Friday, July 26, 2019

July 26, 2019--A Quick Run Around the Web

"The Combat Reload"--Max Velocity Tactical (14 min.)
A look at three different techniques, one of which involves simply dumping the magazine on the ground, and two that involve retaining the empty magazine.
      People very often refer to concealed carry as a “lifestyle”. I’m not sure I can agree with that.
          A lifestyle is a behavioral pattern which expresses how someone sees him or herself, and how they want others to see them. Their activities, opinions, and even how they spend their money are all reflected in their lifestyle. In other words, their lifestyle is the dominant feature of their existence; it defines them. 
            A lifestyle is all-encompassing. By admitting to a lifestyle, one is saying “this best expresses who I am, and I will devote my time and energy to maintaining it”.
             Seems a little silly to me to say that a gun on my belt justifies that level of involvement.
          He asserts that carrying a firearm should no more define who you are than the socks you wear, and adds:
                   I know some people are probably tired of hearing me say this, but the firearm doesn’t keep you safe. It simply gives you one way to extricate yourself from a situation that’s gone horribly wrong. What does keep you safe is all that “other stuff”, the things and behaviors that prevent an incident from starting in the first place. Once the gun comes out, the incident has already deteriorated past the point of prevention.
                    I’m all about prevention as a strategy. That’s worthy of a lifestyle.
                These seems to segue nicely into a recent note from Recoil's Concealment magazine on the defensive mindset:
                        Those who live, eat, and breathe guns know that training is the single most important consideration after buying a firearm for home defense or concealed carry. But I’d like to take this idea a step further and suggest training is the primary consideration of defense; the firearm is the accessory.
                         Guns can be a hobby, but armed defense is a mindset. Before anyone steps up to the gun store counter, we’d all be better off if they did so after taking a comprehensive defensive firearm class that cultivates that mindset, challenges them to consider what it’s like to store and carry a firearm every day, makes them aware of how perishable the skill of handgun marksmanship is, and articulates the kind of commitment needed to maintain a level of proficiency that assures the safety of loved ones and bystanders in a violent encounter.
                    I would replace "training" with "knowledge," but noting that "training" is generally the most efficient method to obtain that knowledge. The reason for my change being that most classes focus on drawing and using the firearm, but spend little time on other subjects, whereas there are several good books and videos from which you can at obtain at least a basic understanding of avoiding violence, the law of self-defense, and what is likely to happen afterward.
                    • "The 12 Lessons of ‘Guns and Self-Defense’ by Robert A. Waters"--The Truth About Guns. This is a review of the book, Guns and Self-Defense by Robert A. Waters and Sim Waters. There are 23 stories or incidents recounted in the book (including details of the aftermath), two of which involved citizens coming to the aid of police officers. The reviewer writes:
                            Looking at the other twenty-one stories, it’s easy to see patterns that might be of use to the average citizen contemplating self-defense or to those involved in the gun control debate.
                        1.  Almost all of these attacks on unsuspecting people involved substance abuse in some way.  Either the attackers were flying high on drugs like alcohol, cocaine and meth, or they were trying to get money to buy drugs.
                        2. Criminals can be extremely vicious and care nothing about the damage they inflict on others.  Many of the victims suffered life-altering injuries as well as lasting emotional trauma.
                        3. Violent criminals, much like predators in the animal world, prefer easy prey.  Most of these victims were women, elderly or physically handicapped people at home.  The few who were not tended to work in convenience stores or high value targets like stores dealing in jewels and precious metals.
                        4. All guns involved were handguns, except for a shotgun wielded by a woman home alone.
                        5. Many of the handguns used for effective defense were cheap weapons that are accessible to low wage earners and have sometimes been targets of gun control efforts.
                        6. Since most of the assailants were drug-enhanced and were only shot with handguns, they often had to be shot more than once.  So if you have time, reach for a long gun.
                        7. Few of the defenders had much training, if any. Yet they all survived, and did not shoot any innocent bystanders.
                        8. None of the guns used for defense were locked up. Due to the speed, shock and ferocity of the attacks, the victims would have been unable to deal with locks.
                        9. Violent predators often work together in armed gangs that may require defenders to fire many shots to end the attack.
                        10. All but one of the attackers had a long criminal history marked by repeated prison terms with early release.  Some were on parole or on bail awaiting trial at the time.
                        11. The underlying explanation for these violent assaults is that society does not deal effectively with the three main causes:  drugs, gangs and mental illness.
                        12. Criminals choose the time and place of their attack both to achieve surprise and avoid law enforcement, so prudent citizens must be prepared to defend themselves anytime, anywhere.
                               In practice or a training class, you are not fearing for your life. Especially in classes where you have numerous draws, the draw stroke might get to be routine. Do not lose focus on the reason you are drawing. You will often see shooters gently grabbing their shirt. This leads to having a minimal grip on the shirt or failing to clear the cover garment on the first attempt. Slow motion videos make this easy to identify. Some clothing will be more difficult to defeat than others, but the problem is consistent. Remember, when drawing a pistol we are in a fight!

                             Due to the nature of the reason you are drawing, get more aggressive with your grip on your cover garment. Aggressively ripping the cover garment up and away from the center of your chest will give you positive control and reduce your failure rate. You might rip your shirt, but let’s stay focused on getting to the gun. With a claw grip ripping the shirt to the chin, we can remove the cover garment in a repetitive manner.
                          The most fundamental way to employ this technique is a doorway to a room that contains unknown contents or off the corner of a building. The trick to getting it right is a couple key aspects. For starters, the shooter must give themselves enough space between their body and the wall/structure to extend their weapon to the fullest. Slowly round the corners apex or take it is small segments by side stepping; there are a few methods here. The important part is to not move faster than you can effectively engage targets that appear past the apex point. Like driving a car, you should never go faster than you can see and stop in relation to your horizon line. Take it slow and methodically round the corner while and engaging targets as necessary. Make the most of cover and/or concealment while you do this. I would also advise a low alert weapon position/posture while performing this. Keeping the weapon slightly lowered ensures that the shooter maintains a full field of view and their line of sight is not obstructed.
                            One of the reasons why you shouldn't clear a building by yourself is the need to have someone cover your back and/or multiple points of cover/concealment for an intruder. For instance, I was recently practicing clearing my own home while the family was away. My home has an open floor plan when it comes to the living, dining and kitchen areas. Coming from a hallway, I have to not only worry about someone straight ahead, but someone hidden by a 90 degree corner. Moving into the living room, I have a partial view into the kitchen and dining area, but limited view between those two areas because of a partial wall. As I move to clear that wall, I have not only the issue of someone that might have been concealed behind that partial wall, but now am also exposing myself to someone that might have been in the kitchen, but out of sight from my earlier vantage. To complicate matters further, there is a counter/pass-through for the kitchen that could conceal someone crouching. Anyway, my point is that you may have to pie a corner and then immediately have to do the same in a different direction, and so on.
                            • Sometime, I think last year, I came across or stumbled upon a link to a discussion on ".357 Sig, What's The Point?" The basic premise is that, given the quality of defensive bullets and ammunition, there is little to no performance advantage to using .357 Sig over 9 mm (speaking of the 9x19), but there are some distinct disadvantages. But most of the same considerations also apply to the .40 S&W, as these two articles discuss:
                            Notwithstanding the foregoing, there is one distinct advantage to the .40 S&W right now, which is that there are a lot of high quality used .40 S&W firearms on the market at prices ranging from very inexpensive to very reasonable, including Sigs, Glocks, Walthers, etc. That it can shoot a heavier bullet (i.e., with more momentum) may also make it better for someone in the outdoors that doesn't want to pack a 10 mm or a magnum revolver.
                            • "Ruger Wrangler Review"--Guns and Ammo. Ruger's Wrangler .22 revolver is intended as an inexpensive .22 revolver for plinking or learning to shoot, that resembles the Single Action Army (SAA) revolvers. The barrel and cylinder are steel, the gun's frame is aluminum, and the grip frame is a zinc alloy casting; the cylinder is nicely finished in what I presume is some sort of black nitrate type finish, while the rest of the firearm is cerakoted in black, bronze, or silver. The reviewer really like this little revolver. 
                                 I've had the opportunity to shoot one, and I agree with the Guns and Ammo reviewer: it is fun to shoot, and the single action makes it great for youth to learn or practice. I found accuracy to be acceptable out to 7 yards, which was the furthest I shot with different types of ammunition. The model I'd tried had definite preferences as to ammunition. It did not like the Federal Auto-Match ammo, but did pretty good with Winchester .22 LR 36-Grain LHP. The trigger is a tad heavy when compared to most single-action revolvers, but acceptable considering its intended use as a plinking or beginner's handgun. Cylinder lock up was excellent. The model I tried was "silver," but I have to say that the photographs of the "silver" models seem misleading because at least the model I shot was of a darker shade of metallic grey.
                                 When I flipped through the owner's manual, I was surprised to see that the manual okay-ed dry fire, actually recommending it as a type of practice. I don't think I've ever seen that before in reference to a rimfire firearm, and have always avoided dry firing a .22. 
                            • Since we are on the subject of .22s: "A Look Back at the Browning Semi-Automatic 22"--American Rifleman. These are very nice take down .22 rifles. I've had a couple opportunities to shoot them and found them to be very nice and handy firearms. But they are not cheap. But if the Ruger 10/22 are the Toyota of .22 rifles, the Browning are the Cadillacs. 
                            • In "Preparedness for the Unprepared," Marcus Wynne presents a set of yes/no questions to assess your general level of preparedness, a second set of questions to evaluate the completeness or effectiveness of your 72-hour kit, and a minimum preparedness checklist. From the latter:
                              1.  Water: one gallon per person, per day
                                2.  Food: select foods that require no refrigeration, no preparation or cooking, and little or no water.
                                  3.  Flashlight and batteries
                                    4.  First aid kit
                                      5.  Medications:  especially any prescription or non-prescription medications you or your family require regularly.
                                        6.  Battery operated radio and batteries
                                          7.  Tools:  wrench, manual can opener, screwdriver, hammer, pliers, knife, duct tape, plastic sheeting, garbage bags and ties.
                                            8.  Clothing: seasonal appropriate change of clothes for everyone and sturdy shoes.
                                              9.  Personal items:  eyeglasses, copies of important documents, insurance polices, toys and books for children.
                                                10.  Sanitary supplies: toilet paper, moist wipes, feminine supplies, personal  hygiene items, bleach, hand sanitizer.
                                                  11.  Money:  have cash.  In an emergency, many banks/ATMS may not be open.
                                                    12.  Contact information:  print out current list of family phone numbers, lawyers, doctors, insurance agents.  Include the number of someone out of state you can call to take messages for scattered family members.
                                                      13.  Pet supplies as appropriate.
                                                        14.  Maps of the local area and surrounding areas.

                                                        The other day I mentioned about having to use a finger to push down a pocket-holster to ready a firearm for drawing, and a reader suggested that I check out the pocket holsters from Mika's Pocket Holsters to remedy that issue. The video above describes the features of the holsters.

                                                             The study is a continuation of a hypothesis that Unto K. Laine, Professor Emeritus, published three years ago on the origin of the sounds heard during the displays of the Northern Lights. His theory postulated that the sounds are generated when a magnetic storm causes charges in the temperature inversion layer of the lower atmosphere, to be discharged at an altitude of 70 to 80 metres.
                                                               A recent research paper presented by Laine at the ICSV26 congress in Montreal provides a more detailed account of the sound generation. According to this study, when the Northern Lights occur, the spectrum of the temporal envelope of the crackling noise (or in other words, the rapid changes in the sound amplitude) contain frequencies of the Schumann resonances.
                                                                 The Schumann resonances refer to the low-frequency electromagnetic resonances occurring around the Earth, the strongest of them being below 50 Hz. Laine has now observed that these resonances generated similar rhythmic structures in all the measured crackling sounds.
                                                                   ’Previous international research has shown that a geomagnetic storm occurring during the Northern Lights reinforces the Schumann resonances. For the first time, such resonances have been found to activate the sound generation mechanism in the temperature inversion layer at altitudes of between 70 to 80 metres where the accumulated electric charges give rise to corona discharges and crackling sounds. In addition to the nine lowest Schumann resonances, the spectra also include their difference and sum frequencies or in other words, distortion components. This non-linearity also lends support to the hypothesis of auroral sounds generation,’ Laine says.
                                                              • "Scholars say Philistine genes help solve biblical mystery" The article reports that "[h]uman remains from an ancient cemetery in southern Israel have yielded precious bits of DNA that a new study says help prove the European origin of the Philistines — the enigmatic nemeses of the biblical Israelites." This seems to confirm that at least some of the "Sea Peoples" that contributed to the Bronze Age collapse around 1200 B.C. were peoples migrating out from Greece.
                                                              • Speaking of invasions by hostile peoples: "Migrants Brutally Beaten by Mob After Molesting Underage Girls"--Breitbart
                                                                      The incident occurred at around 4 pm over the weekend in the French commune of Draveil with the two migrants, said to be in their 30s, sexually assaulting a 12-year-old and a 15-year-old girl, Le Parisien reports.
                                                                       Immediately after the assault, one of the girls screamed, alerting other bathers who attempted to attack the two men. The father of the young girls also joined in and is said to have beaten them both.
                                                                         One of the migrants managed to escape the crowd and the violence and hid while the other had to be rescued by the pool’s security.
                                                                            “One of the men has a head injury, a broken nose and wrist. The other has cracked ribs and swollen face,” a source close to the investigation said.
                                                                        I realize this is difficult for a lot of Christian fetishists to accept, but the undeniable fact is that people in the United States have not been attacking everything from Christmas to advertising keywords to the definition of Western civilization for decades because they are atheists, or because they just wish to be left alone, but because they specifically hate and fear Jesus Christ.
                                                                        • I made the mistake recently of researching the Yiddish word "goyim" and how it is applied to non-Jews, and came across a lot of interesting material. For instance: "Why Are We So Afraid of Goyim?" by Zak Fleischman at Sefaria.
                                                                          Avodah Zarah 22a:11
                                                                            We do not allow our animals to be in the stables of goyim because we fear that the goyim may engage in bestiality. We do not go near a women goy because she may seduce you. You may not be alone with any goy because they are suspected of wanting to kill you.
                                                                            Note: "The tractate of Avodah Zarah (lit. idolatry) [a part of the Talmud] discusses all laws relating to idolatry as well as many laws regulating the interaction between Jews and non-Jews."
                                                                            • More: And this piece, "Is ‘goy’ a slur?" by Andrew Silow-Carroll, apparently an editor for the periodical, The Jewish Telegraph Agency. He begins his analysis thusly: 
                                                                            My seders, like most, drew to a close with the annual cringe-fest known as “Sh’foch Hamatcha,” in which everyone stands up and urges the Almighty to “Pour out Your fury on the nations [goyim] that do not know You.” The section is a justifiable reflection of historic Jewish anger and wishful thinking, especially during the Middle Ages when the biblical verse was added to the Haggadah. But PC it is not.
                                                                            • "Dating Of Turin Shroud To Middle Ages Was Flawed"--Newser (via AT&T). Back in 1988, scientists from the University of Arizona, Oxford University, and Switzerland's Federal Institute of Technology conducted radiocarbon testing on pieces of the cloth. They dated the linen pieces to between A.D. 1260 and 1390. There has been criticism of the testing since, including over the issue of whether the samples were contaminated. The new complaint, however, is that "only edge pieces of the shroud were analyzed, not the cloth as a whole, though nuns are rumored to have repaired its perimeter in the Middle Ages." In other words, the samples may have dated from the Middle Ages because that is when the edges were repaired.
                                                                            • "Immorality Embraced by So-Called Christian Love"--E. Jeffrey Ludwig at American Thinker. A look at a theory of justification termed "antinomianism".
                                                                              Anne Hutchinson was expelled by the Puritan leaders of Massachusetts in the 17th century for teaching this heresy.  She relocated in Long Island,where she and her children were eventually massacred by Indians.  This heresy teaches that since salvation is by grace, and since Christians are no longer under the Law (of Moses), God’s grace and mercy extends to all in a way that sinful behavior is forgiven by God in Christ.  Holy living, required by the Puritans, was no longer essential in Christ. 
                                                                                Apparently the idea is that since we are all saved, we no longer are required to engage in good works or follow the commandments, but can indulge in whatever sins we want. We are placed here to be tried and tested and improve, but this theory says that we needn't bother with even trying to take the test or become better people.
                                                                                         The most important reasons for the human expansion into space are not the standard things you hear all the time from the space agencies—the jobs, wealth creation, or even new science. It has more to do with human nature and the way we will change as we move into this new frontier. Dr. Charles Laughlin, emeritus professor of Carleton University's Department of Sociology & Anthropology, said that these changes are so important that the establishment of a permanent, self-sufficient, human presence in space will become our most crucial activity over the next century.
                                                                                         This is not merely a science fiction-driven fantasy. Manned space exploration satisfies a basic human drive to engage in geographic exploration in a way no other activity does in today's world. The fact that Star Trek became a global phenomenon suggests that there is far more to the popular appeal to "boldly go where no one has gone before" than most people understand. We need to look to the social sciences—anthropology, history, and psychology, for example—to properly understand this phenomenon.
                                                                                            Laughlin explained that the drive to engage in geographic exploration is an important part of us. It is a characteristic of the way in which the higher orders of the human nervous system function—the awareness of new physical frontiers is essential to the health of humanity. American anthropologist Dr. Ben Finney labeled humans "the exploring animal" and maintained that a withdrawal from the exploration and development of space would put the brakes on our cultural and intellectual advancement. ...
                                                                                        I would note that the discovery and colonization of the New World completely reinvigorated European Civilization in the 15th and 16th Centuries.
                                                                                                A tragic fire aboard a secret Russian nuclear "mini-sub" in the Barents Sea that killed 14 senior sailors has refocused media attention on a little-noticed flash-point of the world: the Arctic. That an important Russian system was being tested or demonstrated was suggested by reports "that among the 14 dead were 7 senior navy captains and 2 'Heroes of Russia.'" The presence of so many Russian navy worthies raises questions because brass do not typically twiddle dials on mini-submarines, but watch them being twiddled until something goes horribly wrong.
                                                                                                  One may speculate endlessly on the true nature of the Russian experiment. But although we may never know the disaster's cause, it is evidently so important that the Kremlin is pushing on. The damaged secret submarine Losharik will be returned to service ASAP to continue whatever it was doing.
                                                                                              One theory is that the submarine, which was designed for deep diving, "may have been on a secret Russian Mission looking to tap into or cut underwater fiber optic or internet cables that span the Atlantic and Arctic sea Lanes." But the article also discusses that this incident may be part of a larger strategy to exploit the Arctic seas.
                                                                                                      The Russian Arctic will see many first-of-a-kind uses of new reactors technology; sea-floor reactors, underwater drones powered by reactors, reactor-powered cruise-missiles, civilian nuclear-powered submarines and small power-reactors on ice-strengthen platforms.
                                                                                                        Among the nuclear-powered drones spawning in the area is the Poseidon doomsday weapon, "a nuclear-powered and nuclear-armed unmanned underwater vehicle ... claimed to be able to deliver a thermonuclear cobalt bomb of up to 200 megatonnes (four times as powerful as the most powerful device ever detonated, the Tsar Bomba" on the U.S. coast. The Barents Observer drolly notes that "32 Poseidon drones will be deployed, 16 with the Northern Fleet and 16 with the Pacific Fleet."
                                                                                                  • "The revolt against the masses"--Spiked. This article, published in 2018, is a look at Fred Siegel's 2014 book, The Revolt Against the Masses: How Liberalism Has Undermined the Middle Class, and an interview with the author. From the article:
                                                                                                        Fred Siegel: People assume that modern American liberalism begins with the New Deal. Or sometimes they say it begins with Woodrow Wilson’s wartime governance. Neither is true. Liberalism begins as a reaction, from a sense among liberals that they have been betrayed by Wilson. People who called themselves progressives would end up calling themselves liberals because they see Wilson’s wartime behaviour, in which he allowed anti-war opinion to be mercilessly suppressed, as contrary to their beliefs. The initial creation of liberalism comes with the creation of the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) in 1920. This, to me, places liberals on the side of the angels.
                                                                                                           But then a second element emerges in the formation of liberalism, and that’s the role of HL Mencken. People are stunned to learn that Mencken was the most important liberal of the 1920s. It’s not that Mencken defined himself as a liberal, but he became the hero of college students and others who called themselves liberal. Liberal thinkers had nothing but praise for Mencken in the 1920s (however, by the 1930s, when Mencken opposed Roosevelt, he was attacked by liberals). The key point taken from Mencken is his view of the masses as stupid, as the ‘Booboisie’. Liberalism becomes more than anything else defined by hostility to the middle class, and that includes small-business people as well as the working class. When the 1930s come, the masses are redeemed temporarily in the eyes of liberals, because they are now in good hands, they are in the hands of approved left-wingers like FDR, and therefore not as problematic. But by the late 1940s and early 1950s, the middle class is back in ill-repute among liberals.
                                                                                                           This is not terribly consequential until we get to the Kennedy period, when liberalism goes off the rails intellectually. It has been politically successful, or has appeared successful as in the case of Obama, but intellectually it never righted itself.
                                                                                                      There is a lot there, so read the whole thing. 


                                                                                                      1. Re: all the articles on concealed carry/ self-defense, I am seriously thinking about writing my own article titled "Using Firearms for Self-Defense: It Ain't Rocket Science." I mean, seriously, how much ink can we spill, how many videos, how many millions of dollars spent on "training" with the "experts"...and how many hundreds of hours does an individual need to spend practicing for the simple act of drawing a firearm, pointing it at an extremely close target and pulling the trigger? I mean, from my POV it appears if we are treating this painfully simple act as a science. Excuse me if I sound sarcastic, but I'm beginning to think that this is just a nationwide fad that some "trainers" are cashing in on while they can. Sure, if someone who has never picked up a gun in their life wants to carry for their own protection, I can see the need for some basic training. I get that. But what I don't get are these three day long "schools" that people travel cross country for, paying hundreds of dollars for just so they can have a shingle signed by one of the big names. My forefathers did just fine, surviving on the frontier and fighting wars, without a single hour of training from Greg Ellifritz or James Yeager. I'm sorry if I am out of line, but it just looks so ridiculous to me when a bunch of average joes and plain janes don their 511 pants to become weekend warriors and run around in robotic fashion- usually at the commands of some shaved head guy with a goatee -like they are clearing buildings in urban warfare. As I said before, it ain't rocket science.

                                                                                                        1. I agree that shooting is not rocket science, saying as much in a 2014 post, entitled coincidentally enough, "Using a Firearm is Not Rocket Science" ( And a couple years ago, I again wrote about elitism in the shooting community ( in response to article from someone claiming to be an ex-SEAL who contended that the average gun owner was not good enough to carry two handguns without expensive training, about which I wrote: "I'm sorry, but what? Using a firearm is not rocket science, and being able to draw a second weapon if the first one comes up empty or stops working does not require months of training at the feet of a commando. It is true in the martial arts or in sports/athletics (including shooting), a coach or teacher will impart a new technique or assist with refining or correcting a technique already known to the student. But most of the training comes from practice ... practice that the student can do on their own time. Obviously, some sports or martial arts require a great deal more learning/teaching than others. For instance, hand-to-hand combat requires the student to learn a relatively large number of maneuvers, techniques, stances, and so on. But other sports, not so much. I see firearms usage as something on par with playing basketball or tennis or golf where mastery comes not so much from learning new techniques but from practice and refinement of the basics. Being able to drop one weapon and draw a second one is not anywhere near the top of the list of complex physical actions one might be called on to use in your life."

                                                                                                          I hate bringing up names and pointing fingers, but since a couple names were raised. While the basic mechanics of using a firearm are simple, some related topics, however, are not as intuitive, such as hand-to-hand skills, or rendering first aid as to a traumatic injury, identifying attack pre-cursors, or the laws of self-defense. (At one time, the laws of self-defense were intuitive to anyone that wasn't a psychopath, but that era is long behind us). Ellifritz's classes, from what I understand (not having taken a class from him), often focus on the less intuitive skills, and I've appreciated the insights that he offers in his articles. Just off the top of my head, I don't believe Ellifritz has ever taken the position that everyone should have to take a firearms class before being allowed to purchase a firearm. He doesn't come across, at least to me, with the elitist attitude that I see from other instructors and authors.

                                                                                                          I don't know much about Yeager, other than I had watched some of his YouTube videos and subscribed to his channel years ago and quickly unsubscribed. Yeager's videos obviously made no impression on me because the only thing I remember from them is that he had an abrasive personality.

                                                                                                      2. The .22 sounds like fun. Might have to look into one.

                                                                                                        Oh, and I'm sure fusion is only 20 years out. I first heard that phrase when I was 10.

                                                                                                        1. Same here. I remember reading in Scientific American back in the 1980's about the advances in the tokamak designs and assertions that fusion was right around the corner.


                                                                                                      What Will The World Look Like In 2040? Part 1--Demographics

                                                                                                      A recent Bombs & Bants Podcast revolved around the subject of what the world would look like in 2040 . And while John Wilder, his wife a...