemed great. Unfortunately, one of the boxes was too close to a tree and the rich nutrients in the garden bed encouraged mass invasive tree root growth--even through the layer at the bottom of the bed to prevent weeds growing up through--which rendered that box useless. It looked good on the surface and the top couple of inches, but the tree roots choked out everything below that. The second planter box met the fate of earlier but less sophisticated attempts I've tried at planter boxes which is that they seem unsuitable for the hot, dry summers of southwestern Idaho. (In fact, that is one of the reasons the other box was close to a tree was to get it under shade during the day). If I had installed a drip watering system it might have worked, but the raised beds just seem to loose too much moisture (or don't retain enough moisture). I've had better success with using shallow mounds. I'm not saying the Square Foot gardening method won't work for you, but that you should first try it at a smaller scale before diving in.
The idea of foraging or guerilla gardening reminds me of journeys my family would make up and down the rural farm roads near where I lived when I was young. Asparagus grew wild along the ditch and canal banks--it seemed to be almost regarded as weed by the local farmers--and so we would go out and collect asparagus when it was ready.
- "Best Survival Knife If You Could Only Have One – My Updated Choices"--The Modern Survival Blog. The author first defines what he means by a survival knife and then discusses some traits or features that he looks for in a survival knife. His top four choices are: (i) the ESEE-5 or ESEE 6 (the only difference is the blade length--five or six inches, respectively); (ii) the Fallkniven A1; (iii) the traditional full-sized K-Bar; and (iv) the Morakniv Garberg.
- And another from the Modern Survival Blog: "Canning Milk and Dairy Products." The article begins:
Dairy (straight milk) is pasteurized at 161 degrees for 15 seconds, or ultra-pasteurized at 280 for 2 seconds.A standard pressure canner will maintain a temperature of 240 degrees, and can get up to 280 for short periods. Thus, it is used under “field” conditions to sterilize medical instruments. Even a water bath canner gets up to between 200 and 212 degrees, more than hot enough for pasteurization.In the past I have canned milk (raw and pasteurized), cream, half-n-half, cheese, cream cheese, butter, ghee and sour cream. Recently I bottled a cheese sauce. Others have bottled cheesecake, cream soups, non-dairy creamers, and many other dairy products. Each should be bottled according to the guidelines, in the sense that if the product is dense, you should use a pressure canner.Use your own discretion and comfort level in deciding if this is right for you and your family. No one else (myself, Ken, the blog, whatever) is responsible for your choices.
Instructions and tips at the link.
- Bravo: "Splashdown! NASA's Orion capsule lands in the Pacific Ocean as it arrives back on earth after completing 1.4 million mile voyage to the moon and back that lasted 25 days."
- Diversity, Inclusion and Equity at work: "Walmart CEO warns that retail giant could HIKE prices or shut down some stores if 'historically high' thefts at the chain continue and prosecutors’ lax approach to dealing with criminals is not corrected."
- Related: "Target said it's lost $400 million this year due to 'inventory shrink' — and organized retail crime is mostly to blame." The article notes that Target executives expect the losses due to theft to grow to $600 million by the end of the year. Somewhat ironic given Target's investment in stopping shoplifting, as this 2020 article relates:
But unlike Walmart and Best Buy, whose loss prevention officers (LPs) barely get paid enough to care––let alone risk their own safety––Target takes loss prevention very seriously. In fact, Target runs one of country's top-rated forensic laboratories, which specializes in solving "organized retail crimes committed at Target stores through video and image analysis, latent fingerprint and computer forensics."
Scarier, though, is the methodical way in which Target goes about building cases against repeat shoplifters. In a 2016 Reddit post, a user named StiggyPop recounted his experience of being a drug-addict who made money by stealing and flipping Blu-Rays from Target. After four months, he was apprehended by a team of high-level LPs who knew everything about him, from where his apartment was located to the specific store he used as a fence (a middleman for stolen goods who acts as a "fence" between thieves and unknowing buyers).
Other Reddit users shared similar stories. As it turns out, alongside their forensic team and top-of-the-line, in-store facial recognition technology, Target is known for actually letting shoplifters get away with their bounty...up until they reach the monetary threshold for a felony shoplifting charge. This means that while a Walmart LP will stop a shoplifter regardless of whether they're stealing a $5 DVD or a $500 dollar TV, Target might allow a shoplifter to steal 100 $5 DVDs over time, all while building up a massive, fool-proof felony case against them. And here's the craziest part––they organize these efforts across stores and even state-lines. Essentially, if you steal at any Target, anywhere in the country, they're quite possibly building up a case against you.
It is double ironic given Target's commitment to DIE. From Target's own website: "Inside Target’s $100 Million Investment in Black Communities, Our Latest Effort in Our Commitment to Advancing Racial Equity" (2021). Target writes of itself:
Target’s committed to co-creating an equitable future for all, delivering on our Target Forward strategy to help everyone thrive. And today, we’re proud to announce we’re investing $100 million through 2025 to help fuel economic prosperity in Black communities across the country. We’ll do it by supporting local, Black-led organizations to ensure that resources are specifically designed for the communities they serve.
“As one of the largest retailers in the U.S., we know we have the responsibility and opportunity to use our resources to help end systemic racism and accelerate economic prosperity for Black communities,” says Amanda Nusz, senior vice president, corporate responsibility, and president of the Target Foundation. “With this commitment, we aim to support the next generation of Black talent, expand the impact of Black-led movements and voices, and create economic opportunity in Black communities across the country.”
This $100 million investment is yet another example of Target’s Racial Equity Action and Change strategy in action, building on the initial $10 million commitment we made in 2020 after the murder of George Floyd and the 10,000 hours of pro-bono consulting services we provided for Black-, Indigenous-, and People-of-Color-owned small businesses in the Twin Cities. It also follows new commitments in 2021, including our plan to spend $2 billion with Black-owned businesses by 2025 and committing scholarships and ongoing professional resources to 1,000 Black students through Target Scholars to support the next generation of Black talent.
Over the past year, we’ve listened to Black community members across the country to better understand what resources are most needed to help eliminate barriers and advance social justice, and as part of this new investment, Target will focus on infusing resources directly into Black communities, including:
- Providing scholarships and support to students attending Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and being a founding supporter of the PENSOLE Lewis College of Business & Design in Detroit (more on that below)
- Expanding our funding of Black-led nonprofits
- Sponsoring programs that elevate Black stories and voices
- "Big Trouble in Little China" by Michael Walsh, The Pipeline. An excerpt:
The Peoples Republic of China is a slave state boasting a record of military ineptitude unrivaled by any other large nation on earth, and is entirely of a piece of nearly all Chinese governments that have come before it. It has no affinity with the West, nor does it desire one. Almost congenitally incapable of creativity, innovation and exploration, it has instead adopted financial colonization as a central instrument of its foreign policy, using its own people as pawns in an international chess game only one side is playing. Today, having scorned them as an undifferentiated mass of coolies led by a handful of mandarins, we fear them, but for all the wrong reasons.
He also notes that "China has not become a major player on the international stage by military means, but by traditional culture methods of often-unscrupulous economy savvy, effective use of bribery, and a massive diaspora that has seen Chinese communities established all over the world, including Malaysia, Singapore, India, Indonesia (where they made themselves so unwelcome that there widespread anti-Chiinese [sic] riots in 1998) and, latterly, in Africa and South America." Similar to another group.
The popular American Girl doll brand is facing backlash for pushing children as young as three years old into changing their gender.
A Smart Girl's Guide: Body Image, contains lines that give advice to prepubescents on how to change their gender - without their guardians' blessing. Parents have since slammed the book's contents as 'deceptive and dangerous.
A passage in the book - marketed to girls aged between three and 12 advises: 'If you haven't gone through puberty yet, the doctor might offer medicine to delay your body's changes, giving you more time to think about your gender identity.'
It also provides a list of resources for organizations the children can turn to 'if you don't have an adult you trust'.
The book, penned by resident American Girl author Mel Hammond, is currently available on shelves in bookstores across the country and on the company's website.
From Hammond's bio at American Girl:
Mel writes and edits books for American Girl, which is pretty much the best job in the world. She started creating stories when she was three years old and later earned her master’s degree in children’s literature. She’s especially interested in improving diversity in the children’s publishing industry. Besides books, her favorite things are trees, rainbows, and dairy-free ice cream. She lives in Madison, Wisconsin with her partner and two mischievous cats.
My wife and I used to get American Girl books for our daughter because, at the time, it was one of the few publishers that seemed to care about traditional values. That was 15 years ago. Apparently American Girl has changed ... a lot.
- "The Once and Future Marriage" by Michael Toscano, American Conservative. Toscano argues that as marriage became a private, rather than public, matter, it set us up for the damage done by so-called Progressives such that now it is simply a public expression of two people's love for one another. But it wasn't always that way:
Many scholars have addressed the legal nature of marriage during the founding era, but none more comprehensively than Nancy F. Cott in Public Vows: A History of Marriage and the Nation (2000). “[T]he founders had a political theory of marriage,” Cott says. That theory was republican in nature. Marriage was a medium of social unity cleaving disparate citizens together till death did them part. As opposed to the sharp opposition between public and private life we find today, to the Founders, the marital state was where liberty, self-government, and public-mindedness would be most fulsomely practiced. This marital unit resulted, naturally, in the begetting of children (i.e., future citizens), and the domestic family was where they were elevated in virtuosity and attained the good character upon which the young republic depended.
As marriage was ordered toward public life, the citizenry had a fundamental interest in its success. Vows were made to the broader public, and their fulfillment was secured by it. This is why, even today, marriage vows are public vows administered and recorded by a representative of the state—as opposed to, say, missives passed between lovers, or a promise made in private conversation. The common formula, “By the power vested in me by the State of New York,” fits the private marriage regime so poorly because it was originally cut for an entirely different body politic. But this was more than a matter of theory. Public marriage was undergirded by the force of law. According to Cott,
From the founding of the United States to the present day, assumptions about the importance of marriage and its appropriate form have been deeply implanted in public policy… Political authorities expected monogamy on a Christian model to prevail—and it did, not only because of widespread Christian faith and foregoing social practice, but also because of positive and punitive laws and government policy choices.
Laws against divorce, contraceptives, abortion, sodomy, polygamy, etc., were designed to protect the public nature of marriage and sex. Punishment of these acts not only preserved the Christian character of the citizenry, by defending marital unity and fostering fertility, they also guaranteed that family life was oriented outward.
While many of the public policies adopted prior to World War II were intended to strengthen the family, he notes that changes to family law and public attitudes after World War II only served to weaken marriage. Toscana writes, for instance:
Elite America soon began to fret over its own good work and, as mentioned, support for public marriage unraveled. Numerous prominent Americans demanded that the federal government shift resources away from marriages and toward the poorest. Kennedy’s 1963 tax cut declined to increase the value of the personal exemption (and introduced a major marriage penalty into the tax code); and was re-structured to benefit the poorest Americans.
Paul Ehrlich’s The Population Bomb (1968), a Malthusian, anti-natalist tract, well captured the feeling of President Nixon’s Commission on Population Growth and the American Future (1970), chaired by John D. Rockefeller III (Republican). In 1972, the Commission issued its report, calling for government to “neutralize…those legal, social and institutional pressures that have been mainly pro-natalist in character.” Nixon himself was strongly critical of the Commission’s findings. The Commission’s claim, nonetheless, that “no substantial benefits will result from further growth of the nation’s population,”—and that, “the gradual stabilization of our population through voluntary means [i.e., abortion and contraception] would contribute significantly to the nation’s ability to solve its problems”—cast the dye for future American policy. Roe was decided less than a year later.
Under this new settlement, family policy is structurally unable to support marriage directly. Family policy can either be designed to bring relief to the poor or to marriages indirectly through the vehicle of children (see the Child Tax Credit)—or both, but never to the family as a whole through the medium of marriage. Strengthening marriage is effectively absent as an object of public policy despite the recommendations of several venerable public policy outfits. ...
Read the whole thing.
- While we are on the subject of families: "Redshirt The Boys: Why boys should start school a year later than girls" by Richard V. Reeves, The Atlantic. It is something that the elites and many educators already do, but which isn't otherwise being discussed. An excerpt:
The value of a later start, which many teachers and administrators call “the gift of time,” is an open secret in elite circles. And it’s a gift overwhelmingly given to boys. In the past few months, I’ve interviewed dozens of private-school teachers, parents, educational consultants, and admissions officers, largely in the D.C. metro area. I learned that a delayed school entry is now close to the norm for boys who would otherwise be on the young side. One former head of an elite private school who now consults with parents on school choice and admissions told me, “There are effectively two different cutoff dates for school entry: one for boys and one for girls.”
Nationally, delayed entry is uncommon. Before the pandemic (which seems to have caused a surge in the practice), about 6 percent of children waited an extra year before beginning kindergarten. But here, too, some children were much more likely to be held back than others: specifically, those with affluent or well-educated parents, and who were white, young for their year, and male. Among summer-born boys whose parents have bachelor’s degrees, the rate was 20 percent in 2010.
The reason little boys wear almost all of the red shirts is not mysterious; the fact that boys mature later than girls is one known to every parent, and certainly to every teacher. According to a Rand survey, teachers are three times more likely to delay entry for their own sons than their own daughters. The maturity gap is now demonstrated conclusively by neuroscience: Brain development follows a different trajectory for boys than it does for girls. But this fact is entirely ignored in broader education policy, even as boys fall further behind girls in the classroom.
On almost every measure of educational success from pre-K to postgrad, boys and young men now lag well behind their female classmates. The trend is so pronounced that it can result only from structural problems. Affluent parents and elite schools are tackling the issue by giving boys more time. But in fact it is boys from poorer backgrounds who struggle the most in the classroom, and these boys, who could benefit most from the gift of time, are the ones least likely to receive it. Public schools usually follow an industrial model, enrolling children automatically based on their birth date. Administrators in the public system rarely have the luxury of conversations with parents about school readiness.
But public-school kids should have the same opportunities as private-school kids, and public-school officials should be able to have those conversations. As a matter of policy, the public schools that aren’t already flexible about school start should be made so—and I believe that, as the default, all states and school districts should enroll boys a year later than girls.
- Evil will oft evil mar: "Emhoff: 'Epidemic of hate' exists in US, mustn't become norm." From the article:
Doug Emhoff, the husband of Vice President Kamala Harris, said Wednesday that a rise in antisemitism in the United States shows that an “epidemic of hate” exists in the country and must not become normal.Emhoff, who is Jewish, led a White House discussion on the issue with Jewish leaders representing the Reform, Conservative and Orthodox denominations. They also were discussing ways to combat hate.“There is an epidemic of hate facing our country. We’re seeing a rapid rise in antisemitic rhetoric and acts,” he said. “Let me be clear: Words matter. People are no longer saying the quiet parts out loud. They are literally screaming them.”He said such attitudes are dangerous and must not be accepted.“We cannot normalize this. We all have an obligation to condemn these vile acts," Emhoff said. “We must all, all of us, not stay silent.”
The Left is eating itself.
- Related: "Poll: US Jews overwhelmingly backed Democrats in midterms." The article reports that "Jews across the country voted overwhelmingly for Democratic candidates — 74% to 25%," and that "that 76% of Jews believe Trump and his Republican allies are directly responsible for the rise in antisemitism and white supremacy in the United States." It also states that "[o]n another question, 74% of U.S. Jews said Trump and the 'Make America Great Again' movement are a 'threat to Jews in America.'"
So what where these anti-Semitic attacks? According to the article, "[t]he U.S. Jewish community has strained in the past few months under a barrage of antisemitic attacks from multiple directions: the rap artist Ye, Brooklyn Nets guard Kyrie Irving and even former President Donald Trump." The comments from Ye (aka, Kanye West) were probably controversial because they pitted one victim group against another; and Irving's sin was to like a film from a Black nationalist group that believes that they are the true Hebrews of the Old Testament. But Trump's anti-Semitic comment? "Wonderful Evangelicals are far more appreciative of (Trump’s record on Israel) than the people of the Jewish faith, especially those living in the U.S." Oh no! Pointing out that Jews were less appreciative of his Israel policies is only one step from gas chambers and the ovens! Is it any wonder why more and more people yawn when they hear cries of "antisemitism"?
Also from the article:
In the poll, 55% of Jews cited concern for democracy [i.e., making sure Democrats can win by rigging elections] as their top issue. The second most important issue on Jewish voters’ minds in this year’s midterms was abortion — 40% said it led them to vote.“I’ve never seen a single event transform an election the way I saw the Dobbs decision transform this election, with the exception of 9/11, which transformed the 2002 election,” Gerstein said, referring to Dobbs v. Jackson, the Supreme Court case that found that the Constitution does not grant a right to an abortion.Jewish tradition permits abortion and sometimes even requires it, when the life of the pregnant person is at risk. Jewish leaders across the spectrum have decried growing restrictions on abortion. On Wednesday, about 100 rabbis from the Conservative Jewish movement gathered in a St. Louis park to protest that state’s ban on abortion.
- Why are leftists so violent? "'I don't care who you are!': Man is arrested for punching a NYPD officer after confronting protesters opposed to Drag Queen Story Hour for kids as young as THREE at NYC's iconic Public Library." The criminal is one Chase Catapano. As for my question, I already know the answer. Liberals have impaired brain function over controlling their emotions and urges. It's why they are violent and why want to sexualize everything.
- "Construction begins on the world's largest radio telescope." "Known as the Square Kilometre Array, the mega observatory consists of huge clusters of dishes and antennas spread across remote parts of South Africa and Western Australia." Linking multiple smaller dishes and antennas together is what made Arecibo obsolete.
- "Outside the Black Box: Back to Basics" by Ad Huijser, Watts Up With That. From the author's summary (underline added):
Analyzing the trend in the energy imbalance at the top of the atmosphere as measured by satellites, delivers a “natural” climate sensitivity of 0.3 K/W/m2. That is at, or very close to the inverse of the Planck feedback parameter as could be expected. Starting from the basic energy balance, it is shown that the high climate sensitivities as used by the IPCC are just a result from the invalid assumption that global warming is caused by greenhouse gasses only. Climate feedbacks to explain those high values are no more than necessary artifacts needed to support this mis-conception. At present conditions it is calculated from a simple analytical expression that the IPCC climate sensitivity is 3.2x too high. That implies that the global warming as measured since 1980, is for about 2/3rd the result of an increase in incoming solar power and can only for 1/3rd be attributed to an increase in GHG’s, at max. This analysis is supported by radiation data from NASA’s CERES-project (2000-2020).
- Speaking of climate change: "A Fair on the Frozen Thames: A three-month frost fair began on 24 November 1715" by Richard Cavendish, History Today.
From the 1550s to the early 1800s, during a period known as the Little Ice Age, the River Thames in London occasionally froze solid for so long, sometimes for weeks or months, that fairs were held on it and people wrapped up warmly and flocked to them. The one that began that winter in 1715 lasted for almost three months and had all the usual features. People played skittles, enjoyed street entertainers and watched bulls being baited. They strolled happily about on the ice or were pulled along on sledges or boats by Thames watermen who were temporarily out of work and needed a fee. Bonfires were lit on the ice and food was cooked. Shops and restaurants opened in canvas tents. Souvenirs were on sale in printers’ shops.
A ‘street’ of booths ran across from Temple Stairs to the south bank, crossed by another, and according to a contemporary account ‘a great cook’s shop was erected’ and gentlemen went to dine there as frequently as at any ordinary establishment. Two big oxen were roasted whole at one point in January. There was plenty to drink, as taverns along either bank of the river opened their own booths on the ice and in the evenings sex was readily on sale. The Prince of Wales and the Duke of Marlborough with an escort of noblemen crossed from Whitehall Palace to Lambeth and back again. Four young men decided to walk up the middle of the river as far they could get and none of them were ever heard of again, though whether it was the river or the cold that killed them nobody knew.
A factor in all this was the old London Bridge, whose 19 narrow arches and their breakwaters slowed the stream down. The new bridge, which opened in 1831, had only five arches and helped bring the freezing of the Thames to an end. The last frost fair was in 1814.
The climate is still recovering from the Little Ice Age.
No comments:
Post a Comment