“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert.” –J. Robert Oppenheimer
What is it that feeds our battle, yet starves our victory?
First Things First
Today sees two memorial services for “Sam”: Susan P Sampson (Deplorable Patriot) at 10 AM CST (at St. Roch Roman Catholic Church in St. Louis) and Sam, PAVACA’s brother at 2PM EST (Peeples Valley Baptist Church in Cartersville, Georgia).
RIP
We carry on the fight, in memory of the fallen.
Do We Still Need the Kang (Mis)Quote?
I’m still using the quote about winning the battles but losing the war. It seems like this doesn’t make sense right now given that we seem to be going from triumph to triumph.
On the contrary. This is the exception that proves the rule. The quote isn’t just a lament, it’s to point out why we can never seem to win.
You see, the RINOs cannot interfere and that is why, just for once, we are actually winning. And that is just one more piece of evidence (for the willfully blind) as to what I have been saying with that quote.
It stays.
Speaker Johnson Pinging you on January 6 Tapes
Just a friendly reminder Speaker Johnson. You’re doing some good things–or at least trying in the case of the budget–but this is the most important thing out there still hanging. One initial block released with the promise of more…and?
We have American patriots being held without bail and without trial, and the tapes almost certainly contain exculpatory evidence. (And if they don’t, and we’re all just yelling in an echo chamber over here, we need to know that too. And there’s only one way to know.)
Either we have a weaponized, corrupt government or we have a lot of internet charlatans. Let’s expose whatever it is. (I’m betting it’s the corrupt weaponized government, but if I am wrong, I’d like to see proof.)
Justice Must Be Done.
The 2020 election must be acknowledged as fraudulent, and steps must be taken to prosecute the fraudsters and restore integrity to the system.
Yes this is still true in spite of 2024. Fraud must be rooted out of our system and that hasn’t changed just because the fraud wasn’t enough to stop Trump winning a second term. Fraud WILL be ramped up as soon as we stop paying attention.
Otherwise, everything ends again in 2028. Or perhaps earlier if Trump is saddled with a Left/RINO congress in 2026, via fraud.
Small Government?
Many times conservatives (real and fake) speak of “small government” being the goal.
This sounds good, and mostly is good, but it misses the essential point. The important thing here isn’t the size, but rather the purpose, of government. We could have a cheap, small tyranny. After all our government spends most of its revenue on payments to individuals and foreign aid, neither of which is part of the tyrannical apparatus trying to keep us locked down and censored. What parts of the government would be necessary for a tyranny? It’d be a lot smaller than what we have now. We could shrink the government and nevertheless find it more tyrannical than it is today.
No, what we want is a limited government, limited not in size, but rather in scope. Limited, that is, in what it’s allowed to do. Under current circumstances, such a government would also be much smaller, but that’s a side effect. If we were in a World War II sort of war, an existential fight against nasty dictatorships on the brink of world conquest, that would be very expensive and would require a gargantuan government, but that would be what the government should be doing. That would be a large, but still limited government, since it’d be working to protect our rights.
World War II would have been the wrong time to squawk about “small government,” but it wasn’t (and never is) a bad time to demand limited government. Today would be a better time to ask for a small government–at least the job it should be doing is small today–but it misses the essential point; we want government to not do certain things. Many of those things we don’t want it doing are expensive but many of them are quite eminently doable by a smaller government than the one we have today. Small, but still exceeding proper limits.
So be careful what you ask for. You might get it and find you asked for the wrong thing.
Political Science In Summation
It’s really just a matter of people who can’t be happy unless they control others…versus those who want to be left alone. The oldest conflict within mankind. Government is necessary, but government attracts the assholes (a highly technical term for the control freaks).
His Truth?
Again we saw an instance of “It might be true for Billy, but it’s not true for Bob” logic this week.
I hear this often, and it’s usually harmless. As when it’s describing differing circumstances, not different facts. “Housing is unaffordable” can be true for one person, but not for another who makes ten times as much.
But sometimes the speaker means it literally. Something like 2+2=4 is asserted to be true for Billy but not for Bob. (And when it’s literal, it’s usually Bob saying it.) And in that sense, it’s nonsense, dangerous nonsense. There is ONE reality, and it exists independent of our desires and our perceptions. It would go on existing if we weren’t here. We exist in it. It does not exist in our heads. It’s not a personal construct, and it isn’t a social construct. If there were no society, reality would continue to be what it is, it wouldn’t vanish…which it would have to do, if it were a social construct.
Now what can change from person to person is the perception of reality. We see that all the time. And people will, of course, act on those perceptions. They will vote for Trump (or try to) if their perception is close to mine, and vote against Trump (and certainly succeed at doing so) if their perception is distant from mine (and therefore, if I do say so, wrong). I have heard people say “perception is reality” and usually, that’s what they’re trying to say–your perception of reality is, as far as you know, an accurate representation of reality, or you’d change it.
But I really wish they’d say it differently. And sometimes, to get back to Billy and Bob, the person who says they have different truths is really saying they have different perceptions of reality–different worldviews. I can’t argue with the latter. But I sure wish they’d say it better. That way I’d know that someone who blabbers about two different truths is delusional and not worth my time, at least not until he passes kindergarten-level metaphysics on his umpteenth attempt.
Lawyer Appeasement Section
OK now for the fine print.
This is the WQTH Daily Thread. You know the drill. There’s no Poltical correctness, but civility is a requirement. There are Important Guidelines, here, with an addendum on 20191110.
We have a new board – called The U Tree – where people can take each other to the woodshed without fear of censorship or moderation.
And remember Wheatie’s Rules:
1. No food fights 2. No running with scissors. 3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone. 4. Zeroth rule of gun safety: Don’t let the government get your guns. 5. Rule one of gun safety: The gun is always loaded. 5a. If you actually want the gun to be loaded, like because you’re checking out a bump in the night, then it’s empty. 6. Rule two of gun safety: Never point the gun at anything you’re not willing to destroy. 7. Rule three: Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire. 8. Rule the fourth: Be sure of your target and what is behind it.
Gold got into the 2870s range Wednesday, dropped then recovered some on Friday. Silver, of course succeeds in going down even on days when gold went up–down 40+cents on, Friday: a day when gold went up.
*The SteveInCO Federal Reserve Note Suckage Index (FRNSI) is a measure of how much the dollar has inflated. It’s the ratio of the current price of gold, to the number of dollars an ounce of fine gold made up when the dollar was defined as 25.8 grains of 0.900 gold. That worked out to an ounce being $20.67+71/387 of a cent. (Note gold wasn’t worth this much back then, thus much gold was $20.67 71/387ths. It’s a subtle distinction. One ounce of gold wasn’t worth $20.67 back then, it was $20.67.) Once this ratio is computed, 1 is subtracted from it so that the number is zero when the dollar is at its proper value, indicating zero suckage.
A Bit More Geology
I’ve talked about stratigraphy quite a lot in this series so far, and plan to move on to very different aspects of geology for a while…but I’m going to start by a review or summing up or practical application.
Here’s a diagram Valerie brought to the comments last week, as referenced by a YEC site which then went on to disparage it.
This is a cross section of the Grand Canyon, which is everybody’s favorite illustration of stratigraphy in action.
On the right are the attributions to different systems (periods) including the “Precambrian” which isn’t really a period (it’s the bucket they put the first three entire eons into sometimes). If you remember the names from last time (and I would be surprised if you did), there’s some missing names here.
Digression on how I remember them:
I’ve heard names like Cambrian, Ordovician, Silurian, etc., enough to recognize them; but I could never remember the order they appear. I could remember Cambrian being the first Paleozoic period and the Permian being the last one, but Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian, Carboniferous (here divvied up into Mississippian and Pennsylvanian, as is often done in America), I could never remember. Until I looked at the initials: COS is of course the Colorado Springs airport code and living near there that’s easy for me to remember: Cambrian, Ordovician, Silurian. I could force myself to remember the Carboniferous is right before the Permian, which leaves (by elimination) the Devonian as the fourth period right after the Silurian.
I have no difficulty with the Mesozoic because I grew up with a dinosaur nut as a kid; I got exposed to this a lot. Triassic (lame), Jurassic (cool dinosuars), Creataceous (really cool dinosaurs).
The Cenozoic is both easier and harder. Easier because Paleogene obviously comes before Neogene (Paleo = old, Neo = new), so you can list off Paleogene and Neogene (and then just remember Quaternary–note not Quarternary), but harder because this one usually gets subdivided all the way down to epochs, one level further, even in children’s books! I didn’t talk about that at all last time except mentioning that in passing, but those all have names ending in -cene and I can’t ever remember them. (I’ll write them out here just for grins: Paleocene, Eocene and Oligocene (subdivisions of the Paleogene) and Miocene and Pliocene in the Neogene. The Quaternary gets broken down into the Pleistocene and Holocene–the Holocene is everything since the last ice age. Seven of these epochs and they rhyme and I can’t remember their ordering for nuthin.
Anyhow returning to the diagram, the entire Ordovician and Silurian, plus who knows how much late Cambrian and early Devonian, is completely missing from the sequence shown. And nothing after the Permian. In fact for all we know from looking at the diagram the last part of the Permian is missing too. What gives?
I’ve talked a lot about rock layers being laid down, and you might have got the impression this happens all the time everywhere, but that’s not true. In many cases nothing gets laid down for millions of years (imagine, for instance, a desert, or mountains, or the land under an icecap or glacier). And in many cases, something already laid down gets removed by erosion. Here what we see is a nice thick Cambrian layer followed immediately by a thin Devonian layer.
For all we know, there may have once been more Cambrian rock here, then some amount of Ordovician rock, then some Silurian rock…and then deposition stopped, and a bunch of stuff got eroded away until resuming near the end of the Devonian.
Or maybe none of that ever got laid down; deposition stopped right where we see it, then resumed late in the Devonian. We can’t tell–not from this diagram at least–we just know those layers aren’t there now.
(If you dig deeper you can learn a bit more. The Muav Limestone is the top Cambrian layer shown, and you can look that up in Wikipedia (and then chase down the sources if you really want to be thorough). In addition to describing the limestone as fine-grained and gray, it goes on to describe the extent of the formation. It turns out the Muav Limestone was laid down in the mid-to-late Cambrian, not at the very end (dates are given), and extends into Utah, Nevada and California…and it is of different thicknesses in different areas. In most places what lies on top of it is Mississippian rock, but in some areas (like the Grand Canyon) where it’s a bit thinner there’s Devonian rock there. Now you can reconstruct a bit what happened: The Muav was laid down. Then parts of it were eroded and there was a Devonian deposit, which probably got planed off by erosion but it lived on in places where the Muav was lower and it filled in deeper areas.
[When I think about the sheer amount of field work it takes to map these things, I am staggered. Geologists basically have to go everywhere to do this to this level of detail.]
The dividing line is labeled as a “disconformity.” It turns out that a disconformity is a specific type of unconformity. And an unconformity is any sort of gap in the stratigraphic sequence, which indicates a gap in deposition of sediment.
I can’t say it better than Wikipoo does so I’ll just quote it: “The rocks above an unconformity are younger than the rocks beneath (unless the sequence has been overturned). An unconformity represents time during which no sediments were preserved in a region or were subsequently eroded before the next deposition. The local record for that time interval is missing and geologists must use other clues to discover that part of the geologic history of that area. The interval of geologic time not represented is called a hiatus. It is a kind of relative dating.”
It’s called a “disconformity” when the unconformity is between parallel layers of sedimentary rock…as is the case here.
It is called a “nonconformity” when the upper layer is sedimentary and what is below is igneous or metamorphic rock, presumably partially eroded away before the sediments were deposited.
Also showing up in that diagram is an “angular unconformity” where the rocks below the unconformity are angled. There are parallel layers there but the layers are at a steep tilt. This usually happens because after the layers were deposited there was a mountain building episode that tilted the landscape. Then part was eroded away and the overlying sediment was deposited.
And of course at the very top, nothing above the Kaibab limestone, which (I went and looked) is early-to-mid Permian, so the late Permian either was never deposited here, or was and has been eroded away. But one shouldn’t judge such things from one location. Before we start looking elsewhere though, I’m going to paste in a different diagram of the Grand Canyon layers, one from the National Park Service:
Some occasional bluffs appear on top of the Kaibab that are of the “Moenkopi” formation.
But let’s look further afield, and if we do so we’ll be rewarded. Because the Kaibab is under many additional layers in Zion National Park. That nails it down; the Kaibab was once under a lot more rock than it is today. Here are the layers that appear above it in Zion:
The Dakota formation spreads all over the Intermountain Western United States and further, it is seen in Kansas as well as the Dakotas. (And I can guess what I am going to find when I go look: YUP, it’s Cretaceous; the last period/system of the Mesozoic. (And the Dakota formation is mid-Cretaceous at that, not late Cretaceous). That’s because there was an “inland sea” called the Western Interior Seaway in the Western United States until then, and I’ve known about that since childhood. Yes, a shallow arm of the ocean where there are now highlands and even mountains.)
From Ellis County, Kansas (which is Western Kansas on or near I-70) we have this imprint fossil of a leaf; the rock contains significant iron. Apparently when this leaf got buried, the area was boggy sand near deciduous (leafy) trees. Other nearby areas have fossilized mollusc shells so there was also a beach near here at one point in time.
(You may have noticed a lot of those Zion Park formation names are quite redolent of the Southwest: Kaibab, Moenkopi, Chinle, Moenave, Keyenta, and Navajo. All were discovered on the Colorado Plateau, largely by watching the rock layers fly by as Wile E. Coyote fell thousands of feet whilst trying to get away from the anvil that was his traveling companion. Really, really, he should never have looked down.)
So what forces erode rocks? Or (by the way) the soil before it becomes a rock?
Many different things. But number one is:
Erosion by Water
And there are many ways for water to do this. Rainfall and surface runoff are what I (sometimes) see where I live, far away from the World Sump known as the ocean, so I’ll cover that one first.
The mere act of a raindrop hitting the ground can sometimes eject particles of soil. But much more dramatic erosion results from runoff; it can go downslope as sheet erosion, form rills, or even create gullies. Rills and gullies are qualitatively the same, but a rill is small enough that you can (if you are farming the land) fill it in just through normal tilling the soil.
Continuous water flow occurs in rivers and streams. Given time they can wear down rocks; rocks in the bed of a stream eventually become smoothed down into pebbles. Streams can not be fed by rainfall but also snow melt and springs.
Entire mountain ranges can, and will, be removed by these processes though it takes millions of years. Streams will first cut narrow, v-shaped canyons; as time progresses and the mountains erode away the channels will get more of a U profile, and eventually the stream ends up moving slowly through a broad river valley. Or one can often see such a progression following a stream downhill today. (Geologists even talk of “young” streams (the ones cutting narrow valleys) versus “mature” streams, with more rounded beds, and then finally “old age”, which are more like:
A stream in a wide flood plain, moving slowly, will eventually start to meander (look at a map of the lower Mississippi to see this in action today). The stream can cut across the meanders especially during a flood, and leave behind oxbow lakes as seen in this picture of the Nowitna River in Alaska.
Water flowing in a stream will pick up more “stuff” the faster it is flowing; when it’s a flash flood it can remove boulders. Slower moving streams will pick sand up off their beds and move it downstream. Fine Silt can stay suspended even along slow-moving nearly-flat rivers.
Of course it’s easiest for streams to pick up loose material like sand than to actually grind down rock, but the latter does happen…assisted some by the loose stuff the stream is carrying. (It is a mistake to compare a gully cut through soil to a canyon cut through rock and assume they are both being cut at the same rate.)
Where does it all go? Downstream of course, and the sediment carried off can be deposited a couple of different ways.
One is the “alluvial fan” where water can emerge from a narrow canyon into a larger valley. The water will spread out and slow down; These are plainly visible in the Basin and Range province of Nevada and California; here is an overhead picture of one in Death Valley:
And from ground level, also in Death Valley (but I don’t know if it’s the same one):
Alluvial fans can be many square kilometers in size and tend to have gentle slopes up to where the stream emerges from its canyon (and nothing says the stream has to run full time; it certainly doesn’t do so here). The deposited stuff tends to be coarser nearer the source, which makes sense: as the water exiting the canyon fans out, it slows down, as it slows down the bigger stuff will be deposited first, closest to where the water exited the canyon.
Alluvial fans have even been seen on Mars, an indication that water used to flow there. They also appear on Titan, but this isn’t due to water flow but rather liquid methane and ethane. As you might expect given the examples I’ve shown, these tend to show up in mountainous, arid places, though by no means must the place be as arid as Death Valley. Buried alluvial fans underlie Denver, Salt Lake City and Los Angeles and often contain groundwater. They also underlie the Ganges valley in India, being fed from the Himalayas. And of course ancient fans often end up becoming sedimentary rock and end up in the geologic column.
River deltas are another obvious destination. The Mississippi delta deposit is tens of thousands of feet thick; it’s so heavy it pushes the bedrock down into the Earth. But in less extreme cases, smaller streams dump sediment into ponds, swamps and oceans…and these could eventually end up becoming rocks in the geologic column.
Below is the mouth of the Amazon river, in Brazil. This river is titanic; it may not be the longest in the world (the other possibility being the Nile) but no other river can hold a candle to it in terms of volume–in fact its total discharge is greater than the next seven rivers on that list, combined. It is mostly in Brazil, but even way upstream where it enters Brazil, it’s carrying more water than any other river on Earth.
But most relevantly here, notice the water is tan–that’s silt, being washed out into the ocean to settle as sediment and eventually show up in a geologic column. (What the geologist who studies it (if any) will look like is another question entirely.)
Those white things on the picture are clouds, which should give you an idea of the sheer scale of the picture.
Streams can empty out into a bog or swamp, too…to say nothing of lakes and endorheic basins. That last sounds truly awful, but that’s any inland basin with no outlet to the ocean. Probably the most famous example of such a thing to Americans is the Great Salt lake, but there are many others in North America, and Eurasia has vast endorheic basins. The map below shows endorheic basins in dark gray (as well as divides separating flows between various oceans).
These tend to be in desert regions; with more water erosion will eventually cut a channel or lower the rims of the basins. This can often happen from outside of the basin, as streams flowing away from it slowly wear down the ridges separating the basin from the outside.
Endorheic lakes have no outflow, so what happens to the water in them? Evaporation. The lake will grow until the evaporation on the surface cancels out the water flowing into the lake. Of course, the rivers flowing into the lake don’t have a constant flow, meaning that the lake can–and does–vary in size. This can be an issue with the Great Salt Lake, which has often flooded during El Nino seasons which tend to dump a lot of rain in the Western US. But when the levels are low there is a lot of evaporite, mostly salt, left behind. This happens at many such lakes including the Dead Sea between Israel and Jordan, and there are many dry lake beds in the Basin and Range Province centered on Nevada but including parts of Utah, California, and Oregon. (Why is this area called the basin and range province? It has mountain ranges…and it’s an endorheic basin.)
I feel as if I haven’t covered this adequately, but I’m simply out of time.
Yep, Kurt has noticed that lots of people are getting twanging schadenböners.
And you do not have to be male to get this kind of böner.
Lawyer Appeasement Section
OK now for the fine print.
This is the WQTH Daily Thread. You know the drill. There’s no Poltical correctness, but civility is a requirement. There are Important Guidelines, here, with an addendum on 20191110.
We have a new board – called The U Tree – where people can take each other to the woodshed without fear of censorship or moderation.
And remember Wheatie’s Rules:
1. No food fights 2. No running with scissors. 3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone. 4. Zeroth rule of gun safety: Don’t let the government get your guns. 5. Rule one of gun safety: The gun is always loaded. 5a. If you actually want the gun to be loaded, like because you’re checking out a bump in the night, then it’s empty. 6. Rule two of gun safety: Never point the gun at anything you’re not willing to destroy. 7. Rule three: Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire. 8. Rule the fourth: Be sure of your target and what is behind it.
Gold zig-zagged across the 2,800 mark (which is record territory) on Friday. Since most people quote bid, not ask, and the bid for gold is 2799.20 you might hear that it closed just short of $2,800 on Friday. (I quote ask, because that’s the buyer’s price and you should be buying, right?) Gold was even above 2,810 at least once on Friday.
Of course this means that the FRNSI is at an all-time high.
Silver, on the other hand, actually dropped on Friday but still up nicely for the week as a whole. At least the gold/silver ratio has dropped a bit.
*The SteveInCO Federal Reserve Note Suckage Index (FRNSI) is a measure of how much the dollar has inflated. It’s the ratio of the current price of gold, to the number of dollars an ounce of fine gold made up when the dollar was defined as 25.8 grains of 0.900 gold. That worked out to an ounce being $20.67+71/387 of a cent. (Note gold wasn’t worth this much back then, thus much gold was $20.67 71/387ths. It’s a subtle distinction. One ounce of gold wasn’t worth $20.67 back then, it was $20.67.) Once this ratio is computed, 1 is subtracted from it so that the number is zero when the dollar is at its proper value, indicating zero suckage.
It is a CULT
Admittedly, the channel I am about to point you to–a brand new one–has one big Dufus Factor involved and that is the silly mask the guy wears for some reason having to do with his other gaming channel.
But when talking about Flat Earth he is spot-on. (And I’ve seen serious content delivered by people in sillier costumes–e.g., dinosaurs.) And…hallellujah! Except for two interviews his videos are short! Anyhow, his comparison of Flat Earth and cults seems spot on.
Nathan Oakley (as in “where are the GUNS, Nathan?!?!?”) tried to respond but of course was selective. As Oakley is credibly alleged to be a child abuser I won’t give him a link (you can surely find it if you want), but the response to his response is here.
CyberWaffle also has a response to the claims that The Final Experiment was done in a studio. Apparently he has some experience with the movie industry.
(In a later video he says he got the cost wrong…it should be 26 billion dollars.)
There seem to be four distinct responses to the Final Experiment from Flat Earthers (based on the interview with MC Toon).
Some maintain it doesn’t matter. “We never made a claim.” Well you still have to be able to explain what was seen.
Some retroactively claim that they were able to predict a 24 hour sun (this is revisionism (i.e., bare faced lying); there are plenty of videos of big-name Flerfers saying they would like to go to Antarctica during Austral summer, see the sun set, and thus prove the globe wrong–they didn’t erase them fast enough). But now they’re claiming that the Sun they saw was a reflection off the dome. (Decisively disproven by sunspot photos.)
One pastor claims the Sun was actually Satan.
But the most common claim is that it was faked; apparently “Flat Earth Dave [Weiss]” (who originally stood up against claims of “greenscreen”) has been brought back into line.
The problem is, they took plenty of videos not yet released to show it wasn’t a fake. Claims it was in a 360 degree surround studio are exploded by a drone flight to about a mile AGL (above ground level), a video that has been released. No studio could be that tall; that’s much taller than any building we have ever built.
MC Toon points out that anyone can go, but clearly the great expense (the Final Experiment cost $31K per participant) is a barrier. He has a standing offer to anyone who thinks it was fake. He will put $100,000 in escrow; they can do the same. Then they go together. Whoever’s right about the Sun gets the money. If they get turned away at gun point the Flerfer gets the money. None of them are confident enough in their position to have taken him up on it. (If they were that confident but poor, they could borrow the money for the trip and the 100K fully confident that they will have $200K afterwards to pay off the $131K loan with. Though perhaps a bank will laugh in their face when they make the application and explain why they are going.)
The Final Experiment team tried to anticipate every possible way that Flerfs could deny they had done what they did. As CyberWaffle put it: “That’s the only really bizarre thing about this trip to Antarctica, where the whole purpose of the trip to Antarctica, the whole time….no one’s ever done an expedition on the pure purpose to have to prove that they did the expedition.”
Here’s an Interview with MC “Where are the GUNS Nathan” Toon. Pay especial attention from 50:36 on and then at 58:00 (though if you have time the whole thing is worth watching).
Another; his most recent (unless he releases one between now (Thursday) and Saturday). This one lays out the best why I harp on this. Flat Earth isn’t just wrong, which is bad enough, it is harmful to the people who believe it. As often as not they lose their friends and even alienate their families.
But here’s a final one, from a totally different source. This one makes a larger philosophical point, and is an interesting exposition on the subject of “respecting one’s elders.”
[Edit to add: This last video’s conclusion could be taken as implying that we should, for instance believe the medical establishment. Maybe he actually does mean that. But I’ll go so far as to say that sometimes the experts disagree with each other and we do have experts on our side in this case. And the “establishment” has plenty of motivation to warp its judgement. That’s quite a different situation than disagreeing with your mechanic.]
CyberWaffle sometimes talks disparagingly of “conspiracy theories” and, in the way he understands the term, he is right to do so. The classic conspiracy theory is impossible to argue with, not because it is true, but because the holder of the theory is primed to dismiss any contrary evidence as faked or a lie, as part of the cover up.
The sorts of things we discuss here are (almost entirely) not like that. We bring a lot here, and so far as I know, if someone were to actually bring contradictory evidence the response here would not be to shove fingers in ears, shake our heads and say “nuh-uh!”
On the other hand, if you ever get to that point of wanting to simply dismiss any counter-evidence as fake, then you’re in danger of disconnecting from reality–in the unlikely event that you haven’t already done so.
That’s a very bad place to be. As Ayn Rand once said (and I’m paraphrasing), one is free to evade reality, but one cannot evade the consequences of evading reality.
And sometimes the consequences may be fatal.
More On Geology The Geologic Timescale
The same Kurt Schlichter article I quoted at the top since Aubergine couldn’t resist calling out the schadenböner reference, has this line (earlier in the same paragraph):
We have more energy than the freshly unleashed Permian Basin.
What is this “Permian Basin”? As it happens there are two of them, one centered on the North Sea in Europe (remember a lot of oil comes from offshore rigs in the North Sea), and the other is the one in West Texas and southeast New Mexico.
If you type “Permian Basin” into Wikipedia, you go to a page that tells you this, and you can then select the one you’re interested in. It also mentions that neither of them are in Perm Krai.
What on Earth is “Perm Krai”? Perm Krai does not have a link (but should). A “krai” (край, plural края́) turns out to be “one of the types of federal subjects of modern Russia, and was a type of geographical administrative division in the Russian Empire and the Russian SFSR.” A krai was traditionally a far out, peripheral frontier area (in fact it’s etymologically related to the word “Ukraine”), while an oblast was a bit more central. In today’s Russian Federation there’s no functional difference between a krai and an oblast; a subdivision of Russia is one or the other based on tradition. (Russia also has other kinds of subdivisions: republics, cities of federal significance, an autonomous oblast, and autonomous okrugs. All have equal status as constituent entities of the Russian Federation according to Article 5 of the Constitution of Russia.)
So here’s a map–which unfortunately lost its labeling on the way over from Wikipoo:
In green are “Republics” which have a little more autonomy (the biggest one is Sakha, better known as Yakutsk to Risk players, and is the largest territorial subdivision in the world). Orange are krais, yellow are oblasts, red are the two federal cities (Moscow and St. Petersburg; Sevastapol in Crimea is also a federal city but most nations do not recognize Russian ownership of that or the four Ukrainian oblasts recently annexed from Ukraine [in cross-hatch at the left side of the map]). The one autonomous oblast in in purple, four autonomous okrugs in blue.
Getting back to our subject, Perm Krai is here, tucked up against the Ural Mountains on the west side. (The Ural Mountains form the traditional border between Europe and Asia, since they aren’t really separate continents. The eastern border of Perm Krai is part of that dividing line.)
Perm has its own coat of arms (just like every “Federal Subject” does):
Despite being deep inside Russia, Perm Krai has a significant population of ethnic minorities; some are not ones you’re likely to have heard of, though: Tatars and Ukrainians, Komi-Permyaks, and Bashkirs. Bashkirs are actually Turkic, but the Komi-Permyaks…well, they’re “Uralic” meaning their closest well-known relatives are the Finns and Hungarians. Its largest city is named…Perm (it gave its name to the Krai), with just a bit over a million people. The total population is roughly 2.5 million, down from 3 million when the Soviet Union collapsed.
OK…so that was (maybe) interesting and even has a tiny bit to do with current events, but…why on Earth is an energy-rich place in Texas and New Mexico named for this place?
SO glad you asked!
The Geologic Timescale Today
I struggled with this topic a bit. Trying to just talk about it historically is hard, because a lot of what I am reading assumes you know what we know today. And a lot of this topic is naming conventions and historic holdovers, but a lot is not. If I were to try to trace this from the beginning without some context, it would get a bit confusing. which is unsatisfactory. So I’m going to briefly outline the modern picture, then jump back and try (and likely fail) to explain how we got here. That might be more confusing, but I aim to excel.
The geologic timescale as we know it today is our best effort to order the different rocks we find around the Earth, by time; and since this is science things need to be classified in buckets so that we can see patterns that will help illuminate what is going on.
This is a vast topic so it gets subdivided. In fact it gets sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-subdivided; there are six “levels” of subdividedness (if that wasn’t a word before, it is now); generically referred to as “units.” Except that there are two different names for the levels. When considering the rocks themselves, they are “chronostratigraphic units,” when talking about the times, they are “geochronologic units.” However when we get to looking at specific ones, they have the same names. Thus “Permian” refers to both a chronostratigraphic unit and a geochronologic unit.
The entire history of the Earth is first subdivided into eons (geochronologic, time) which are each equivalent to eonothems (chronostratigraphic; rock layers). There are four of these according to the standard scheme. In order, newest to oldest (newest is always at the top, because it mimics the principle of superposition, they are:
Phanerozoic (the current eon/eonthem)
Proterozoic
Archean
Hadean (starts with the formation of the Earth)
As you might imagine, the older, the less well understood. Thus, the Hadean is not further subdivided; we have almost nothing to work from with this one. The other three eons are subdivided into eras (geochronologic; time) or erathems (chronostratigraphic; actual rock layers). There are ten defined eras, from oldest to newest these are: The Eoarchean, Paleoarchean, Mesoarchean, Neoarchean, Paleoproterozoic, Mesoproterozoic, Neoproterozoic, Paleozoic, Mesozoic, and Cenozoic. As you likely guessed, the first four are subdivision of the Archean, the next three of the Proterozoic, and the final three by elimination are subdivisions of the Phanerozoic; we are living in the Cenozoic era, with rocks being laid down now part of the Cenozoic erathem. To summarize:
Phanerozoic (the current eon/eonthem)
Cenozoic (the current era/erathem)
Mesozoic
Paleozoic
Proterozoic
Neoproterozoic
Mesoproterozoic
Paleoproterozoic
Archean
Neoarchean
Mesoarchean
Paleoarchean
Eoarchean
Hadean (starts with the formation of the Earth)
The eras that are part of the Proterozoic and Phanerozoic (the Archean and certainly the Hadean are not subdivided to this level) are further subdivided into periods (geochronologically, time) equivalent to systems (chronostratigraphic, rock layers); there are 22 of these. You may recognize some of these names, but the ones from the Proterozoic eon/eonthem are new. I won’t be mentioning these much; the last two, however are the Cryogenian and Ediacaran. Once you get into the Phanerozoic, though, the Paleozoic is subdivided (oldest to newest) into the Cambrian, Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian, Carboniferous (which is a special case, there are two sub-periods of it called the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian), and Permian, and I will be talking about these. (In particular if I don’t discuss the Permian after that intro, someone will probably put a price on my head.) The Mesozoic is subdivided into the Triassic, Jurassic, and Cretaceous. (If you have never heard of the Jurassic, you’ve been living under a rock. Maybe even one that formed in the Jurassic.) The Cenozoic is subdivided into the Paleogene, Neogene and Quaternary periods (or systems). [Note: the Cenozoic was reorganized in 2008 [edit]. Before then used to be a period called the “Tertiary” instead of the Paleogene and Neogene.] We are living in the Quaternary period; rocks laid down now are part of the Quaternary system.
Phanerozoic (the current eon/eonthem)
Cenozoic (the current era/erathem)
Quaternary
Neogene
Paleogene
Mesozoic
Cretaceous
Jurrasic
Triassic
Paleozoic
Permian
Carboniferous (Mississippian + Pennsylvanian)
Devonian
Silurian
Orodivician
Cambrian
Proterozoic
Neoproterozoic
Ediacaran
Cryogenian
Tonian
Mesoproterozoic
3 periods
Paleoproterozoic
4 periods
Archean
Neoarchean
Mesoarchean
Paleoarchean
Eoarchean
Hadean (starts with the formation of the Earth)
That’s three levels, and that’s as deep as I am likely to get. However, you should remember there are finer gradations, the epoch/series, the subepoch/subseries, and the age/stage (giving the “time” name first, then the “rock” name second). These exist because there’s really no situation where a single distinct rock layer covers an entire period.
I’m certainly not expecting you to remember these last three levels. I certainly won’t. But please be aware that they are there. The systems (hence periods) were often originally built up by combining series (epochs).
(However, even popular treatments will break the Cenozoic down one more level than this down to the epoch level, and all of those have names ending in -cene. None, fortunately were named after the Russian river Ob.)
In some cases which smaller units got grouped into which larger units is arbitrary, but in other cases it’s anything but. There are clear, obvious dividing lines between the Paleozoic and Mesozoic, as well as between the Mesozoic and Cenozoic; as we will see there was a mass extinction event at both of those dividing lines. Other, lesser mass extinctions turn out to be boundaries between periods/systems.
One more thing to add: For historic reasons, the first three entire eons put together are sometimes informally called “the Precambrian,” almost as if they were only as important as a mere period (two levels below them in the schema). This is largely due to the fact that until recently we knew next to nothing about those three eons and had a hard time distinguishing them from each other in any case. It was just some indefinitely long time.
The whole schema as it exists today (and with some text about proposed changes) is laid out in painstaking detail here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_time_scale, broken down all the way to Ages where such subdividing has been done.
Which brings us to the question of how we tell these apart from each other (and why those methods failed, at first, with the Precambrian). And so now I will switch to the historical perspective. So tuck all of that away in the back of your minds, wipe the mental slate temporarily, and…here we go.
Historical Development
Back to the late 18th and early 19th century, where we start to see the development of the geologic timescale. Between mining and the coal industry that was firing up to support the Industrial Revolution, geologists started to realize the fossils could tell us a few things. Similar fossils would appear at the same places in a bottom-to-top sequence and they could often be used to establish that the rocks were of a specific age. William Smith could distinguish otherwise-similar formations (i.e, rocks of the same color and texture) based on what fossils appeared in them. Putting things together people like Georges Cuvier and Alexandre Brogniart realized you could set up a complete sequence of rocks, oldest to youngest, based on index fossils. Index fossils are fossils that were widely distributed (hence could be seen in large parts of the globe) and existed briefly, so they’d be confined to one stratum.
When they published in 1811, we saw the birth of modern stratigraphy. We started to see what today we consider the systems/periods within the Phanerozoic.
(Cuvier, by the way, used the sequence to argue for catastrophism. This means multiple disasters–not just one, that caused many of the different abrupt boundaries in the geologic column. And you know what…he wasn’t completely wrong, though it took some time for this to be recognized.)
Note that not every kind of fossil is an index fossil. A good candidate for an index fossil will be something that lived in the oceans (hence was probably nearly global) and doesn’t appear across a long span of time. The narrower the time, the more precisely you can date a formation.
Because fossils were used to distinguish epochs and periods from each other, we really could only get anything useful from a certain time onwards. Before that time the rocks apparently had no fossils in them (we know now this is not quite true). After that time…we have fossils.
This was a very iterative process, with people noting strata and their relationships slowly and a big picture emerging at last. In many cases the epochs were noted first and combined into the periods later; with some re-groupings along the way. So here’s what we ended up with, listed from oldest to youngest, and not by any means in the order they were discovered or got their final names.
English geologists were particularly prolific, identifying the following periods (from oldest to youngest): the Cambrian (from Cambria, meaning Wales), in 1835; the Ordivician (from a Celtic tribe) in 1879; the Silurian (another Celtic tribe) in the early 1830s; the Devonian (named after Devon, England) also in the 1830s, and the Carboniferous (named after the coal) in 1811. Anything older than the Cambrian at the time appeared to have no fossils in it, and as mentioned earlier just got called the “Precambrian”. These periods are abbreviated, respectively, Ꞓ, O, S, D, and C.
In North America, the Carboniferous period was initially treated as two periods, the Mississippian (older) and Pennsylvanian (younger)…so America does make its way into the schema. This kind of monkeywrenched the scheme when one group of geologists talked about the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian and the other talked of the Carboniferous. The compromise eventually arrived at is to consider this period, and only this period, as consisting of sub-periods by those names. Other periods don’t have sub-periods but go directly to being divided into epochs.
(That wasn’t the only dispute by any means. As you might have noticed, the Ordovician was first named much later than the others, and was created by reorganizing what we had before, as a way to settle a different argument altogether.)
England certainly has newer rocks than the Carboniferous, but for whatever reason other countries beat England to the punch as far as identifying and naming more recent periods.
The very next period, the Permian (P), was found in the Ural mountains of Russia and added to the scheme in 1841–and this is how the Permian basin of Texas got its name. It turns out to consist of rocks from the same period. (Famous fossils from the Permian include a lot of corals [an entire reef nows form the Gaudalupe mountains in West Texas] and Dimetrodon, the sail-back lizards, which contrary to popular belief were not dinosaurs.)
(As for how a coral reef ended up way out in West Texas at elevations up to 8751 feet…well, that’s for a future post.)
The next one after that was the Triassic (T), first noted in Southern Germany. This was in turn composed of three rock layers (hence the “tri” in the name). It got that name in 1834, however it had been noted earlier than that.
In the Jura mountains of France and Switzerland, we found the Jurassic (J). This was a markedly earlier discovery from 1795.
The Cretaceous was first identified in the Paris basin in 1822 and the name comes from the extensive beds of chalk (calcium carbonate from the shells of microscopic sea organisms). Its abbreviation is K, not C, from German Kreide, chalk.
Next was the Tertiary. Those rocks are quite new (as such things are measured); it brings us almost to the present day. This name actually goes back to the middle 1700s and Arduino, who divided geologic time into primitive, secondary, and tertiary periods based on what he saw in Northern Italy, so the Tertiary was essentially discovered in Northern Italy. For a time, this period was identified has having been laid down during the Flood.
The Tertiary is now considered obsolete and has been broken up into two periods, the Paleogene (Pg) and Neogene (N). I know that the Tertiary used to be abbreviated T, but that means the Triassic must have had a different abbreviation back then. This relatively recent rearrangement was very controversial and part of the dispute was what to do about the very next (and latest) period…
The Quaternary, which was named such because it followed the Tertiary. It was first identified by Arduino in 1759 (by contrast with the Tertiary) and very nearly didn’t survive the recent reorganization of the Tertiary; it almost got folded into the Neogene. This is the latest period/system.
These periods were (and still are) grouped into three Eras, with the Cambrian through Permian making up the Paleozoic (“old life”) era, the Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous making up the Mesozoic (“middle life”) era, and the Tertiary and Quaternary making up the Cenozoic (“new life”) era.
Anything before the Cambrian got lumped together as the “Precambrian.” There were no index fossils in those rocks (at least we didn’t think so at the time), so although we could look at the rocks at one location and do relative dating on them, we couldn’t correlate the Precambrian rock layers in one location with those in another location far away.
Eventually we would overcome this and build up the much more refined timescale we have today, but for a long time the Precambrian was an difficult-to-chart wasteland of geologic time.
Geologists worked on and after two centuries of development, we have today’s schema.
As a reminder, today the Paleozoic, Mesozoic and Cenozoic eras are in turn grouped together into the “Phanerozoic Eon” and we’ve been able to subdivide the Precambrian into three full eons with some subdividing into eras and periods.
I’m going to jump ahead a bit, and talk about the Precambrian fossils that we have more recently discovered. But first, I have to bring up a basic point.
What are fossils, and what causes them?
A fossil is any preserved remains, impression or trace of past life. Usually these are preserved in rocks, but preservation in amber (a la Jurassic Park) also happens.
We actually have to distinguish different kinds of fossils. Sometimes all we have are “trace fossils.” I always found this name misleading (I’m used to other meanings of the word “trace”), but here it means such things as footprints, tracks, burrows (without any remains of the burrower), and so on…indirect evidence of the critter. Another category of fossil that goes into this bucket is “copralites.” And these are fossilized dung. (Who would have guessed that wokester brain matter existed back then?)
In many cases we have nothing more than trace fossils to identify something, or rather to identify that something existed. We can learn a few things from them, such as that the critter liked to burrow in the sediment at the bottom of a shallow sea and was of a certain size, but we won’t learn a lot.
Sometimes we have external molds. An organism is buried, decomposes, dissolves and is gone…but the void it left in the sediment is preserved as the sediment turns to rock. Sometimes sediments fill an organism’s interior and we end up with an internal mold or endocast.
Sometimes we get an impression of the creature. This can be very interesting since we might learn about skin texture. Skins usually don’t fossilize.
There are microfossils, things you need a microscope to examine. These often are of the critters themselves.
But the “classic” fossil like the skeleton you’ve seen in museums is when a buried organism’s tissues are slowly replaced by minerals coming out of solution. This is much more likely to happen if the organism is buried underwater right after it dies and as you might imagine, that’s far more common for sea life (which is already underwater) than land life.
This turns out to be a big subject, and I am going to take the easy way out and punt you over to Wikipedia if you want to know more. (Note that on occasion a fossil is made out of iron pyrite (fool’s gold)!)
It’s much, much easier to fossilize if you have hard body parts. Skeletons, exoskeletons, shells, etc., because the other stuff is likely to decompose or otherwise be consumed by animals even when buried. The reason why “fossils show up” only in the Cambrian and later is because that’s when hard body parts first show up. (Why not earlier? My speculation: This is when predators first showed up, and critters suddenly needed body armor.)
But we do have some fossils from before the Precambrian, after all.
For instance, fossilized bacterial mats called stromatolites going clear back into the Archean, and not just the late Archean either. (These mats still exist in certain isolated places today–the situation has to be just right, however, or they get eaten before the mats can really form. Shark Bay in Western Australia is one of these places–it’s so important for that reason that UNESCO made it a World Heritage Site.) Those things that look like lumpy brown rocks are alive.
And a number of soft bodied creatures did manage to get impressions preserved in the rocks from immediately before the Cambrian; this led to the recognition, for the first time in 120 years, of a new period, the Ediacaran, named after the Ediacara Hills of South Australia, at the tail end of the Neoproterozoic era. Interestingly, many of these fossils were first noticed in England by schoolchildren, and the paleontologists around them, knowing the local surface rocks were Precambrian, dismissed their stories until one of them went with the kids and looked. These organisms look like nothing around today (unlike the Cambrian ones), and they are collectively called the “Ediacaran biota” though they only appear in the more recent part of the Ediacaran system. Here is an artist’s impression (very speculative)
And here are some pictures of the actual fossils, first charnia:
And dickinsonia.
Before that we have fossils of algae. Such as stromatolites.
Fossils versus Index Fossils
I’m going to make one more thing clear. I’ve noted that the periods were defined by index fossils..in fact in many cases the fossils actually identify epochs and ages within the periods. Completely distinct rocks in widely separated locations can be identified as being from the same epoch or age based on the index fossils they contain. The narrower the time span, the better. Not every fossil is an index fossil. Sometimes the geographic range is too small (the creature wasn’t wide spread enough) and sometimes that particular species was around for far too long.
But those non-index fossils are still confined to a certain time range, even if it’s a broad one.
Take trilobites, an entire class of creatures. (Mammals are a class. Insects are a class. Trilobites were that big a grouping.) There isn’t a single trilobite alive today. All of them lived from the middle of the Cambrian to the end of the Permian. The fossils were found in those systems so they date to those periods. (In fact the abrupt disappearance of the trilobites is one of the reasons the Permian–and the entire Paleozoic Era–is regarded as ending right then.)
We’ve identified, from fossils, 22,000 distinct species of trilobites spread out over the entire Paleozoic. There were surely many, many more. Some got to be 28 inches long. Some were scavengers, some were predators, some were filter feeders. They were an incredibly diverse and successful class. I can’t find anything to say for sure (I’m running out of time), but I would be surprised if at least some specific species of trilobites weren’t index fossils.
But you never find a trilobite after the Permian system. Never. They died out at the end of the Permian in a mass extinction, among the victims of the biggest one of all time. You can’t tell what period a generic trilobite is (though if you can identify the specific species, you have a better shot at it), but if your rock has a trilobite fossil in it, it’s Paleozoic, not Mesozoic or Cenozoic. And certainly not Precambrian.
Similarly, dinosaurs lived at characteristic times. Tyrannosaurs, for instance, are from the very end of the Cretaceous. Allosaurus and stegosaurus (and closely related species) are Jurassic. You never see these creatures outside of those ranges.
And not just for these examples, but for every species we have fossils of. This sort of precise and consistent location within the geologic column is very, very hard to explain if someone wants to claim that the entire column was laid down all at once. And this is what Young Earth Creationists claim…the whole thing was laid down in one year by the Great Flood.
But if a single flood event laid down the entire geologic column with the fossils all being things that drowned in the Flood, why would you not find drowned trilobites and tyrannosaurs and brachiosaurus and apatosaurus and pelycosaurs and ambulocetus and archaeopteryx and anomalocaris and eurypterids and camerata and ammonites and I could go on and on and on, but especially fossilized fish and gigantic Mesozoic marine reptiles of various extinct species (which could surely have held out longer) throughout the entire geological column if the whole thing happened within one year, or at least with lots of overlap? Instead we see things strictly segregated by layers. Even if you want to appeal to objects forming layers by density a) the brachiosaur bones would be in the Precambrian not the Cretaceous–in other words things didn’t sort by density and b) even if we grant for the sake of argument that they did, we’d see at least SOME cases of things not falling as far as they should because some piece of debris got in the way. Enough that we couldn’t ignore them. But we don’t. They’re segregated too perfectly by era, period and epoch. The segregation is so good because something would have to be thousands of years out of its time at the very least to end up in the wrong layer (and how would that happen? Time travel?), not just “it needed to fall for just a few more seconds to the right layer but something else blocked it.”
I’m sorry but the “all due to Noah’s Flood” claim is absurd. And this is just one line of argumentation that that is so.
Is there plenty of evidence of flooding in the geological record? Oh, yes, yes indeed, but there is no indication that it was a single event, or that any of the multitude of episodes were global. We can do relative dating on these things, after all.
(So Georges Cuvier, who as far as I can tell, believed in global catastrophes, was wrong. Or was he? Stay tuned.)
Not a Single Number?
You may have noticed that I have not given any numbers here. When were these periods? Just for instance, what’s the timespan of the Jurassic period? From when to when?
We didn’t know back then. We could look at index fossils and say that this rock from Russia was the same age as this other rock from Texas (even though from totally different formations). We could say that that rock was older than this other rock, and newer than yet a third rock. This is called relative dating. But other than crude order-of-magnitude estimates like was done with Etna, we could not do any sort of absolute dating where we could assign an actual number to the age of the rock. We could say “millions of years” or “more millions of years.” And by the way, there’s a symbol for that: Ma means “million years ago,” so 66 Ma means 66 million years ago.
How we got to absolute dating is a future topic (I might cover some other things before that). I know something about the modern methods. I have no idea (yet) how precise they were able to get before the modern methods were available, and I hope I can find out. (I may even have to walk back some of what I said in the prior paragraph if I’ve underestimated the cleverness of 19th and early 20th century paleontologists and geologists.) This is a learning experience for me too.
With Trump now FINALLY restored to his Rightful Office, I was wondering what to name my posts. Continuing to complain that Biden didn’t win when Biden no longer effing matter any more than roadkill seen in the rearview mirror, seemed pointless. Even if it was a monument to Wheatie.
This should have been a week of joy. And indeed much good has happened, a wonderful start!
And then we found out that DePat…Susie…had taken her leave, very much before time. In fact just before she could see Trump restored to office.
DePat and I clashed loudly from time to time but I have nothing but respect for the time and effort she put in on her posts. (This is something I know about being one of the other authors.) To be sure she didn’t do much of the kind of writing she was certainly capable of, but the time it must have taken to gather all of those memes, articles and what-not is substantial. (Seriously when did she find the time?) And she would be visibly frustrated when she couldn’t throw a big pile of them together. Me, I’ll just say “no science post” and move on.
I suppose we can’t know DePat was killed by the Covid Vax in super-hyperdrive reach-out-and-kill-someone mode, though it certainly seems very likely indeed that it found DePat worn out and pounced.
That damned jab has killed hundreds of thousands if not millions…and it’s the “gift” that keeps on giving. If they never gave another slab jab from this moment forward, it would continue killing for years.
What we can know is that this was way too damned early. And for it to happen just before the inauguration she had been waiting for would strike me as incredibly “in-your-face, fuck you” injustice if I were to believe it was done by agency. (And yes, I’ve read the flip side of that viewpoint a lot here, so no need to explain it (again) on my account.)
Perhaps DePat can serve as a symbol of those it killed, even if it were to turn out that she wasn’t one of its victims.
And we should all remember her, and Wheatie, as we push forward with the fight. This is NOT over by any means.
Fight! Fight! Fight! Because JUSTICE must be served on those who foisted that shit on us. And for all the other things they have done to this country.
You failed to pay attention to this advice. You went out of your way to do the opposite. You chose to rub our faces in it, imprison those who dared complain, and even to kill our people. Now you shall pay just a tiny fraction of the real price, Ratfuckers.
Welcome Back, 4GodandCountry
I have no idea if you enjoyed my science posts before you went on sabbatical (I do remember you were enthusiastic about my post on the 50th anniversary of the first moon landing). If so you have plenty of catchup. Largely on physics, but a few side excursions, lately a walk through the solar system and I’ve just started on geology (if I can quit slacking and put out part II).
What is it that feeds our battle, yet starves our victory?
RINO scum. Like Murkowski and Collins.
That’s OK. We go around ’em for now.
January 6 Tapes Reminder
OK…I’m sick and tired of reminding you to no effect, Speaker Johnson, so I’ll do the more emotionally satisfying thing and call you a cowardly, lying, fraudulent sack of diarrhetic monkey shit.
Johnson, you are a cowardly, lying, fraudulent sack of diarrhetic monkey shit!
A Caution
Just remember…we might replace the RINO candidates. (Or we might not. The record is mixed even though there is more MAGA than there used to be.) But that will make no difference in the long run if the party officials, basically the Rhonna McDaniels (or however that’s spelled–I suspect it’s RINO), don’t get replaced.
State party chairs, vice chairs, secretaries and so on, and the same at county levels, have huge influence on who ultimately gets nominated, and if these party wheelhorses are RINOs, they will work tirelessly to put their own pukey people on the ballot. In fact I’d not be surprised if some of our “MAGA” candidates are in fact, RINO plants, encouraged to run by the RINO party leadership when they realized that Lyn Cheney (and her ilk) were hopelessly compromised as effective candidates. The best way for them to deal with the opposition, of course, is to run it themselves.
Running good candidates is only HALF of the battle!
Biden Gives Us Too Much Credit
…we can move on to the next one.
Apparently Biden (or his puppeteer) has decided we’re to blame for all of the fail in the United States today.
Sorry to disappoint you Joe (or whoever), but you managed to do that all on your own; not only that, you wouldn’t let us NOT give you the chance because you insisted on cheating your way into power.
Yep, you-all are incompetent, and so proud of it you expect our applause for your sincerity. Fuck that!!
It wouldn’t be so bad, but you insist that everyone else have to share in your misery. Nope, can’t have anyone get out from under it. Somehow your grand vision only works if every single other person on earth is forced to go along. So much as ONE PERSON not going along is enough to make it all fail, apparently.
In engineering school we’re taught that a design that has seven to eight billion single points of failure…sucks.
Actually, we weren’t taught that. Because it would never have occurred to the professors to use such a ridiculous example.
Justice Must Be Done.
The prior election must be acknowledged as fraudulent, and steps must be taken to prosecute the fraudsters and restore integrity to the system.
Nothing else matters at this point. Talking about trying again in 2022 or 2024 is hopeless otherwise. Which is not to say one must never talk about this, but rather that one must account for this in ones planning; if fixing the fraud is not part of the plan, you have no plan.
Kamala Harris has a new nickname since she finally went west from DC to El Paso Texas: Westward Hoe.
Lawyer Appeasement Section
OK now for the fine print.
This is the WQTH Daily Thread. You know the drill. There’s no Poltical correctness, but civility is a requirement. There are Important Guidelines, here, with an addendum on 20191110.
We have a new board – called The U Tree – where people can take each other to the woodshed without fear of censorship or moderation.
And remember Wheatie’s Rules:
1. No food fights 2. No running with scissors. 3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone. 4. Zeroth rule of gun safety: Don’t let the government get your guns. 5. Rule one of gun safety: The gun is always loaded. 5a. If you actually want the gun to be loaded, like because you’re checking out a bump in the night, then it’s empty. 6. Rule two of gun safety: Never point the gun at anything you’re not willing to destroy. 7. Rule three: Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire. 8. Rule the fourth: Be sure of your target and what is behind it.
(Hmm a few extras seem to have crept in.)
Spot Prices
All prices are Kitco Ask, 3PM MT Friday (at that time the markets close for the weekend). (Note: most media quotes are for the bid…the price paid by the market makers, not the ask, which is what they will sell at. I figure the ask is more relevant to people like us who wish we could afford to buy these things. In the case of gold the difference is usually about a dollar, for the PGMs the spread is much wider.)
Gold went up nicely. While it was climbing, silver struggled to keep its head above the water and finally went up 17 cents on Friday–which was most of its gain for the week. So it now takes over ninety ounces of silver to buy an ounce of gold, and that’s assuming of course you don’t have to give the moneychanger a cut.
Silver is on sale right now folks!
*The SteveInCO Federal Reserve Note Suckage Index (FRNSI) is a measure of how much the dollar has inflated. It’s the ratio of the current price of gold, to the number of dollars an ounce of fine gold made up when the dollar was defined as 25.8 grains of 0.900 gold. That worked out to an ounce being $20.67+71/387 of a cent. (Note gold wasn’t worth this much back then, thus much gold was $20.67 71/387ths. It’s a subtle distinction. One ounce of gold wasn’t worth $20.67 back then, it was $20.67.) Once this ratio is computed, 1 is subtracted from it so that the number is zero when the dollar is at its proper value, indicating zero suckage.
Precisely…um…(looks up hours left)…(smacks forehead)
Never mind. Trump is President!
No more “Once and Future” He’s the PRESENT President!
We have somehow survived the last four years. Some faced jail–they have now been freed.
And one man faced bullets;
From THIS:
To THIS:
And he’s off to a roaring start, signing executive orders, some of which are HUGE in their impact. Immediate cessation of DEI. Declaration of a national emergency on the Border. Declaring the cartels terrorist organizations. Freeing up energy production (though nothing was said aloud about using The (strong nuclear) Force).
Alas Holder is still at large.
Comment here until/unless the regular post shows up.
2 days, 11 hours, 59 minutes until the Once And Future President, Donald John Trump, is restored to the office that was Rightfully his the last four years.
Not that I’m counting, mind you.
What is it that feeds our battle, yet starves our victory?
Our Turn
[Yes, I did this one ten weeks ago. But it was too cathartic to just throw away.]
We’ve often seen that quote from David Plouffe: “It is not enough to simply beat Trump. He must be destroyed thoroughly. His kind must not rise again.”
This was of course a declaration of intent to annihilate not just Trump, but rather “his kind.”
You know what? I think we should flip it around. David Plouffe’s kind should be destroyed thoroughly and their kind must not rise again.
What is Plouffe’s kind? I suppose it depends on who’s talking and what they are thinking of in particular. Well, at the moment it’s me talking and I am thinking of the sort of maggot who is attracted to politics not to better his world but rather so that he can wield power over others, or line their pockets with “free” money. Often these people end up as what Ayn Rand called “pull peddlers,” receiving money in exchange for using their connections to do favors.
This type is parasitic. Utterly parasitic. And they should be destroyed thoroughly and not allowed to rise again.
The bad news is we will never eradicate them. Useless turds who can’t do anything productive will always be with us. As will the outright sociopaths.
Of course they find Trump to be their enemy. And of course they find us to be their enemy. If we won’t simply lie down and let our “betters” have their way with us, we’re a problem, we’re something to be got rid of. And of late, we haven’t lain down without a protest, as we are “supposed” to do. Dang uppity Garbage Deplorables! We don’t know our place!!!
The good news is we can provide far fewer niches for these parasites. The niches come into being when something that people formerly did of their own free will is taken over by the government; then every aspect of that activity becomes a political football.
Take for instance education. Since the government runs it, if you don’t like what’s being done, you have to form a political movement and try to work your way around the maggots embedded in the bureaucracy. If education were private, then if you didn’t like what they were doing to your child, you’d take your money and your child elsewhere. And people who didn’t even have school-age children presently would have no voice–and not have to pay money. Making it a government “thing” turned it into a political thing, and the maggots began to swarm.
So we wreck them by seriously cutting government and giving them fewer places to exist. Among all of the other benefits, the body politic would have fewer sociopaths and parasites in it.
People like Plouffe are the same type, but they are the full-on political hacks who set policy, rather than implement it. They’re just as bad if not worse; they help government grow, and steer it into serving its own ends, rather than those of the people it is supposed to be serving.
The Deep State is nothing more than a government that serves its own ends.
And we have had enough of this.
They must be destroyed thoroughly, and their kind must not rise again.
This election wasn’t the end, it was the beginning. There are millions of these malignancies in this country and we’ve just defeated two of them. Keep pushing. Now we can go after them wholesale.
It’s our turn.
Our turn.
Our turn.
OUR TURN!
You stole the 2020 election. You’ve mocked and ridiculed and put people in prison and broken people’s lives because you said this thing was stolen. This entire phony thing is getting swept out. Biden’s getting swept out. Kamala Harris is getting swept out. MSNBC is getting swept out. The Justice Department is getting swept out. The FBI is getting swept out. You people suck, okay?! And now you’re going to pay the price for trying to destroy this country.
And I’m going to tell you, we’re going to get to the bottom of where the 600,000 votes [are]. You manufactured them to steal this election from President Trump in 2020. And think what this country would be if we hadn’t gone through the last four years of your madness, okay? You don’t deserve any respect, you don’t deserve any empathy, and you don’t deserve any pity.
And if anybody gives it to you, it’s Donald J. Trump, because he’s got a big heart and he’s a good man. A good man that you’re still gonna try to put in prison on the 26th of this month. This is how much you people suck. Okay? You’ve destroyed his business thing. And he came back.
He came back in the greatest show of political courage, I think, in world history. Like, [Roman statesman] Cincinnatus coming back from the plough [returning to politics to rescue the Roman Republic]. He’s the American Cincinnatus. And what he has done is a profile in courage. We’ve had his back. But I got to tell you, he may be empathetic. He may have a kind heart. He may be a good man. But we’re not. Okay? And you deserve, as Natalie Winters says, not retribution, justice. But you deserve what we call rough Roman justice, and we’re prepared to give it to you.
Steve Bannon, on election night
OUR TURN!!
OUR TURN!!!
OUR TURN!!!
OUR TURN!!!
January 6 Tapes?
Paging Speaker Johnson…this is your conscience calling you out on broken promises.
For all your high talk about your Christian moral background…you’re looking less and less like you have any kind of moral background.
If You are a Patriot and Don’t Loathe RINOs…
Let’s talk about RINOs, and why they are the lowest form of life in politics.
Many patriots have been involved with politics, often at the grassroots, for decades. We’ve fought, and fought, and fought and won the occasional illusory small victory.
Yet we can’t seem to win the war, even when we have BIG electoral wins.
I am reminded of something. The original Star Trek had an episode titled Day of the Dove. It was one of the better episodes from the third season, but any fan of the original series will tell you that’s a very low bar. Still, it seems to get some respect; at a time when there were about 700 episodes of Star Trek in its various incarnations out there, it was voted 99th best out of the top 100.
In sum, the plot is that an alien entity has arranged for 39 Enterprise crew, and 39 Klingons, to fight each other endlessly with swords and other muscle-powered weapons. The entity lives off of hostile emotions, you see and it wants a captive food source. (The other 400 or so Enterprise crew are trapped below decks and unable to help.) Each side has its emotions played and amplified by the alien entity; one Enterprise junior officer has false memories implanted of a brother who was killed by Klingons. The brother didn’t even exist.
Even people killed in a sword fight miraculously heal so they can go do it again.
The second best line of the episode is when Kang, the Klingon captain, notes that though they have won quite a number of small victories including capturing Engineering, can’t seem to actually finally defeat the Enterprise crew. He growls, “What power is it that feeds our battle yet starves our victory?*”
Indeed. He may have been the bad guy, but his situation should sound familiar.
We are a majority in this country. We have a powerful political party in our corner. There is endless wrangling.
And yet,
What power is it that feeds our battle yet starves our victory?
In our case, that power is the RINOs in our midst. They specialize in caving when on the verge of victory. Think of Obamacare’s repeal failing…by one Republican vote. Think of the way we can never seem to get spending under control (and now our entire tax revenue goes to pay interest on the debt; anything the government actually does now is with borrowed money).
We have a party…that refuses to do what we want it to do, and that refusal is institutionalized. If you’ve been involved with GOP politics, but haven’t seen this, it’s because you refuse to see it. Or because you are part of the problem yourself. (If so, kindly gargle some red fuming nitric acid to clear the taste of shit out of your mouth, and let those not part of the problem alone so they can read this.)
We fight to elect people, who then take a dive when in office. But it’s not just the politicians in office, it’s the people behind the scenes, the leaders of the national, state and county branches of the party. Their job is to ensure that real patriots never get onto the general election ballot. They’re allowed a few failures…who can then become token conservatives who will somehow never manage to win (Jordan), or can be compromised outright (Lauren Boebert?).
That way it doesn’t actually matter who has a congressional majority. I remember my excitement when the GOP took the Senate in 1980. But all that did was empower a bunch of “moderate” puddles of dog vomit like…well for whatever reason forty years later the most memorable name is Pete Domenici. And a couple of dozen other “moderates” who simply had no interest in doing what grassroots people in their party–those same grassroots people who had worked so hard to elect them–wanted them to do.
Oh, they’ll put up a semblance of a fight…but never win. And they love it when we fight the Dems instead of fighting them. Just like that alien entity, whose motto surely was “Let’s you and him fight. It’ll be delicious!”
If you think about it, your entire political involvement has come to nothing because of these walking malignant tumors.
That should make you good and mad.
The twenty five who blocked Jordan, and the hundred people who took that opportunity to stab Jordan in the back in the secret ballot should make you good and mad.
I’ll close this with another example of RINO backstabbing, an infuriating one close to home.
In my county, the GOP chair is not a RINO. She got elected when the grassroots had had enough of the RINOs. Unfortunately the state organization is full of RINOs, and the ousted county RINOs have been trying to form a new “Republican Party” and get the state GOP to recognize them as the affiliate. I’m honestly amazed it hasn’t happened yet.
In other words those shitstains won’t just leave when they get booted out; they’ll try to destroy what they left behind. It’s an indication that they know we know how important that behind-the-scenes party power is.
So they must be destroyed. That’s the only way they’ll ever stop.
We cannot win until the leeches “on our side” get destroyed.
What power is it that feeds our battle yet starves our victory?*
We know it. What is going to be done about it?
*NOTE: The original line was actually “What power is it that supports our battle yet starves our victory.” I had mis-remembered it as feeds. When I checked it, it sure enough was “supports” and that’s what I originally quoted. On further reflection, though, I realized my memory was actually an improvement over the reality, because feeds is a perfect contrast with starves. I changed it partway through the day this originally posted, but now (since this is a re-run) it gets rendered this way from the start.
If one must do things wrong, one should do them wrong…right.
RINOs an Endangered Species? If Only!
According to Wikipoo, et. al., the Northern White Rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum cottoni) is a critically endangered species. Apparently two females live on a wildlife preserve in Sudan, and no males are known to be alive. So basically, this species is dead as soon as the females die of old age. Presently they are watched over by armed guards 24/7.
Biologists have been trying to cross them with the other subspecies, Southern White Rhinoceroses (Rhinoceri?) without success; and some genetic analyses suggest that perhaps they aren’t two subspecies at all, but two distinct species, which would make the whole project a lot more difficult.
I should hope if the American RINO (Parasitus rectum pseudoconservativum) is ever this endangered, there will be heroic efforts not to save the species, but rather to push the remainder off a cliff. Onto punji sticks. With feces smeared on them. Failing that a good bath in red fuming nitric acid will do.
But I’m not done ranting about RINOs.
The RINOs (if they are capable of any introspection whatsoever) probably wonder why they constantly have to deal with “populist” eruptions like the Trump-led MAGA movement. That would be because the so-called populists stand for absolutely nothing except for going along to get along. That allows the Left to drive the culture and politics.
Given the results of our most recent elections, the Left will now push harder, and the RINOs will now turn even squishier than they were before.
I well remember 1989-1990 in my state when the RINO establishment started preaching the message that a conservative simply couldn’t win in Colorado. Never mind the fact that Reagan had won the state TWICE (in 1984 bringing in a veto-proof state house and senate with him) and GHWB had won after (falsely!) assuring everyone that a vote for him was a vote for Reagan’s third term.
This is how the RINOs function. They push, push, push the line that only a “moderate” can get elected. Stomp them when they pull that shit. Tell everyone in ear shot that that’s exactly what the Left wants you to think, and oh-by-the-way-Mister-RINO if you’re in this party selling the same message as the Left…well, whythefuckexactly are you in this party, you lying piece of rancid weasel shit?
Justice
It says “Justice” on the picture.
And I’m sure someone will post the standard joke about what the fish thinks about the situation.
But what is it?
Here’s a take, from a different context: It’s about how you do justice, not the justice that must be done to our massively corrupt government and media. You must properly identify the nature of a person, before you can do him justice.
Ayn Rand, On Justice (speaking through her character John Galt, in Atlas Shrugged):
Justice is the recognition of the fact that you cannot fake the character of men as you cannot fake the character of nature, that you must judge all men as conscientiously as you judge inanimate objects, with the same respect for truth, with the same incorruptible vision, by as pure and as rational a process of identification—that every man must be judged for what he is and treated accordingly, that just as you do not pay a higher price for a rusty chunk of scrap than for a piece of shining metal, so you do not value a rotter above a hero—that your moral appraisal is the coin paying men for their virtues or vices, and this payment demands of you as scrupulous an honor as you bring to financial transactions—that to withhold your contempt from men’s vices is an act of moral counterfeiting, and to withhold your admiration from their virtues is an act of moral embezzlement—that to place any other concern higher than justice is to devaluate your moral currency and defraud the good in favor of the evil, since only the good can lose by a default of justice and only the evil can profit—and that the bottom of the pit at the end of that road, the act of moral bankruptcy, is to punish men for their virtues and reward them for their vices, that that is the collapse to full depravity, the Black Mass of the worship of death, the dedication of your consciousness to the destruction of existence.
Ayn Rand identified seven virtues, chief among them rationality. The other six, including justice, she considered subsidiary because they are essentially different aspects and applications of rationality.
I’m sure enough of this that I put my money where my mouth is.
The prior election must be acknowledged as fraudulent, and steps must be taken to prosecute the fraudsters and restore integrity to the system. (This doesn’t necessarily include deposing Joe and Hoe and putting Trump where he belongs, but it would certainly be a lot easier to fix our broken electoral system with the right people in charge.)
Nothing else matters at this point. Talking about trying again in 2024 or 2026 is pointless otherwise. Which is not to say one must never talk about this, but rather that one must account for this in ones planning; if fixing the fraud in the system is not part of the plan, you have no plan.
This will necessarily be piecemeal, state by state, which is why I am encouraged by those states working to change their laws to alleviate the fraud both via computer and via bogus voters. If enough states do that we might end up with a working majority in Congress and that would be something Trump never really had.
Martin Luther King
The 20th is also Martin Luther King day…a circumstance I find handy this year; it’s a “Floating Holiday” where I work. I can take that day, or take it some other time. I chose this time to take it on Monday.
Of course I’m doing it because it will be cold, and because it’s the end of the Brandon Administration.
But I’ll still say something about MLK. He was a decidedly mixed individual. As are we all. But I think he, and many others of his time, did something important and unpleasant; he (and those others) forced a recognition that even after the Civil War we were being hypocritical on the subject of equality under the law. Those people who descended from those who (shall we say) involuntarily migrated to what is now the United States were still getting the shitty end of the stick in many parts of this country, as a matter of law.
He was one hundred percent correct on that.
Unfortunately his successors have turned the point full circle and want a leg up from the law, supposedly to make up for the past mistreatment, but that can only lead to an endless round of back and forth. There are some signs that MLK himself had he not been killed (he would be turning 96 this year were he still alive), would have been right alongside the race baiters (which include some who were with him), other signs that he wouldn’t have.
But just as Thomas Jefferson penned these words, in spite of owning slaves, the words that eventually shamed us into abolishing the “peculiar institution”:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…
I’ll go with what Martin Luther King said…not all that far from where the Inauguration will take place:
And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
Emphasis mine. Judge people by the content of their character.
That is as it should be.
I see that, sometimes, on “our” side, at Trump rallies.
I see nothing but reverse racism on the Left. To them the world is defined by what one group does to another, some group must be on top shitting on everyone else. And it shows. There’s a false dichotomy in their thinking. Either white shits on black, or black shits on white. The way to recognize it as a false dichotomy, though, is not to gin up a third “group” to make it a trichotomy, or a fourth group to make it, what, a tetrachotomy? quadrichotomy? Is either of those actually a word? Gee maybe we can have a different group on top every week of the year at least until some jackass makes up a 53rd group! (Let’s leave aside the one or two day remainder you get from dividing 365(or 6) by 7. These are leftists studying critical race theory, not mathematicians.)
How about we do soemthing different? How about we work towards a system where the law shits on NO ONE except those who violate the rights of others?
Lawyer Appeasement Section
OK now for the fine print.
This is the WQTH Daily Thread. You know the drill. There’s no Poltical correctness, but civility is a requirement. There are Important Guidelines, here, with an addendum on 20191110.
We have a new board – called The U Tree – where people can take each other to the woodshed without fear of censorship or moderation.
And remember Wheatie’s Rules:
1. No food fights 2. No running with scissors. 3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone. 4. Zeroth rule of gun safety: Don’t let the government get your guns. 5. Rule one of gun safety: The gun is always loaded. 5a. If you actually want the gun to be loaded, like because you’re checking out a bump in the night, then it’s empty. 6. Rule two of gun safety: Never point the gun at anything you’re not willing to destroy. 7. Rule three: Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire. 8. Rule the fourth: Be sure of your target and what is behind it.
Gold went up nicely on Thursday, and dropped a bit on Friday but is still just over the 2700 “dollar” mark for the first time in a while. Silver didn’t kept up with those gains and so the gold-to-silver ratio keeps widening.
*The SteveInCO Federal Reserve Note Suckage Index (FRNSI) is a measure of how much the dollar has inflated. It’s the ratio of the current price of gold, to the number of dollars an ounce of fine gold made up when the dollar was defined as 25.8 grains of 0.900 gold. That worked out to an ounce being $20.67+71/387 of a cent. (Note gold wasn’t worth this much back then, thus much gold was $20.67 71/387ths. It’s a subtle distinction. One ounce of gold wasn’t worth $20.67 back then, it was $20.67.) Once this ratio is computed, 1 is subtracted from it so that the number is zero when the dollar is at its proper value, indicating zero suckage.
The Final Experiment: More Fallout
The desperate attempts by Flat Earthers to refute the Final Experiment continue.
It might be easier if they could agree on their attack. Is it A) irrelevant because lights in the sky won’t tell us anything about the shape of the Earth? Or B) filmed in a 360 degree studio so it’s fake? If A) is true B doesn’t matter, yet Eric Dubay the guru is going after B, and I’ve heard Flat Earth Dave go with A. (Flat Earth Dave by the way has often debunked a lot of the “it was faked” arguments including the claims that a chromakey glitch showed it was a green screen…when in fact it actually proved there was no green screen.)
We have a couple of videos by Dave McKeegan. These pretty much cover the gamut of ridiculous attempts to debunk TFE
So does this one, in Professor Dave style (which means he’s willing to be a bit insulting)
9 days, 11 hours, 59 minutes until the Once And Future President, Donald John Trump, is restored to the office that was Rightfully his the last four years.
SINGLE DIGITS!!! (Too bad we don’t use binary numbers.)
Not that I’m counting, mind you.
What is it that feeds our battle, yet starves our victory?
January 6 Tapes?
Where are the tapes? Anyone, Anyone? Bueller? Johnson??
Paging Speaker Johnson…this is your conscience calling you out on broken promises.
News Flash
Today, it is still the case that Joe Biden didn’t Win.
I realize that to some readers, this might be a shock; surely at some point things must change and Biden will have actually won.
But the past cannot actually be changed.
It will always and forever be the case that Joe Biden didn’t win.
And if you, Leftist Lurker, want to dismiss it as dead white cis-male logic…well, you can call it what you want, but then please just go fuck off. No one here buys that bullshit–logic is logic and facts are facts regardless of skin color–and if you gave it a moment’s rational thought, you wouldn’t either. Of course your worthless education never included being able to actually reason–or detect problems with false reasoning–so I don’t imagine you’ll actually wake up as opposed to being woke.
As Ayn Rand would sometimes point out: Yes, you are free to evade reality. What you cannot do is evade the consequences of evading reality. Or to put it concretely: You can ignore the Mack truck bearing down on you as you play in the middle of the street, you won’t be able to ignore the consequences of ignoring the Mack truck.
And Ayn Rand also pointed out that existence (i.e., the sum total of everything that exists) precedes consciousness–our consciousnesses are a part of existence, not outside of it–therefore reality cannot be a “social construct” as so many of you fucked-up-in-the-head people seem to think.
So much for Leftist douchebag lurkers. For the rest of you, the regular readers and those lurkers who understand such things: I continue to carry the banner once also carried by Wheatie. His Fraudulency didn’t win.
Let’s Go, Brandon!!
His Fraudulency
Joe Biteme, properly styled His Fraudulency, continues to infest the White House, we haven’t heard much from the person who should have been declared the victor, and hopium is still being dispensed even as our military appears to have joined the political establishment in knuckling under to the fraud.
One can hope that all is not as it seems.
I’d love to feast on that crow.
(I’d like to add, I find it entirely plausible, even likely, that His Fraudulency is also His Figureheadedness. (Apparently that wasn’t a word; it got a red underline. Well it is now.) Where I differ with the hopium addicts is on the subject of who is really in charge. It ain’t anyone we like.)
Justice Must Be Done.
The prior election must be acknowledged as fraudulent, and steps must be taken to prosecute the fraudsters and restore integrity to the system.
Nothing else matters at this point. Talking about trying again in 2024 is hopeless otherwise. Which is not to say one must never talk about this, but rather that one must account for this in ones planning; if fixing the fraud is not part of the plan, you have no plan.
Lawyer Appeasement Section
OK now for the fine print.
This is the WQTH Daily Thread. You know the drill. There’s no Poltical correctness, but civility is a requirement. There are Important Guidelines, here, with an addendum on 20191110.
We have a new board – called The U Tree – where people can take each other to the woodshed without fear of censorship or moderation.
And remember Wheatie’s Rules:
1. No food fights 2. No running with scissors. 3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone. 4. Zeroth rule of gun safety: Don’t let the government get your guns. 5. Rule one of gun safety: The gun is always loaded. 5a. If you actually want the gun to be loaded, like because you’re checking out a bump in the night, then it’s empty. 6. Rule two of gun safety: Never point the gun at anything you’re not willing to destroy. 7. Rule three: Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire. 8. Rule the fourth: Be sure of your target and what is behind it.
Gold has been jumping up one day each week only to fall the next two days, lately. Well this time the jump was on Friday. Will it drop on Monday and Tuesday? Silver has done slightly better than that on a percentage basis.
*The SteveInCO Federal Reserve Note Suckage Index (FRNSI) is a measure of how much the dollar has inflated. It’s the ratio of the current price of gold, to the number of dollars an ounce of fine gold made up when the dollar was defined as 25.8 grains of 0.900 gold. That worked out to an ounce being $20.67+71/387 of a cent. (Note gold wasn’t worth this much back then, thus much gold was $20.67 71/387ths. It’s a subtle distinction. One ounce of gold wasn’t worth $20.67 back then, it was $20.67.) Once this ratio is computed, 1 is subtracted from it so that the number is zero when the dollar is at its proper value, indicating zero suckage.
The Final Experiment Fallout
The fallout continues.
Flerfs are saying that 1) it was faked and 2) it was consistent with a flat earth after all and 3) it doesn’t matter, lights in the sky don’t prove the shape of the earth and 4)…well I’m not sure. (Note that sometimes the same Flerf will hold two or more of these positions within minutes of each other.)
Jeran of Jeranism, one of the Flerfs who went on the Final Experiment, apparently has said he is no longer a Flat Earther. But I doubt that he’s gone glober. Here’s a livestream from Friday; I’ve not watched it yet.
As of desired publication time, 12:01 AM on January 4, there are 16 days, 11 hours and 59 minutes before our Once and Future President, Donald John Trump, is restored to his rightful office.
Not that I’m counting, mind you.
What is it that feeds our battle, yet starves our victory?
Speaker Johnson Pinging you on January 6 Tapes
Just a friendly reminder Speaker Johnson. You’re doing some good things–or at least trying in the case of the budget–but this is the most important thing out there still hanging. One initial block released with the promise of more…and?
We have American patriots being held without bail and without trial, and the tapes almost certainly contain exculpatory evidence. (And if they don’t, and we’re all just yelling in an echo chamber over here, we need to know that too. And there’s only one way to know.)
Either we have a weaponized, corrupt government or we have a lot of internet charlatans. Let’s expose whatever it is. (I’m betting it’s the corrupt weaponized government, but if I am wrong, I’d like to see proof.)
Justice Must Be Done.
The prior election must be acknowledged as fraudulent, and steps must be taken to prosecute the fraudsters and restore integrity to the system.
Nothing else matters at this point. Talking about trying again in 2022 or 2024 is hopeless otherwise. Which is not to say one must never talk about this, but rather that one must account for this in ones planning; if fixing the fraud is not part of the plan, you have no plan.
Small Government?
Many times conservatives (real and fake) speak of “small government” being the goal.
This sounds good, and mostly is good, but it misses the essential point. The important thing here isn’t the size, but rather the purpose, of government. We could have a cheap, small tyranny. After all our government spends most of its revenue on payments to individuals and foreign aid, neither of which is part of the tyrannical apparatus trying to keep us locked down and censored. What parts of the government would be necessary for a tyranny? It’d be a lot smaller than what we have now. We could shrink the government and nevertheless find it more tyrannical than it is today.
No, what we want is a limited government, limited not in size, but rather in scope. Limited, that is, in what it’s allowed to do. Under current circumstances, such a government would also be much smaller, but that’s a side effect. If we were in a World War II sort of war, an existential fight against nasty dictatorships on the brink of world conquest, that would be very expensive and would require a gargantuan government, but that would be what the government should be doing. That would be a large, but still limited government, since it’d be working to protect our rights.
World War II would have been the wrong time to squawk about “small government,” but it wasn’t (and never is) a bad time to demand limited government. Today would be a better time to ask for a small government–at least the job it should be doing is small today–but it misses the essential point; we want government to not do certain things. Many of those things we don’t want it doing are expensive but many of them are quite eminently doable by a smaller government than the one we have today. Small, but still exceeding proper limits.
So be careful what you ask for. You might get it and find you asked for the wrong thing.
Political Science In Summation
It’s really just a matter of people who can’t be happy unless they control others…versus those who want to be left alone. The oldest conflict within mankind. Government is necessary, but government attracts the assholes (a highly technical term for the control freaks).
His Truth?
Again we saw an instance of “It might be true for Billy, but it’s not true for Bob” logic this week.
I hear this often, and it’s usually harmless. As when it’s describing differing circumstances, not different facts. “Housing is unaffordable” can be true for one person, but not for another who makes ten times as much.
But sometimes the speaker means it literally. Something like 2+2=4 is asserted to be true for Billy but not for Bob. (And when it’s literal, it’s usually Bob saying it.) And in that sense, it’s nonsense, dangerous nonsense. There is ONE reality, and it exists independent of our desires and our perceptions. It would go on existing if we weren’t here. We exist in it. It does not exist in our heads. It’s not a personal construct, and it isn’t a social construct. If there were no society, reality would continue to be what it is, it wouldn’t vanish…which it would have to do, if it were a social construct.
Now what can change from person to person is the perception of reality. We see that all the time. And people will, of course, act on those perceptions. They will vote for Trump (or try to) if their perception is close to mine, and vote against Trump (and certainly succeed at doing so) if their perception is distant from mine (and therefore, if I do say so, wrong). I have heard people say “perception is reality” and usually, that’s what they’re trying to say–your perception of reality is, as far as you know, an accurate representation of reality, or you’d change it.
But I really wish they’d say it differently. And sometimes, to get back to Billy and Bob, the person who says they have different truths is really saying they have different perceptions of reality–different worldviews. I can’t argue with the latter. But I sure wish they’d say it better. That way I’d know that someone who blabbers about two different truths is delusional and not worth my time, at least not until he passes kindergarten-level metaphysics on his umpteenth attempt.
Lawyer Appeasement Section
OK now for the fine print.
This is the WQTH Daily Thread. You know the drill. There’s no Poltical correctness, but civility is a requirement. There are Important Guidelines, here, with an addendum on 20191110.
We have a new board – called The U Tree – where people can take each other to the woodshed without fear of censorship or moderation.
And remember Wheatie’s Rules:
1. No food fights 2. No running with scissors. 3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone. 4. Zeroth rule of gun safety: Don’t let the government get your guns. 5. Rule one of gun safety: The gun is always loaded. 5a. If you actually want the gun to be loaded, like because you’re checking out a bump in the night, then it’s empty. 6. Rule two of gun safety: Never point the gun at anything you’re not willing to destroy. 7. Rule three: Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire. 8. Rule the fourth: Be sure of your target and what is behind it.
(Hmm a few extras seem to have crept in.)
(Paper) Spot Prices
[EDIT: Forgot to do this, as of 2:50 AM I have edited it to actually mean something]
Gold went up nicely on Thursday (possibly responses to those attacks that aren’t terrorist attacks, oh no they aren’t!) but lost a lot of those gains on Friday. Still, it’s a bit up this week. Silver managed to gain a little bit of ground against it. On the whole, though, things seem pretty stable as we head for 47.
*The SteveInCO Federal Reserve Note Suckage Index (FRNSI) is a measure of how much the dollar has inflated. It’s the ratio of the current price of gold, to the number of dollars an ounce of fine gold made up when the dollar was defined as 25.8 grains of 0.900 gold. That worked out to an ounce being $20.67+71/387 of a cent. (Note gold wasn’t worth this much back then, thus much gold was $20.67 71/387ths. It’s a subtle distinction. One ounce of gold wasn’t worth $20.67 back then, it was $20.67.) Once this ratio is computed, 1 is subtracted from it so that the number is zero when the dollar is at its proper value, indicating zero suckage.
Flat Earthers Strike Back
The guru or pope of the Flat Earth movement–the man who produced those “200 Proofs” videos–has now spoken about the Final Experiment.
According to him it was shot in a studio, one of those fancy 360 dome studios like they use for Mandalorian. (Whatever that is–Star Wars? I stopped following Star Wars after those horrifically bad prequels, Episodes I – III. I honestly should have stopped after Episode I.)
I hate like hell to give this lying turd any views, but here’s his video:
The first point is that he complains the sun in the timelapse changes shape. As if the (alleged) special effects team behind his (alleged) dome studio would be too stupid to not do it that way (heck, it’s more work to do it that way). But okay maybe they did it like that deliberately to double fake us, so that people like me would use the “they wouldn’t be that incompetent” argument. But in fact this shot shows a lot of glare from the sun, and the glare is what is changing shape. Eric Dubay knows this. I know he knows this, because the jackass uses this effect in his own videos!!
In their Gleason’s Map model which many are abandoning (but apparently not Dubay), the Sun never actually dips below the horizon plane since it is always roughly 3000 miles above the flat Earth. Instead it just gets further and further away and eventually we just can’t see it any more; they will invoke “perspective” to explain why it seems to be getting lower and lower in the sky. But getting further and further away would imply that the Sun should look smaller and smaller the closer you are to sunrise and sunset. How does Dubay handle that in his 200 proofs videos? He shows shots of the Sun where the glare orb is of different sizes because of differing atmospheric conditions; he just had to find one with a small glare orb near sunset or sunrise, and one with a bigger glare orb closer to midday.
If you photograph the Sun with a strong enough filter (20 or so stops does it; even seventeen might do it), you know, like I did, you will see it’s always the same actual size. There’s an exceedingly tiny variation over the course of a year because of the Earth’s elliptical orbit, but basically nothing over the course of a day. (This is evidence that the sun is far away compared to distances on Earth.)
Dave McKeegan did a second timelapse of the Sun, tracking it with a filter on. No change in sizes either. Oh, wait. That’s fake. Are my photos also fake? Or the ones taken by many other people around the globe?
The next point is the behavior of shadows. He shows McToon walking around (this is actually the “Where are the Guns, Nathan!?!?!” video, and his shadow apparently changing length and direction, which obviously wouldn’t happen if the object casting the light were far enough away you could treat the light rays as parallel. Well, for someone who likes to invoke “perspective” to explain sun angles, he sure has forgotten the concept here. The man taking the video (McKeegan) was walking around, McToon was walking around; this will cause shadows to appear to pivot. McToon was also getting closer to and further from the camera, and this will make shadows get foreshortened when the object casting them is far enough away. That is actual perspective in action, and Dubay is hoping to find marks too stupid to understand this.
Next, footprints in the snow. Well, you’ll actually see SOME footprints in the snow in the shots Dubay is selecting; but the real issue here is that this snow has been compacted by heavy vehicles driving over it to make a flat area to work in (this space was also used by the Antarctic marathon runners…who of course never saw a sunset either.
No wind? There was wind in other videos.
No visible breath? You don’t get visible breath in dry air. I know this personally since humidity is often quite low here, though not nearly as dry as Way Down Under at Union Glacier.
The bit about the snow is easily explained: Witsit wanted to make sure the camera could see him pick up the snow, so he couldn’t be accused of just picking powder out of an (off camera) bucket. Funny that his due dilligence is being used against him.
A not unrelated rant: One thing a couple of Flerfers have accused me of is believing that the Earth is round solely because I was taught that in school. No. I’ve seen actual evidence for it outside of school, and of course as described above I have evidence that the Sun is far away (which wouldn’t rule out the ancient flat earth theories, but does rule out this stupid pizza world with a firmament model–sort of like a snow globe–that the current crop of FEs is fond of).
Remember, you’re simply watching the behavior of grifters dancing as the evidence that they are full of shit keeps piling up.
No Science Section
Neither the time nor the energy. Last week I divided the post in two and saved the other half off; but it needs fleshing out, a lot of it. I thought about covering a workaday-geology topic (e.g., streams), but it’s almost 9 PM.
23 days, 11 hours, 59 minutes until our Once and Future President, the Rightful President of the United States, is restored to his proper office.
Not that I’m counting, mind you.
[Assumes 0001 publication time. Wordpiss will be wordpiss and it’s unlikely to happen at that time.]
What is it that feeds our battle, yet starves our victory?
Speaker Johnson: A Reminder.
And MTG is there to help make it stick.
January 6 tapes. A good start…but then nothing.
Were you just hoping we’d be distracted by the first set and not notice?
Are you THAT kind of “Republican”?
Are you Kevin McCarthy lite?
What are you waiting for?
I have a personal interest in this issue.
And if you aren’t…what the hell is wrong with you?
Lawyer Appeasement Section
OK now for the fine print.
This is the WQTH Daily Thread. You know the drill. There’s no Poltical correctness, but civility is a requirement. There are Important Guidelines, here, with an addendum on 20191110.
We have a new board – called The U Tree – where people can take each other to the woodshed without fear of censorship or moderation.
And remember Wheatie’s Rules:
1. No food fights 2. No running with scissors. 3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone. 4. Zeroth rule of gun safety: Don’t let the government get your guns. 5. Rule one of gun safety: The gun is always loaded. 5a. If you actually want the gun to be loaded, like because you’re checking out a bump in the night, then it’s empty. 6. Rule two of gun safety: Never point the gun at anything you’re not willing to destroy. 7. Rule three: Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire. 8. Rule the fourth: Be sure of your target and what is behind it.
Not a whole lot of movement this week, but enough to push gold:silver over 89! It continues to suck to be heavy on silver and light on gold. Unless, of course, you think this is a buying opportunity for the white metal.
*The SteveInCO Federal Reserve Note Suckage Index (FRNSI) is a measure of how much the dollar has inflated. It’s the ratio of the current price of gold, to the number of dollars an ounce of fine gold made up when the dollar was defined as 25.8 grains of 0.900 gold. That worked out to an ounce being $20.67+71/387 of a cent. (Note gold wasn’t worth this much back then, thus much gold was $20.67 71/387ths. It’s a subtle distinction. One ounce of gold wasn’t worth $20.67 back then, it was $20.67.) Once this ratio is computed, 1 is subtracted from it so that the number is zero when the dollar is at its proper value, indicating zero suckage.
More Fallout from the Final Experiment
Flerfs seem to fall into two distinct camps lately: 1) Those who claim the whole thing is faked, and: 2) Those who claim that they can shoehorn what happened into the Flat Earth model somehow.
First one first: As more and more footage is being uploaded the claims some make that TFE videos were shot in a soundstage somewhere are looking more and more ridiculous. Aircraft landing, rides on snowmobiles or other vehicles to and from the Union Glacier camp to Midway (the area they did most of their experiments at) show this is no sound stage. Another claim, that the sun was somehow fake: The sun was real by the testimony of even the Flerfs who were there. Jeran burned holes through paper with a magnifying glass, which counters the notion that it’s some sort of sun simulator (never mind the fact that no simulator is going to light up miles of terrain like that).
Second, we’re seeing two main lines of attack. One is that someone named Steven Alonzo allegedly used the flat earth model to predict the sorts of things that Will Duffy asked about, matching Globe Earth predictions. The problem is he used globe based mathematical models to do so! (The sincerest form of flattery being imitation.) Alonzo has allegedly founded a “Flat Earth University” where he lives in Belize.
@2:43 (meaning 2 hours and 43 minutes):
The other is a new flat earth model by someone named Hanvey who has added yet more layers to the “firmament” in order to try to get reflected suns to behave the way seen. So far his videos haven’t impressed anyone except some Flerfers. However, it’s supposedly a work in progress.
Flerfs are counting on these guys to rescue them.
McToon (“Where are the guns, Nathan?!?!”) is going to be able to demolish both, or so he promises. He’s waiting to see which way the Flerfs (those who don’t wake the hell up) jump; to Alonzo or Hanvey.
Also in that video shortly after the bit about Alonzo (at about 2:46:15), is the story of the presentation they gave to the staff of Union Glacier Camp about the Final Experiment. Flerfer Austin Witsit spoke and was seen by the full time meteorologist at Union Glacier. That meteorologist was pissed at Witsit’s condescending attitude and eventually just left. McToon makes a very trenchant point here, which is that if the meteorologist is wrong, people die. If Witsit is wrong, he’s just a lying turd on the internet and his followers won’t die from it. Witsit can be wrong and suffer no consequences because he has no responsibility. The meteorologist can’t be wrong.
2:48:05: “That’s always the thing. They can spout their nonsense because they have zero responsibility. You have responsibilities, you don’t get to be wrong, and continue to be wrong, right? You’re done. You’re done. That’s how it works.”
But someday, someone will die from this crap, just as surely as DEI hires have caused lives to be risked or even lost.
Some Go-Backs
Regarding my article from five weeks ago, where I discussed trans-Neptunian objects (as well as Centaurs) as a class before diving in and looking at the ones that qualify as dwarf planets the following week. I really didn’t tie things together, and I saw something that made it clear.
The TNOs or Kuiper Belt Objects plus “Scattered Disk Objects” orbit just outside the orbit of Neptune. Why not closer? Because Neptune or some other object would eventually get too close to them, and change their orbit–possibly flinging them out of the solar system just like it did with Voyager 2; otherwise putting it into a smaller orbit. And why aren’t they further away? They seem to get as close as they can without Neptune mucking them up, no closer…but they exist right up to that line. Well, go back in time. Maybe there were plenty of these sorts of objects at varying distances…and once Neptune came on the scene, it took care of all of the ones too close to the Sun. In other words, it’s not a coincidence that the Kuiper Belt’s inner boundary is near Neptune’s orbit, rather Neptune caused the boundary to be where it is.
So what happens when Neptune manages to perturb one of these objects? It either gets a speed boost and goodbye…or loses energy and drops into an orbit closer to the Sun. Well…those are the Centaurs! And a Centaur will eventually interact with Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, or maybe go for a second round with Neptune. And at that point, it could either be flung out, or become a short term comet.
So now I’ve tied TNOs, Centaurs, and comets together in a way that takes a bunch of different conceptual “buckets” of things and relates them to each other.
(I’m not sure whether to add this to the article from five weeks ago…or to the one on comets…or both.)
Another thing I saw was someone throwing a bunch of solar-system objects (none of them moons) into a table, stripping the names off and considering things like: number of moons, orbit shape (eccentricity), orbit tilt (inclinations), distance from the sun, mass, size, and composition (gas, rocky, rocks with ice, ice with rocks). Of course this looks like a mess, but then he plotted one against another to find trends. For instance eccentric orbits tended to correlate with high inclinations. That’s kind of interesting (unlike most of the ones he showed at first). It got very interesting when he plotted size (diameter) against distance from the Sun. At that point, he got four distinct clumps. Not only that, but those four lumps tended to have the same compositions! So: the largest objects tend to be medium-far from the sun, and they’re all gaseous. The next larger group is closest to the sun and tends to be rocky. Then there’s a distant group–the most distant–of objects that are ice with some rock. Finally the smallest group, farther then the rocky groups, but closer than the gaseous group, that are rock and some ice. The four groups tend to have more things in common within the group: The gaseous objects tend to have more moons. The groups that are rock-ice mixes tend to have those elliptical, inclined orbits.
Of course, he cheated. He put the largest bodies in each of the four groups into the table to begin with. But he insists that even after he adds more and more objects, the groupings persist.
The implication is that the solar system has four different kinds of objects (aside from however you want to handle moons). In the order I described them: Gas giants, terrestrial planets, trans-Neptunian objects, and the asteroids. Now this doesn’t account for “round” versus “lumpy.” Everything except gas giants can be small enough to be lumpy.
Could this illuminate the path to classifying objects in the solar system? No one is satisfied by the current state of affairs, that’s for sure. One thing that has to be accounted for that isn’t, here, is the moons.
Geology
Geology has, until recently, been the study of Earth, the rocks of which it is composed, and how they change over time. In the last few decades, it has become extended to cover the other objects of the solar system, even though the word comes from the Greek γῆ (gê) ‘earth’ (in particular) and λoγία (-logia) ‘study of, discourse’. This is because much of what we have learned down here has served as a basis for studying what is up there, despite a myriad of fascinating differences. (Perhaps it would have been more useful for me to write this before doing the rest of the solar system.)
Geology is a gigantic subject, and since even today it has to do mostly with that ball of rock we stand on every day, it tends to have a ton of practical applications, everything from telling us where to dig or drill to get the good stuff, to advising us where to put buildings, to watching out for hazards like volcanoes and earthquakes. There are a lot of sub-specialties including mineralogy (the study of the actual mineral constituents of rocks), seismology, vulcanology, glaciology, speleology (caves), and so on.
In general outline, one goes from studying minerals, to rocks (composed of mixes of minerals), “unlithified material”–the sorts of things that end up on top of bedrock, like gravel and soil, but also magma (liquid material under the surface of the earth). And then there’s the whole earth, including tectonic plates, the structure of the earth (which I touched on last time).
And then there are landforms like mountains, streams, sand dunes, glaciers, hogbacks, alluvial fans (i.e., the deposits that form near the mouths of streams), and on and on.
A gigantic field with a lot of places where one can do a deep dive.
And to be honest, NOT something I have strong knowledge of. I’ll be learning a lot in doing this series. In the past I’ve had to look up details but at least I had a broad mental outline from which to proceed. With geology, though I know some things, the outline is much sketchier. I’m trying very hard not to get out ahead of my skis here.
It’s best for all of us if I start at the beginning. But before I do that, there are a couple of absolutely basic concepts I have to explain.
Rock Types and the Rock Cycle
Rocks come in three basic types.
The first is “igneous” rocks like granite and basalt. These are rocks that formed directly from cooling magma (and magma is the term for lava that is still underground). This can happen either deep underground as the magma cools (e.g., granite) or above ground when the magma spills out onto the surface during an eruption (e.g., basalt). You can tell how quickly the magma/lava cooled by the size of the crystals–big crystals mean it cooled slowly, so basalt, being the result of an eruption, tends to have smaller crystals than granite, which is formed deep underground and thus tends to cool slowly.
The second is “sedimentary” rocks, examples being shale, limestone and sandstone. These are rocks that form when other rocks erode, are carried elsewhere by water (usually) or wind (sometimes), and are deposited elsewhere as sediment, silt, sand…and then something other than heat or pressure happens to transform it into rock. Perhaps water with a lot of dissolved minerals flows through and the minerals out of solution, acting as cement.
Finally, there is metamorphic rock. This is rock that used to be one of the other two types, but was subject to heat and pressure–not enough to melt it, which would result in igneous rocks–but enough to make it change in structure. Marble is metamorphosed limestone, and slate is metamorphosed shale. Schists can form from either sedimentary or igneous rocks.
There are numerous ways rocks of one type can become rocks of another type, and the full picture is known as the “rock cycle.” A lot of geology’s “big picture” is encapsulated right here.
All three types can erode and form sediment (even sedimentary rock can go through it all again). Metamorphic rock can “cook” too long and go molten and become magma which can only become igneous rock. And so on.
OK, so maybe now some of the things I will have to refer to in the history will make more sense. I had to do this, because geology started when people started looking at rocks.
Early History of Geology
The ancient Greeks wrote some works on stones, in particular Theophrastus (372-287 BCE), and Aristotle, who made many observations on the slow rate of geological change. And then Pliny the Elder (who seems to have written on just about everything) wrote on minerals and metals. He died in the eruption of Vesuvius, 79 CE, a fitting way to go for a geologist…which was only one of his many interests. But Aristotle gets additional credit here because he tried to be strictly evidence-based when he said that geological change was slow. During the middle ages, the mantle was taken up by people in the Islamic world, with Ibn Sina (Avicenna in translation) proposing explanations for mountain formation, earthquakes and other topics. Also in China Shen Kuo (1031-1095) came up with a hypothesis of land formation based on observation of fossil shells in a mountain hundreds of miles from the ocean. He inferred that land was formed by the erosion of mountains and the deposition of silt–in other words, the creation of sedimentary rocks.
The first person considered a truly scientific geologist, however, was Georgius Agricola (1495-1555). He wrote De Natura Fossilium in 1546. This was the first systematic attempt to classify minerals, rocks and sediments since Pliny. He also wrote De Re Metallica (published 1556), which focused more on mineralogy, ores, and mining (and was considered authoritative for almost two centuries afterwards). The two books together made geology a scientific subject for the first time.
Nicholas Steno (1638-1686) gets the credit for some key laws of geology that underlie stratigraphy (roughly the study of rock layers). These are so important that it’s worth hitting the pause button and talking about them. They are:
Steno’s Laws of Stratigraphy
The law of superposition. In undeformed stratigraphic sequences, the oldest layers or strata will be on the bottom, with progressively newer deposits stacked upon it. This can be a bit tricky to apply as sometimes the layers are later flipped over at least 90 degrees, putting the newer layers on top. But there are ways to tell this has happened. Below is an example from Svalbard, Norway of layers of sediment–which eventually hardened into rock–with the oldest layers at the bottom.
The successive layering of rocks like this is known as stratification, and when the information is gathered from all over the world and assembled into a whole, it’s called “the geologic column.”
The principle of original horizontality. Layers of sediment are originally deposited horizontally (not at a slant) under the action of gravity.
Here is an example from the Colorado Plateau (this part of the plateau is actually in Utah). Layers are horizontal.
We now know that in special cases sand (for instance) can be deposited at a slope of up to fifteen degrees, particularly in sand dunes.
Getting ahead of ourselves, these layers were deposited in the Permian through Jurassic times. They show up in widely separated areas. Which brings us to:
The principle of lateral continuity. This states that layers of sediment initially extend laterally in all directions (but not forever). Based on this, rocks that are otherwise similar but are now separated by a valley or something else caused by erosion, were originally “connected.”
In the picture above those layers are seen in Capitol Reef national park and the Canyonlands national park. The different layers are named, from top to bottom: The Navajo Sandstone, layerd red Kayenta formation, red Wingate sandstone which forms cliffs, the sloped purplish portion is Chinle formation, the lighter red stuff further down is Moenkopi formation, and the white layer at the very bottom is the Cutler Formation. This picture isn’t from either of those two parks, rather it’s from Glen Canyon. The point being that these same layers can be identified and named even though they appear in differing places, separated by canyons that were cut through them after they were deposited.
You might get the impression that stratigraphy is purely about sedimentary rock, but lava flows can spill out over sedimentary layers, harden into (usually) basalt, and then be overlain later on by more sediment. This is going to turn out to be very useful, in fact. Also, sometimes igneous rock manages to penetrate through a vertical crack in sedimentary layers. When we see that it’s called a “dike” and it’s obviously newer than any of the layers it cuts through.
Another thing that make things a bit tricky is that a bunch of strata can be deposited, then whatever body of water lays there might disappear for whatever reason, and already-deposited layers can be eroded away. Much later, sediments can start depositing again, but now there’s a time gap at least as long as the dry spell. This is called an “unconformity.” Sometimes it’s obvious because the land tilts during the dry spell; you end up with non-parallel layers when that happens.
Sedimentary rock tends to form very extensive layers, called “formations.” This is different from popular usage where a “formation” might be a distinctive outcropping of exposed rock, like for instance these:
(Garden of the Gods, Colorado Springs). The big double-humped rock on the left is popularly called a “rock formation” but is actually part of at least two different formations in the geologic sense (and I am unable to find their names), as you can tell by the different colors. And this is an instance where the rock layers have been tipped on their sides, in this case by the events that formed the Rocky Mountains.
Geology Gets Going
OK so returning at last to the historical narrative, we are now in the 17th century and things started to take off here.
The Christian world at this time was starting to notice that different translations of the Bible could be significantly different, but the one thing they all agreed on was that the Noachian deluge had formed the world’s geology and geography. So the quest was on: prove with scientific evidence that the Great Flood had in fact occurred!
Yes: Many of these early geologists were what we would today call “Young Earth Creationists.”
So what happened when they went and looked?
In the early 1600s many people began to notice fossils…but there were arguments over what they were. Some thought they were legitimate preserved forms of actual creatures, and others thought they were somehow something that just happened as rocks formed, “sports of nature,” funny rocks that happened to look like things. As crazy as this sounds today, no one had any concept of how a dead animal or plant could somehow be transformed into a rock of the same size and shape. Robert Hooke (1635-1703), Steno, and John Ray (1627-1705) did much of the work to explain how this could happen.
One important thing is to note that fossils appeared only in sedimentary rocks, or possibly (if we were lucky) were still identifiable in metamorphic rocks that were originally sedimentary. Another is that fossils are usually formed from hard body parts, bones, shells, and exoskeletons. You’ll find fossils of clams, but not of jellyfish–not unless you’re extremely lucky. And this means that for those creatures who have their hard body parts on the inside (like vertebrates) it’s uncommon to get any impression of the skin. We are getting better at detecting such things even when they’re extremely subtle.
Hooke, Steno, and Ray rejected the notion that all fossils resulted from the Great Flood. In their minds there were too many of them, scattered throughout the geologic column all over the world, for it to have happened all within one year.
But others disagreed, and we had a school of thought in geology called “Diluvialism,” where the Great Flood is considered responsible for (at least) the fossils. This was a real hypothesis, being investigated by many responsible geologists, and was taken quite seriously for a number of decades.
During the late 1600s and early 1700s, diluvialism and a young Earth was most geologists’ starting point. It isn’t any more. What changed?
Diluvialists collected a lot of fossils, but they were “small stuff.” Dinosaur and mammal fossils had not yet been noticed–that would start rolling in the early-to-mid 1800s. In looking for fossils, mid 1700s geologists like Giovanni Arduino (1714-1795), Johann Gottlob Lehmann (1719-1767) and many others started noticing things about the rocks that contained them. Namely mountain building, volcanism (meaning igneous rocks), deposition (sedimentary rocks), etc. There were so many different kinds of processes they simply couldn’t have been all due to some single uniform process like the Great Flood. So, many reasoned, the recent stuff was due to the Great Flood, but other items in deeper, older strata were perhaps created from nothing or were products of the chaos that God put order to in Genesis.
Enter Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon (1707-1788), who eventually became hugely influential. He saw the huge array of things that those prior geologists had found, and decided to do some experiments. Buffon reasoned that the Earth as a whole was once hot (and is known to still be hot on the inside) so he heated spheres of minerals and recorded how long it would take for them to cool off. Extrapolating from this he determined that Earth was roughly seventy five thousand years old. He wrote that up in 1778, and the Sorbonne forced him to retract the claim.
James Hutton (1726-1797) was coming to a similar conclusion. He was a doctor by training but had become more and more interested in geology. He eventually wrote a book “Theory of The Earth” in 1788. He argued that nothing “special” had to be invoked to explain the Earth, just the same processes we see around us today, erosion and deposition. This was known as uniformitarianism, He also was the first to recognize metamorphic rocks as a distinct group.
However other geologists held out for catastrophism, brief catastrophic episodes, and not necessarily only the Great Flood; and they had good arguments for this. I’ll say more later.
By the end of the 1700s, due to these and many other lines of investigation, geologists were coming to accept that the Earth was far older than one would think, based on an absolutely literal reading of Genesis. They had to be dragged to this conclusion by the weight of what they were seeing. They didn’t want it to be true. They were Christians…and believed the Bible could not be wrong. They had to conclude that they were misinterpreting Genesis.
So now we had a couple of competing theories as to what was going on throughout this extended time. We already had the notions of uniformitarianism and catastrophism, which refer to the rates of changes, but what about the nature of the changes? We had the neptunists led by John Walerk, Johan Gottshalk Wallerius and Abraham Werner who thought all of the geographic strata–including igneous rocks! had formed from an ocean that had covered the entire Earth (sort of like a slow Flood).
The other competing theory was Plutonism, whose main proponent was Hutton. Here the Earth was formed through the gradual solidification of a molten mass (which was also what Buffon believed), volcanic processes were king. Hutton was convinced that the Earth was “immeasurably” old. (Which was certainly true…he couldn’t measure it!)
The truth of course is that both water and volcanism are important. “And” logic definitely applies. And this turns out to be true of uniformitarianism vs. catastrophism, too. Both happen. Remember Eugene Shoemaker and his asteroid and comet impacts? And remember the really bad day a lot of dinosaurs had ‘way back when.
As time went on, more and more evidence piled up. The Earth is old. We didn’t know how old, precisely, but figures in the range of a few thousand years rapidly became untenable. The evidence has only gotten much, much more weighty and our ability to date things much more precise, since then.
I’ve elided much in this account and I should be a bit more specific because I know some people simply won’t believe what I just wrote. So here’s just one avenue of investigation, out of many.
Mount Etna, on Sicily, overlooks the city of Catania, and it is the largest volcano in Europe. Furthermore, it’s always simmering, and erupts often enough, and usually mildly enough, that to the locals it’s just another aspect of the weather.
Scottish geologist Charles Lyell (1797-1875) visited Etna in the early-to-mid 1800s and realized he could estimate how long it had taken to build up to its present size. He was able to determine the size of the mountain, from the lowest lava layers which rest on limestone (which has fossils in it). He also knew that Etna erupts regularly, and that we had records of those eruptions clear back to Roman times.
Etna is about 3km high, and circular, with a radius of 25 km, so it roughly forms a cone, and the volume is approximately 2000 cubic kilometers. Going through the records, the average lava flow was about 0.02 cubic kilometers though there had been a larger eruption in 1669. On average, eruptions have been happening at a rate of 5 per century. So since Roman times (2000 years ago), we’ve seen a total of 2 cubic kilometers come out of Etna. If the rate of the last two thousand years is typical, then Etna is two million years old.
Of course, there’s an assumption there that the rate has held constant for two million years. But based on the distribution of the smaller cones on the slopes of Mt. Etna, and the fact that we can distinguish different lava flows, it looks pretty steady. If it were ever (say) a hundred times more active than it is now, we’d see fewer and bigger lava flows further down into the volcano. It probably has varied some, but not by nearly enough to make the difference between 2 million years and six thousand years. Consider: 99.9 percent of the lava happened over two thousand years ago; for 6,000 years to be the maximum age of Etna, that 99.9 percent would have to have happened within a span of 4,000 years–in other words five hundred times as fast on average, as the 2000 years we have historical records for. We’d know if Etna’s activity had changed that much, the volcano would look very different below the surface than it actually does.
[Modern dating methods apparently show an age for Etna of 500,000 years or so. Lyell was off by a factor of four, which isn’t bad given what he had to work with.]
There’s more to this particular sub-plot…but it will have to wait until I lay some more groundwork.
In particular, the next thing to talk about is the geologic time scale.
Final Thoughts
In the meantime, I’m going to drag out my soap box.
Today, Young Earth Creationists like to complain that no one will take them seriously when it comes to the age of the Earth, because the mainstream geologists have a “presupposition” that the Earth is old. They have to fight against a “mainstream” that is just predisposed against them. And no one will give them a chance.
What is a “presupposition,” anyway? Well, to start with let’s just say it’s basically walking through the door into nature’s classroom–a figure of speech meaning going out into the world and examining it–thinking you already know the answer to the question you want to (pretend to) ask.
Recall, though, that in the 1700s geology must have looked like a present-day Young Earth Creationist’s idea of paradise. The mainstream geologists thought just like they do, that the Earth was 6000 years old.
The geologists from the 1700s had a presupposition too, one that said the Earth is 6000 years old (give or take). I don’t fault them for it. They had nothing else to go on. It fell to them to find something. So what happened when these people and their presupposition went “through the door” and into nature’s classroom, went out into the field, got dirty and sweaty climbing hills and mountains, crossing ravines, wading in streams so they could look at rocks, take copious notes, making as many drawings, and finally, lugging samples?
These people realized their presupposition was wrong. The weight of the evidence was simply too great to bear. I alluded to Mount Etna, but that’s only a minuscule fraction of a percent of what has come to light both before it and after. It simply made no sense to people who had actually been there and done that with their eyes open and their brains engaged, to cling to a young Earth age.
They were good scientists. They didn’t let their preconceived notions force them to ignore what they saw. They didn’t behave like today’s Flat Earthers, cramming their fingers into their ears, squeezing their eyes shut and saying “Nuh-uh! I know it’s flat, anything else must be fake.”
And this was only the beginning. It’s now two centuries later, and the weight of now centuries of unearthed (literally) evidence points in the same direction.
Is someone aware of all of this holding onto a “presupposition” when they refuse to take seriously those that are ignorant (often willfully so) of that evidence?
Or is it the other way around? Is it the Young Earth Creationists who are the ones with the presupposition? Are they projecting? I maintain that the answer is yes. And today, I can fault them for it, because we have more than enough info to counter the presupposition. It’s worse than that though: The YECs from two centuries ago were willing to abandon their presupposition in the face of the evidence; the modern YECs will do their damnedest to come up with scenarios ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous to torture the data to make it somehow conform to the presupposition. They desperately cling to it in a way the prior YECs did not. And it is, right now, pushing many of them to a breaking point, as much of a breaking point as The Final Experiment is for the flerfs.
I’ve just made some strong statements in that paragraph, but I will be backing them up over the next few posts.
For those of you who haven’t just rage quit, see you next week.
What is it that feeds our battle, yet starves our victory?
This post is scheduled to go “live” at 10:01PM MST on Friday, December 20, 2024. That’s 00:01 EST on Saturday, December 21, 2024 for those of you in that benighted timezone near the Atlantic Ocean.
As of that moment, there are 30 days, 11 hours, and 59 minutes until our rightful President of the United States is restored to office.
Not that I’m counting, mind you.
January 6 Tapes Reminder
OK…I’m sick and tired of reminding you to no effect, Speaker Johnson, so I’ll do the more emotionally satisfying thing and call you a cowardly, lying, fraudulent sack of diarrhetic monkey shit.
Johnson, you are a cowardly, lying, fraudulent sack of diarrhetic monkey shit!
A Caution
Just remember…we might replace the RINO candidates. (Or we might not. The record is mixed even though there is more MAGA than there used to be.) But that will make no difference in the long run if the party officials, basically the Rhonna McDaniels (or however that’s spelled–I suspect it’s RINO), don’t get replaced.
State party chairs, vice chairs, secretaries and so on, and the same at county levels, have huge influence on who ultimately gets nominated, and if these party wheelhorses are RINOs, they will work tirelessly to put their own pukey people on the ballot. In fact I’d not be surprised if some of our “MAGA” candidates are in fact, RINO plants, encouraged to run by the RINO party leadership when they realized that Lyn Cheney (and her ilk) were hopelessly compromised as effective candidates. The best way for them to deal with the opposition, of course, is to run it themselves.
Running good candidates is only HALF of the battle!
Biden Gives Us Too Much Credit
…we can move on to the next one.
Apparently Biden (or his puppeteer) has decided we’re to blame for all of the fail in the United States today.
Sorry to disappoint you Joe (or whoever), but you managed to do that all on your own; not only that, you wouldn’t let us NOT give you the chance because you insisted on cheating your way into power.
Yep, you-all are incompetent, and so proud of it you expect our applause for your sincerity. Fuck that!!
It wouldn’t be so bad, but you insist that everyone else have to share in your misery. Nope, can’t have anyone get out from under it. Somehow your grand vision only works if every single other person on earth is forced to go along. So much as ONE PERSON not going along is enough to make it all fail, apparently.
In engineering school we’re taught that a design that has seven to eight billion single points of failure…sucks.
Actually, we weren’t taught that. Because it would never have occurred to the professors to use such a ridiculous example.
Justice Must Be Done.
The prior election must be acknowledged as fraudulent, and steps must be taken to prosecute the fraudsters and restore integrity to the system.
Nothing else matters at this point. Talking about trying again in 2022 or 2024 is hopeless otherwise. Which is not to say one must never talk about this, but rather that one must account for this in ones planning; if fixing the fraud is not part of the plan, you have no plan.
Kamala Harris has a new nickname since she finally went west from DC to El Paso Texas: Westward Hoe.
Lawyer Appeasement Section
OK now for the fine print.
This is the WQTH Daily Thread. You know the drill. There’s no Poltical correctness, but civility is a requirement. There are Important Guidelines, here, with an addendum on 20191110.
We have a new board – called The U Tree – where people can take each other to the woodshed without fear of censorship or moderation.
And remember Wheatie’s Rules:
1. No food fights 2. No running with scissors. 3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone. 4. Zeroth rule of gun safety: Don’t let the government get your guns. 5. Rule one of gun safety: The gun is always loaded. 5a. If you actually want the gun to be loaded, like because you’re checking out a bump in the night, then it’s empty. 6. Rule two of gun safety: Never point the gun at anything you’re not willing to destroy. 7. Rule three: Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire. 8. Rule the fourth: Be sure of your target and what is behind it.
(Hmm a few extras seem to have crept in.)
Spot Prices
All prices are Kitco Ask, 3PM MT Friday (at that time the markets close for the weekend). (Note: most media quotes are for the bid…the price paid by the market makers, not the ask, which is what they will sell at. I figure the ask is more relevant to people like us who wish we could afford to buy these things. In the case of gold the difference is usually about a dollar, for the PGMs the spread is much wider.)
Silver down over a dollar…which sounds bad until I tell you it went up fifty cents on Friday, and is still down over a dollar. So Thursday, it really sucked. And the gold:silver ratio is getting really, really bad.
The only thing that went up is…miracle of miracles…platinum, which is still on fricking sale.
*The SteveInCO Federal Reserve Note Suckage Index (FRNSI) is a measure of how much the dollar has inflated. It’s the ratio of the current price of gold, to the number of dollars an ounce of fine gold made up when the dollar was defined as 25.8 grains of 0.900 gold. That worked out to an ounce being $20.67+71/387 of a cent. (Note gold wasn’t worth this much back then, thus much gold was $20.67 71/387ths. It’s a subtle distinction. One ounce of gold wasn’t worth $20.67 back then, it was $20.67.) Once this ratio is computed, 1 is subtracted from it so that the number is zero when the dollar is at its proper value, indicating zero suckage.
It Sucks To Be A Flat Earth Charlatan
If you are a flat earth charlatan, my just telling you you suck would be the LEAST bad aspect of your life. How can you look at yourself in the mirror?
As for everyone else (including Flat Earth true believers–i.e., the victims of the charlatans), you all likely know that The Final Experiment (TFE) happened this last week. At this point the participants are on their way home, except for Critical Think, whose flight from Punta Arenas to Santiago Chile isn’t for another day or two. Then he flies directly from Santiago to Sydney Australia…oh, wait, I forgot, that flight doesn’t exist according to Flat Earthers.
In many cases they collected terabytes of data. (“tera” is what comes after “giga” if you don’t know. “Tera” equals “trillion” (twelve zeroes) and that should be easy to remember because both start with t.) One person recorded over 24 hours of 11K video (not a time lapse, full time video) of the sun. Others took numerous sun spot shots (and they have thousands of emails from people like me waiting for them, for comparison). But it’s taking them days to get back, and now they have to deal with the holidays. So don’t expect much out of them before New Year’s. As for the documentary the one flat-earther professional is putting together, who knows how long that will take. They have all kinds of stuff, that should sink this bullshit once and for all, but won’t, because many of their followers are having cult psychology kick in. “Terabytes of evidence against my position? It must be fake. I can’t possibly just be…wrong about this.”
I’ll post a couple of videos here, some of them are repeats. This one is SciManDan, a Glober who was not part of TFE, talking about various types of copium being taken by the Flerfs:
Here’s something new I found. Lots of clips up front of the Flerfer charlatans insisting that what was seen could not possibly exist–which to me would mean that what was seen invalidates the Flat Earth. But these people move the goal posts. Once that evidence comes up, they need something else…yeah, that is what you need to disprove flat earth. (Marred by the fact that Peterson confuses Ushuaia Argentina with Punta Arenas, Chile):
And this is one I posted earlier. McToon (Glober) is letting Nathan Oakley (Flerfer Charlatan) have it with both barrels.
Wolf took exception to this, thinking McToon was over the top. I disagree. Oakley is a fraudster. This is the least of what that species of “human” deserves. They should have “CON MAN” tattooed on their foreheads.
I will, nevertheless post a Nathan Oakley response:
Precession of the Equinoxes
We’ve got a lot of prerequisites fresh in our minds, so let’s take up precession of the equinoxes, a subject that seems to come up frequently. And I’d normally not touch it with a ten foot pole or a lot of graphics. An animation would be best honestly, and I found one but I wish it showed a bit more (like relation with the Earth’s orbit).
Remember this from last week?
Since the Earth’s axis of rotation is tilted about 23.5 degrees with respect to its orbit, the celestial equator is tilted 23.5 degrees with respect to the ecliptic, as shown below.
Last Week
But then I went on to say:
But since we’re thinking in a set of coordinates that goes from the celestial equator, we think of it the other way around: we think of the ecliptic being tilted with respect to the celestial equator.
Me rambling on more, last week
Well this time we are going to think the the way the diagram shows; the ecliptic will be the basis of another coordinate system, known as…drumroll…the ecliptic coordinate system.
There are actually two ecliptic coordinate systems, one centered on the Sun (heliocentric), the other on the Earth (geocentric). Since the planets generally orbit in planes almost aligned with the Earth’s orbital plane (which is the ecliptic plane), and the Sun is the center of gravity of the solar system, the sun-centered system is very useful for talking about the solar system. Indeed, even though I didn’t mention it at all in the recent series on the planets, I have used it here–go back to the articles on the great conjunction almost exactly four years ago; I did those plots in that system.
But we’ll focus on the Earth centered (geocentric) version this time.
For both systems (as well as the equatorial system I talked about) the primary line is the one pointing towards the vernal equinox (or March equinox, or (sometimes) the “first point of Aries”). It lies in the “reference plane” of all systems. For the ecliptic system, the “poles” are simply a line perpendicular to the ecliptic plane; in the diagram above they are called the north and south ecliptic poles.
In the ecliptic system, the two coordinates are called ecliptic longitude and ecliptic latitude and both are measured in degrees; no mucking around with hours of right ascension and minutes and seconds of arc that aren’t the same kind of minutes and seconds as the other minutes and seconds.
In the heliocentric system longitude is represented by l (italic lower case L) while in the geocentric system it’s represented by Greek letter lambda, λ. Latitude is represented by b (heliocentric) or β (geocentric).
Or, if you know the distance to whatever it is you’re considering, you can go Cartesian, a grid instead of spherical coordinates:
x = r cos β cos λ y = r cos β sin λ z = r sin β
The x axis points towards the first point of Aries, the y axis is 90 degrees counterclockwise from it in the ecliptic plane, and z points toward the north ecliptic pole. The formula is the same for the heliocentric system (swapping b for β and l for λ) and it was the Cartesian version of the helicentric system I worked with in those old posts from four years ago. (And similar conversions can be done with equatorial coordinates.)
[Digression: Both equatorial and ecliptic coordinates are considered “right handed” coordinate systems. Why? Imagine pointing the fingers of your right hand along the x axis, then bending them to point along the y axis (or, if in spherical coordinates, curling the fingers in increasing longitude or right ascension). Raise your thumb like “thumbs up” and it points along the z axis. On a left handed system, this works for the left hand instead. I find this easier than whiddershins and diesel or whatever those words were.]
Imagine a line drawn from “Autumnal Equinox” through the Earth to “Vernal Equinox.” It’s the intersection of the celestial equatorial plane and the ecliptic plane. (Two planes that aren’t parallel and aren’t the same plane, will intersect in a line.) It just happens to be the case that Earth is tilted in such a way that this particular line represents the intersection (and is the X axis in both the equatorial and ecliptic systems).
What if it were in a different place? It’s pretty arbitrary, isn’t it? Why couldn’t it be in a different place?
It would be, if the Earth’s equator were oriented differently–meaning, also, “if the earth’s axis were pointed differently.” Oh, I suppose the Earth’s orbital plane could shift, but that’s much harder than shifting the poles.
I can say this with confidence because the Earth’s axis does indeed shift direction! It does so without changing the angle between the celestial equator and ecliptic. Over the course of some 26,000 years the line of intersection shifts through a full 360 degrees. (And unlike almost everything else…it goes clockwise.) The first point of Aries precesses and the line points to the two equinoxes, so this is precession of the equinoxes.
If you are having trouble visualizing this, well, we’re both in luck. I found a good animation.
By about 30 seconds in you can see how it works.
The effect of this is to move the first point of Aries (represented with that symbol) around the ecliptic…which means it moves through the Zodiac. The first point of Aries was actually in Aries from about 2000 BCE to 1 CE, then it was in Pisces. It’s about to leave Pisces and shift into Aquarius (“the Age of Aquarius” actually means something…but nothing magic here).
As the first point of Aries moves, the Earth’s axis draws a cone through space, scribing circles on the celestial sphere centered on the ecliptic poles.
There are two other effects of this.
First off, it mucks up both equatorial and ecliptic coordinate systems, because the x axis, the primary axis…is moving! With ecliptic coordinates, you could probably just ignore this…and say we’re going to use the x axis direction from (say) 2000 and just leave it there. Big deal. The fundamental plane doesn’t change. Even if you let the X axis change, the Z axis does not, and you can just add or subtract a correction from ecliptic longitude and be current.
But this precession of the equinoxes absolutely hoses the equatorial coordinate system, because the fundamental plane itself shifts. And we can’t just go on using an old set of axes; the point of the equatorial system is so that you can be assured that if you set a telescope to a certain declination, it will stay at that declination as the earth rotates (even if you don’t have the telescope track whatever you’re looking at). So we issue new charts every fifty years ago, epoch 1950, epoch 2000; with all star coordinates shifted. At some point we will need to switch to something newer–or perhaps they’ll just let computers do the work of listing coordinates according to where the equinoxes are right now.
The other effect is on our year. Just like we have sidereal and solar days, the first being one rotation as seen from the stars, the other being one rotation as seen from the Sun, we have sidereal and tropical years.
A sidereal year is how long it takes for Earth to return to the same spot in its orbit, as seen from far away, in the stars (a sort of “God’s Eye View” of the situation). But our calendar does not track the stars, it tracks the seasons, and the interval between two crossings of the March equinox is called the “tropical year.” We set our calendar up so that the average length of a year (in whole days) is as close to one tropical year as possible. Otherwise, our calendar shifts with respect to the seasons. (We had trouble with that while following the “every four years is a leap year” rule. The calendar would slip against the seasons about 3 days every four hundred years. So we changed the calendar to drop three leap years out of every four centuries. The old schema is called the “Julian calendar” while the new one is the “Gregorian calendar”, each named after the person who instituted the system.)
A calendar year is the interval between one equinox and the next time we’re at that equinox, not (quite) the amount of time it takes for the sun to (apparently) return to the exact same place in the sky.
Actually since a calendar year is a whole number of days, we want the average length of a calendar year to be equal to the amount of time it takes to return to the same equinox (or solstice).
Since, as seen from either the north celestial pole or the north ecliptic pole, the Earth orbits counterclockwise but the equinoxes shift slowly clockwise, the effect is that one tropical year elapses just before the Earth can finish a full orbit with respect to the stars. How much before? About 1,224.5 seconds faster, roughly 20 minutes, 24.5 seconds. You can estimate the exact amount of time it will take the equinoxes to precess by dividing the number of seconds in a sidereal year by 1,224.5 and you get 25,772 years–which invariably gets rounded to 26,000 when you see this talked about in science popularizations. And this makes sense because it happens that the rate itself does vary; it’s not always 1,224.5 seconds per sidereal year.
13,000 years or so from now, Earth will be on the other side of its orbit when springtime hits the Northern hemisphere…but even though the Earth will be on the other side of its orbit, it will still be called March 21, because the calendar tracks the seasons, not the stars.
Speaking Of Earth
Go back through my series of articles on planets, moons, comets, asteroids and the Sun, and it appears I left one thing out, something fairly high up on the list.
The sixth largest body in the solar system.
Yep. I never talked about the third round rock from the Sun, Earth.
I picked that picture because it was taken from the Galileo space probe. The one that went to Jupiter. Before it got to Jupiter, it played gravity assist pinball, getting a boost from Venus then two assists from Earth. It was the first interplanetary probe to return to Earth (though it didn’t linger).
It also took pictures of the Simpson desert in Australia and the Ross ice shelf in Antarctica (the latter is a mosaic assembled from smaller images).
It was useful to see how Galileo’s cameras would behave taking pictures of a known target.
And the Earth is well known; we’ve been stomping around on it for millennia.
So: the basics.
Earth has a radius of 6,371 kilometers. (Try to take so much as one orbital dynamics class without having that number burned into your brain by the time of the final exam.) That is an average. Through the poles, it’s 6356.752 kilometers, through the equator, it’s 6378.137 kilometers. The mean density is 5.513 grams per cubic centimeter…and that is a record for any round body in the solar system. (Metallic asteroids will be higher of course.) It even beats out Mercury which has a large (for its size) core.
Density is useful for helping to figure out what something is made of. A lot of those outer planet moons have very low densities, indicating they’re mostly ice; others have slightly higher densities, indicating they’re more rock than ice…and so on. A typical rock has a density of about 3, and ice is just below 1.
I’ve often talked about the average density of different bodies in the solar system, and you may have wondered how we could possibly know this. It’s not as if we’ve sampled Earth at all depths, much less any of the other bodies we’ve only flown by once.
It turns out we can know this, relatively easily in fact. The average density of some planet or moon is its mass, divided by its volume, so we need to know two other things to get the density. Volume is easy: once you have a radius, r, you can compute the volume of the object via (4/3)πr3. Mass is a little trickier, but we can get most of the way there if something is in orbit around the body. The orbital speed for a circular orbit is v = √(μ/R). Since we’re after the mass, let’s rearrange that a bit: v2R = μ This time R stands for the orbital radius (not the radius of the planet). That other letter, Greek mu (μ), is the gravitational parameter of the body–that’s different for every body. So if we know the distance between the satellite and its primary, and we time how long it takes to orbit (T), we can get the velocity readily (2πR/T). We can substitute into the first formula and get μ = 4π2R3/T2 And then we have this “gravitational parameter” thingie, based totally on the orbital radius and the time it takes the satellite to orbit.
(Gravitational parameter is another thing we had burned into our brains…but at least I’ve managed to forget its value since then. I just looked it up, Earth’s gravitational parameter is 3.986 x 1014 m3/s2. Except I was used to deal with kilometers per second, so I used 3.986 x 105.
But we wanted mass. Well it turns out that μ is equal to the mass of the primary, M, times the gravitational constant, G. But that’s as far as we could go for about a hundred years; we could measure μ, but we actually had no idea what G was, so we couldn’t get from μ to M. In the late 1790s Henry Cavendish was able to measure the gravitational force between known masses, so this time, he knew the mass, and could compute G. As soon as he did that, every known value of μ, be it for Earth, the Sun, Jupiter, Saturn, could be used to compute a mass. So.
Earth is being orbited by the Moon, so we could do the calculations above and arrive at the total mass of the Earth, then divide by the volume. If a body didn’t have a satellite, though, we were SOL. So we found ourselves in the situation where we knew Uranus’s mass better than we knew the mass of Venus, even though Venus is much closer. Uranus has moons, Venus does not. And of course moons themselves didn’t have anything orbiting around them, so we couldn’t determine their masses, except in the case of our Moon, which is big enough to have a noticeable effect on the Earth.
Once we could send spacecraft out there, though, we could determine masses, by watching how much their trajectories bent as they flew by. That’s a hyperbolic orbit, and the formulae for it also contain μ.
So with Earth being far denser than typical rocks, what’s inside of it? One cause of higher density might just be that rocks deep down might compress some under the weight of the rocks above them, and we now know that this is part of it. But we still need Earth to be largely made of stuff quite a bit denser than average ol’ rocks.
And so we get something like this diagram (which is not to scale, the ocean and crust are drawn much too thick):
The liquid outer core and solid inner core are believed to be composed mostly of iron, with densities ranging from 9.9 to 13.1 grams/cubic centimeter. (Iron on the surface has a density of 7.874–clearly the iron in the core is compressed.) But given that we can’t drill down even to the mantle, much less down to the core, how do we know this? We can kind of guess that the innards are iron, since iron is very common in the universe (supernovas happen when stars try to fuse iron; the supernovas end up basically barfing the iron out into space). And we get meteorites consisting of mostly iron, to reinforce that. But liquid? How much?
That one’s a bit harder than computing average density. But the answer, in one word, is “seismology.”
If you think I’m just going to leave it there…you don’t know me very welly.
Seismic waves are waves through the solid material of Earth, resulting from earthquakes, volcanoes, movements of magma underground, and even man-made explosions. There are all sorts of different kinds of seismic waves, and different ways to divvy them up.
One is surface waves vs. Body waves. Surface waves travel along the surface of Earth, while body waves travel through the whole body of earth. Surface waves will tend to get weaker in proportion to distance, while body waves will get weaker in proportion to distance squared. (There’s a good intuitive reason for this. Think about a surface wave traveling away from its source ten kilometers. The entire energy of the wave is contained along a circle 2π x 10 km in circumference. Wait for the wave to reach a 20 km distance, all of the energy is distributed along 2π x 20 km of line. Twice as much, so the wave will be half as strong. Body waves travel outwards along consistent hemispheres, not circles, and the hemisphere’s area multiplies by four when the radius doubles.)
Body waves, in turn, come in two types: P (or primary) waves, and S (or secondary) waves. These names come from the fact that the P waves move faster, so they reach seismographs first. Below is an example, the P wave hits, then the S wave.
The two types are fundamentally different. P waves are longitudinal…which means that the medium the wave is traveling through moves in the same direction the wave is moving. This is very much the way sound works; the sound wave consists of denser and less dense atmosphere and the air molecules move towards and away from the sound source to build up bands of compression and rarefaction. Below is a diagram of a longitudinal wave traveling from left to right.
I said they are much like sound waves, and in fact when a P wave reaches the surface, it will often make a noise. Travel speeds are 330 m/s in air, 1450 m/s in water and 5000 m/s in granite.
Secondary waves are transverse (like light waves).
They take roughly 1.7 times as long to cover the same distance as a P wave, and there is one other key difference: They don’t go through fluids. P waves do but they will bend. In fact both will curve when the density of the medium changes (this is another example of refraction).
So we can glean some information about what’s inside the Earth just by looking at how seismometers in different parts of the world react to strong earthquakes. S waves never show up more than 103 degrees away from the epicenter of an earthquake, beyond that, you are in the S wave “shadow”–a shadow cast by a liquid layer deep inside the Earth. P waves have a much complex shadow pattern, as seen below, caused by an abrupt bend in the wave at the core boundary. The core doesn’t stop P waves, but it does bend them sharply.
So we know we have a liquid core outer core. How do we know what it’s made of? It does cause Earth’s magnetic field so we know it’s a metal. Meteorites (which came off other bodies of the solar system) come in many different types but occasionally one will show up that is almost pure metal, and that will be roughly 90 percent iron, ten percent nickel. (In fact the meteor that created the Barringer or “Meteor” crater in Arizona was an iron-nickel type.)
So that’s the beginning of how we know what’s inside there. We get the occasional mantle rock brought up by geologic processes, too.
[It just occurred to me this is another bit of evidence for a globe shaped earth. S wave shadows exist. Plot them on a globe, and compare to the origin of the waves. Then do the same on the flat earth disc. Which of the two patterns is symmetric and simple to explain, and which is just some random-seeming curve-bounded area with no obvious physical explanation? I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone else bring this up.]
I’m going to leave it there.
“But Steve, you skipped over Earth in your series on the planets, and this is all we get?”
You proceed from a false premise. This isn’t part of the series on the planets and moons and other stuff in our Solar System. That series is over.
This is the first part of a new series, on geology. There will be more, lots more.
37 days, 11 hours, 59 minutes until the Once And Future President, Donald John Trump, is restored to the office that was Rightfully his the last four years.
Not that I’m counting, mind you.
What is it that feeds our battle, yet starves our victory?
Our Turn
[Yes, I did this one five weeks ago. But it was too cathartic to just throw away.]
We’ve often seen that quote from David Plouffe: “It is not enough to simply beat Trump. He must be destroyed thoroughly. His kind must not rise again.”
This was of course a declaration of intent to annihilate not just Trump, but rather “his kind.”
You know what? I think we should flip it around. David Plouffe’s kind should be destroyed thoroughly and their kind must not rise again.
What is Plouffe’s kind? I suppose it depends on who’s talking and what they are thinking of in particular. Well, at the moment it’s me talking and I am thinking of the sort of maggot who is attracted to politics not to better his world but rather so that he can wield power over others, or line their pockets with “free” money. Often these people end up as what Ayn Rand called “pull peddlers,” receiving money in exchange for using their connections to do favors.
This type is parasitic. Utterly parasitic. And they should be destroyed thoroughly and not allowed to rise again.
The bad news is we will never eradicate them. Useless turds who can’t do anything productive will always be with us. As will the outright sociopaths.
Of course they find Trump to be their enemy. And of course they find us to be their enemy. If we won’t simply lie down and let our “betters” have their way with us, we’re a problem, we’re something to be got rid of. And of late, we haven’t lain down without a protest, as we are “supposed” to do. Dang uppity Garbage Deplorables! We don’t know our place!!!
The good news is we can provide far fewer niches for these parasites. The niches come into being when something that people formerly did of their own free will is taken over by the government; then every aspect of that activity becomes a political football.
Take for instance education. Since the government runs it, if you don’t like what’s being done, you have to form a political movement and try to work your way around the maggots embedded in the bureaucracy. If education were private, then if you didn’t like what they were doing to your child, you’d take your money and your child elsewhere. And people who didn’t even have school-age children presently would have no voice–and not have to pay money. Making it a government “thing” turned it into a political thing, and the maggots began to swarm.
So we wreck them by seriously cutting government and giving them fewer places to exist. Among all of the other benefits, the body politic would have fewer sociopaths and parasites in it.
People like Plouffe are the same type, but they are the full-on political hacks who set policy, rather than implement it. They’re just as bad if not worse; they help government grow, and steer it into serving its own ends, rather than those of the people it is supposed to be serving.
The Deep State is nothing more than a government that serves its own ends.
And we have had enough of this.
They must be destroyed thoroughly, and their kind must not rise again.
This election wasn’t the end, it was the beginning. There are millions of these malignancies in this country and we’ve just defeated two of them. Keep pushing. Now we can go after them wholesale.
It’s our turn.
Our turn.
Our turn.
OUR TURN!
You stole the 2020 election. You’ve mocked and ridiculed and put people in prison and broken people’s lives because you said this thing was stolen. This entire phony thing is getting swept out. Biden’s getting swept out. Kamala Harris is getting swept out. MSNBC is getting swept out. The Justice Department is getting swept out. The FBI is getting swept out. You people suck, okay?! And now you’re going to pay the price for trying to destroy this country.
And I’m going to tell you, we’re going to get to the bottom of where the 600,000 votes [are]. You manufactured them to steal this election from President Trump in 2020. And think what this country would be if we hadn’t gone through the last four years of your madness, okay? You don’t deserve any respect, you don’t deserve any empathy, and you don’t deserve any pity.
And if anybody gives it to you, it’s Donald J. Trump, because he’s got a big heart and he’s a good man. A good man that you’re still gonna try to put in prison on the 26th of this month. This is how much you people suck. Okay? You’ve destroyed his business thing. And he came back.
He came back in the greatest show of political courage, I think, in world history. Like, [Roman statesman] Cincinnatus coming back from the plough [returning to politics to rescue the Roman Republic]. He’s the American Cincinnatus. And what he has done is a profile in courage. We’ve had his back. But I got to tell you, he may be empathetic. He may have a kind heart. He may be a good man. But we’re not. Okay? And you deserve, as Natalie Winters says, not retribution, justice. But you deserve what we call rough Roman justice, and we’re prepared to give it to you.
Steve Bannon, on election night
OUR TURN!!
OUR TURN!!!
OUR TURN!!!
OUR TURN!!!
January 6 Tapes?
Paging Speaker Johnson…this is your conscience calling you out on broken promises.
For all your high talk about your Christian moral background…you’re looking less and less like you have any kind of moral background.
If You are a Patriot and Don’t Loathe RINOs…
Let’s talk about RINOs, and why they are the lowest form of life in politics.
Many patriots have been involved with politics, often at the grassroots, for decades. We’ve fought, and fought, and fought and won the occasional illusory small victory.
Yet we can’t seem to win the war, even when we have BIG electoral wins.
I am reminded of something. The original Star Trek had an episode titled Day of the Dove. It was one of the better episodes from the third season, but any fan of the original series will tell you that’s a very low bar. Still, it seems to get some respect; at a time when there were about 700 episodes of Star Trek in its various incarnations out there, it was voted 99th best out of the top 100.
In sum, the plot is that an alien entity has arranged for 39 Enterprise crew, and 39 Klingons, to fight each other endlessly with swords and other muscle-powered weapons. The entity lives off of hostile emotions, you see and it wants a captive food source. (The other 400 or so Enterprise crew are trapped below decks and unable to help.) Each side has its emotions played and amplified by the alien entity; one Enterprise junior officer has false memories implanted of a brother who was killed by Klingons. The brother didn’t even exist.
Even people killed in a sword fight miraculously heal so they can go do it again.
The second best line of the episode is when Kang, the Klingon captain, notes that though they have won quite a number of small victories including capturing Engineering, can’t seem to actually finally defeat the Enterprise crew. He growls, “What power is it that feeds our battle yet starves our victory?*”
Indeed. He may have been the bad guy, but his situation should sound familiar.
We are a majority in this country. We have a powerful political party in our corner. There is endless wrangling.
And yet,
What power is it that feeds our battle yet starves our victory?
In our case, that power is the RINOs in our midst. They specialize in caving when on the verge of victory. Think of Obamacare’s repeal failing…by one Republican vote. Think of the way we can never seem to get spending under control (and now our entire tax revenue goes to pay interest on the debt; anything the government actually does now is with borrowed money).
We have a party…that refuses to do what we want it to do, and that refusal is institutionalized. If you’ve been involved with GOP politics, but haven’t seen this, it’s because you refuse to see it. Or because you are part of the problem yourself. (If so, kindly gargle some red fuming nitric acid to clear the taste of shit out of your mouth, and let those not part of the problem alone so they can read this.)
We fight to elect people, who then take a dive when in office. But it’s not just the politicians in office, it’s the people behind the scenes, the leaders of the national, state and county branches of the party. Their job is to ensure that real patriots never get onto the general election ballot. They’re allowed a few failures…who can then become token conservatives who will somehow never manage to win (Jordan), or can be compromised outright (Lauren Boebert?).
That way it doesn’t actually matter who has a congressional majority. I remember my excitement when the GOP took the Senate in 1980. But all that did was empower a bunch of “moderate” puddles of dog vomit like…well for whatever reason forty years later the most memorable name is Pete Domenici. And a couple of dozen other “moderates” who simply had no interest in doing what grassroots people in their party–those same grassroots people who had worked so hard to elect them–wanted them to do.
Oh, they’ll put up a semblance of a fight…but never win. And they love it when we fight the Dems instead of fighting them. Just like that alien entity, whose motto surely was “Let’s you and him fight. It’ll be delicious!”
If you think about it, your entire political involvement has come to nothing because of these walking malignant tumors.
That should make you good and mad.
The twenty five who blocked Jordan, and the hundred people who took that opportunity to stab Jordan in the back in the secret ballot should make you good and mad.
I’ll close this with another example of RINO backstabbing, an infuriating one close to home.
In my county, the GOP chair is not a RINO. She got elected when the grassroots had had enough of the RINOs. Unfortunately the state organization is full of RINOs, and the ousted county RINOs have been trying to form a new “Republican Party” and get the state GOP to recognize them as the affiliate. I’m honestly amazed it hasn’t happened yet.
In other words those shitstains won’t just leave when they get booted out; they’ll try to destroy what they left behind. It’s an indication that they know we know how important that behind-the-scenes party power is.
So they must be destroyed. That’s the only way they’ll ever stop.
We cannot win until the leeches “on our side” get destroyed.
What power is it that feeds our battle yet starves our victory?*
We know it. What is going to be done about it?
*NOTE: The original line was actually “What power is it that supports our battle yet starves our victory.” I had mis-remembered it as feeds. When I checked it, it sure enough was “supports” and that’s what I originally quoted. On further reflection, though, I realized my memory was actually an improvement over the reality, because feeds is a perfect contrast with starves. I changed it partway through the day this originally posted, but now (since this is a re-run) it gets rendered this way from the start.
If one must do things wrong, one should do them wrong…right.
RINOs an Endangered Species? If Only!
According to Wikipoo, et. al., the Northern White Rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum cottoni) is a critically endangered species. Apparently two females live on a wildlife preserve in Sudan, and no males are known to be alive. So basically, this species is dead as soon as the females die of old age. Presently they are watched over by armed guards 24/7.
Biologists have been trying to cross them with the other subspecies, Southern White Rhinoceroses (Rhinoceri?) without success; and some genetic analyses suggest that perhaps they aren’t two subspecies at all, but two distinct species, which would make the whole project a lot more difficult.
I should hope if the American RINO (Parasitus rectum pseudoconservativum) is ever this endangered, there will be heroic efforts not to save the species, but rather to push the remainder off a cliff. Onto punji sticks. With feces smeared on them. Failing that a good bath in red fuming nitric acid will do.
But I’m not done ranting about RINOs.
The RINOs (if they are capable of any introspection whatsoever) probably wonder why they constantly have to deal with “populist” eruptions like the Trump-led MAGA movement. That would be because the so-called populists stand for absolutely nothing except for going along to get along. That allows the Left to drive the culture and politics.
Given the results of our most recent elections, the Left will now push harder, and the RINOs will now turn even squishier than they were before.
I well remember 1989-1990 in my state when the RINO establishment started preaching the message that a conservative simply couldn’t win in Colorado. Never mind the fact that Reagan had won the state TWICE (in 1984 bringing in a veto-proof state house and senate with him) and GHWB had won after (falsely!) assuring everyone that a vote for him was a vote for Reagan’s third term.
This is how the RINOs function. They push, push, push the line that only a “moderate” can get elected. Stomp them when they pull that shit. Tell everyone in ear shot that that’s exactly what the Left wants you to think, and oh-by-the-way-Mister-RINO if you’re in this party selling the same message as the Left…well, whythefuckexactly are you in this party, you lying piece of rancid weasel shit?
Justice
It says “Justice” on the picture.
And I’m sure someone will post the standard joke about what the fish thinks about the situation.
But what is it?
Here’s a take, from a different context: It’s about how you do justice, not the justice that must be done to our massively corrupt government and media. You must properly identify the nature of a person, before you can do him justice.
Ayn Rand, On Justice (speaking through her character John Galt, in Atlas Shrugged):
Justice is the recognition of the fact that you cannot fake the character of men as you cannot fake the character of nature, that you must judge all men as conscientiously as you judge inanimate objects, with the same respect for truth, with the same incorruptible vision, by as pure and as rational a process of identification—that every man must be judged for what he is and treated accordingly, that just as you do not pay a higher price for a rusty chunk of scrap than for a piece of shining metal, so you do not value a rotter above a hero—that your moral appraisal is the coin paying men for their virtues or vices, and this payment demands of you as scrupulous an honor as you bring to financial transactions—that to withhold your contempt from men’s vices is an act of moral counterfeiting, and to withhold your admiration from their virtues is an act of moral embezzlement—that to place any other concern higher than justice is to devaluate your moral currency and defraud the good in favor of the evil, since only the good can lose by a default of justice and only the evil can profit—and that the bottom of the pit at the end of that road, the act of moral bankruptcy, is to punish men for their virtues and reward them for their vices, that that is the collapse to full depravity, the Black Mass of the worship of death, the dedication of your consciousness to the destruction of existence.
Ayn Rand identified seven virtues, chief among them rationality. The other six, including justice, she considered subsidiary because they are essentially different aspects and applications of rationality.
I’m sure enough of this that I put my money where my mouth is.
The prior election must be acknowledged as fraudulent, and steps must be taken to prosecute the fraudsters and restore integrity to the system. (This doesn’t necessarily include deposing Joe and Hoe and putting Trump where he belongs, but it would certainly be a lot easier to fix our broken electoral system with the right people in charge.)
Nothing else matters at this point. Talking about trying again in 2024 or 2026 is pointless otherwise. Which is not to say one must never talk about this, but rather that one must account for this in ones planning; if fixing the fraud in the system is not part of the plan, you have no plan.
This will necessarily be piecemeal, state by state, which is why I am encouraged by those states working to change their laws to alleviate the fraud both via computer and via bogus voters. If enough states do that we might end up with a working majority in Congress and that would be something Trump never really had.
Lawyer Appeasement Section
OK now for the fine print.
This is the WQTH Daily Thread. You know the drill. There’s no Poltical correctness, but civility is a requirement. There are Important Guidelines, here, with an addendum on 20191110.
We have a new board – called The U Tree – where people can take each other to the woodshed without fear of censorship or moderation.
And remember Wheatie’s Rules:
1. No food fights 2. No running with scissors. 3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone. 4. Zeroth rule of gun safety: Don’t let the government get your guns. 5. Rule one of gun safety: The gun is always loaded. 5a. If you actually want the gun to be loaded, like because you’re checking out a bump in the night, then it’s empty. 6. Rule two of gun safety: Never point the gun at anything you’re not willing to destroy. 7. Rule three: Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire. 8. Rule the fourth: Be sure of your target and what is behind it.
Gold blooped up over 2700 on Wednesday then got beaten with the ugly stick the last two days, but still ended up a bit up for the week. Silver, however, didn’t end up for the week. Platinum continues to be on sale.
*The SteveInCO Federal Reserve Note Suckage Index (FRNSI) is a measure of how much the dollar has inflated. It’s the ratio of the current price of gold, to the number of dollars an ounce of fine gold made up when the dollar was defined as 25.8 grains of 0.900 gold. That worked out to an ounce being $20.67+71/387 of a cent. (Note gold wasn’t worth this much back then, thus much gold was $20.67 71/387ths. It’s a subtle distinction. One ounce of gold wasn’t worth $20.67 back then, it was $20.67.) Once this ratio is computed, 1 is subtracted from it so that the number is zero when the dollar is at its proper value, indicating zero suckage.
The Final Experiment Begins
I wrote this first bit on Tuesday. Then realized my mistake. Rather than try to edit it, I think I’ll just tack on the next bit, written on Wednesday, and leave both parts in, plus what I come up with Thursday and Friday. It might give you some insight into what I choose to call a “thought process.”
My First Take [Written Tuesday, to be read Saturday]
It starts today. After a few days’ travel the four Flat Earthers, four Globers, and Will Duffy (who put the whole thing together) have now arrived at nearly 80 degrees South latitude, where they will enjoy several days of uninterrupted daylight.
Assuming, of course that globe earth is true. I’d normally not have to put that caveat in but under present circumstances, it’s necessary.
I contacted Will Duffy and will be taking photographs of the Sun over the next few days to bolster the data set. People all around the globe will be doing this.
Duffy dropped a video on Tuesday the 10th, mentioning someone that dang near everyone forgot. Including me, though as I watched the video I did guess what it was before he said it.
The video starts with a recap. Before the Final Experiment was announced, the Big Name Flat Earthers were adamant that there was no 24 hour sun in Antarctica. Once the Final Experiment was announced, they scurried like cockroaches when you flick the lights on, coming up with crazy rationales…followed by more crazy rationales.
Oh, the participants (including the Flat Earthers, who are really paid off shills) secretly went to the NORTH six months ago and filmed the sun there. Whoops–that won’t work, because the Sun would be traveling in the wrong direction. No problem, the film will be run backwards. Except that one of the Flat Earthers plans to wear a body cam. Run THAT backwards and people will be walking backwards. That string of Grade-A Stupid was their second resort; it came about after the first suggestion–that they’d be going north right now was instantly shot down on the grounds that you have 24 hour darkness in the Arctic right now.
[It’s funny that they’re changing their position on what a 24 hour sun means before they see the results. It’s almost as if they knew all along that the Final Experiment would show a 24 hour sun and were lying six months ago, and for years before that, when they said there was no 24 hour sun in Antarctica, but willing to stake their whole line of bullshit on it because they figured no one would actually offer to send them on a $31K trip to see for themselves.
Yeah, almost as if. In fact, these people are duplicitous cunts.]
There is not only a twenty four hour sun according to the Globe model…there is going to be a 24 hour moon! And, at least up to six months ago, Flat Earthers would have considered this impossible too. But! No one has ever videoed it, at least nothing can be found on YouTube.
(Contrary to grifter flerfer assertions, there are plenty of 24 hour Antarctic sun videos on YouTube, and not just the one that had an edit in it that was readily acknowledged and explained by the uploader…once someone actually bothered to ask him instead of leaping to conclusions about his motives. Of course the flerfers will say ALL of these have been doctored but when you demand evidence for that they change the subject.)
On the 14th the moon will be full. It should be visible in daylight, opposite the sun. If the Sun is to the north, the moon should be visible to the south. If the sun is to the west, the Moon should be visible to the East.
By the 19th the moon will be a waxing gibbous (as seen from the northern hemisphere, the right hand crescent is dark; it should be the left hand side as seen in Antarctica because the observer is upside down with respect to what we’re accustomed to (we in the Northern Hemisphere I think). At that point it will follow the Sun around the sky, trailing it by a bit less than 120 degrees. (If the sun is directly in front of you (“twelve o’clock”) the moon will be at about four o’clock. Both will move right to left [not left to right as in the Northern hemisphere].)
For those who need a quick refresher on terms like “twelve o’clock” and “four o’clock” as directions:
A nice timelapse from the 17th onward should show a visible change in the moon’s phase over the span of 24 or better yet 48 hours. Let’s see what Will Duffy comes up with.
Flat Earthers: What are you going to do if there’s not only a 24 hour Sun, but also a 24 hour Moon? Are you going to create a brand new set of outrageous theories and ridiculous excuses for the Moon, like you did for the Sun? Or will you just do the right thing, and finally acknowledge that we live on a globe?
I am throwing down the gauntlet, right here, right now. If we return from Antarctica with videos of both a twenty four hour sun, and a twenty four hour moon, this debate is over. Done. Finished. This is The Final Experiment.
Will Duffy of The Final Experiment, in the video linked above
But this is actually WRONG! [Written Wednesday]
In fact, I realized on Wednesday that the Moon will not be visible at all from Antarctica at this time of year! (And I am by no means the only person to realize this. Plenty of comments for the video, in fact, are from people who spotted this. They checked online. I, on the other hand realized from first principles there would be a problem.)
What!?!
[At this point, I wrote what eventually became the science part of this post. You can go read it, or not…but what follows might not make sense without it.]
OK, let’s step back a bit, and get back to the Final Experiment, applying what we’ve learned.
The reason there’s a twenty four hour sun near the June solstice in the Arctic or near the December solstice in the Antarctic, is because the sun’s declination is extreme enough that it never sets in these locations. If you look at that last diagram, right now the Sun is near the left hand side, almost where that sun is drawn onto the far side of the sphere. Look carefully, it shines onto the south pole, albeit at an oblique angle. Earth rotates, but no matter what, the south pole is lit as long as the sun stays near there. That’s the current situation in Antarctica.
“Okay, Steve, but we dove down this rabbit hole because you got cranky about the twenty four hour moon. So what about the moon?”
The moon will be full on the 14th. Which means that on that day, it is on the opposite side of the celestial sphere from the sun. That way the Sun lights up the same side we are looking at, because the Sun is behind us as we face the Moon.
Is the Moon exactly opposite of the Sun on the celestial sphere? No. It usually is not exactly opposite on a full moon. But when it is, we get a lunar eclipse, because the Moon is actually traveling through the Earth’s shadow.
We need to know a bit more about the Moon’s orbit. Wikipedia says the inclination of the Moon’s orbit is 5.145 degrees relative to the ecliptic. (Oh, goody, just for once the data is in the most convenient form!) The plane of the Moon’s orbit intersects the ecliptic just like the celestial equator does, somewhere. In fact that intersection line moves a lot. But we don’t need to know where. We just need to know that the moon is never more than 5.145 degrees away from the ecliptic.
Now since we’re conservatives and old school, we go to a table and look something up. the declination of the Sun on December 14th:
The table says 23 degrees, 11 minutes south. Or almost exactly 23.2 degrees south. That’s the declination of that point of the ecliptic.
The opposite point on the ecliptic…near where the Moon will be, since it’s full on that date, is at 23.2 degrees north declination. The Moon is not more than 5.145 degrees off of this. I’m going to round that to 5.1, and say the Moon will have a declination of between 28.3 and 18.1 North.
So if I duck-duck-go that, there’s another table of lunar declination and it turns out that on the 14th the moon will be anywhere from 25 1/4 degrees to 27 1/4 degrees north declination. Later on the 16th its declination will be almost 26 1/2 degrees north.
That’s close to where the right hand Sun is in that diagram above. THAT Sun always shines on the north pole as the Earth rotates, never on the south pole.
In other words, if the moon is at that point (and it will be), it won’t be visible from the south pole, or anywhere within 25 degrees of the south pole. It will be below the horizon, all of the time. They will never see the moon at all.
If Will Duffy is expecting to take a video of a twenty four hour moon while he’s down there, he’s going to be sorely disappointed.
Is Will Duffy a chimp who didn’t think to check on this? Well, let’s think about this very carefully.
The moon not being visible in Antarctica for days is also a prediction of the Globe Earth. The flat Earth would never make a prediction like this, for exactly the same reason it won’t predict either 24 hours of sun or 24 hours of darkness in Antarctica. So if you are in Antarctica and don’t see the moon “over there” away from the Sun, like I described above, and never see it for days on end, the Globe model is in fact successful. Furthermore, any sight of the Moon would be evidence against the Globe Earth.
But note I not only said “you,” I emphasized it. Because there’s an important epistemic point here. If you don’t go to Antarctica, but someone else goes and says he didn’t see the moon, do you trust him? If he shows you pictures of a sky with no moon in it, how do you know he didn’t just face the wrong way deliberately when taking the picture, to avoid photographing the moon that was actually there? Oh, a really hard-core fisheye would photograph the whole sky…and immediately be condemned by the flerfers as NASA photoshop. (And you’d want a filter over it, one that wouldn’t let the moon through, because you don’t want the Sun–which will also be there–to burn a hole in your camera’s sensor.) The point is, someone who went to Antarctica can’t prove to you that he didn’t see the Moon. [He can prove to you that he saw the Sun, by producing photos with the Sun in them, but a photo with no Moon in it can happen even if there’s a Moon up.]
And the big-name flerfers who aren’t going to Antarctica A) won’t accept anything a glober says and B) won’t accept the testimony of the flerfers who went. [They’ll believe it because based on their recent behavior, they know the globe is true. They won’t accept it, though because that would be them admitting they are grifting pieces of shit.] Remember, now the flerfers in Antarctica are all “shills” just for having the intellectual integrity to go and look!
So how do you prove the Moon is behaving in accordance with glober predictions?
You have someone in the Arctic make the movie of the 24 hour moon. Because the moon will be 24 hours as far south as 63 1/2 degrees north latitude. In other words, Fairbanks will be able to see it for a few days. Prudhoe Bay will have no trouble seeing it the full length of time. People in Northern Scandinavia and Russia will have no trouble. There are plenty of people “up” there (I’ve even seen YouTube channels by some of them, talking about the round the clock darkness). And a pro photographer with the right equipment should be able to get “up” there, too.
And I believe this is what Will Duffy is doing.
He talked about a 24 hour moon happening at this time. He talked about a 24 hour moon happening in Antarctica (without being specific as to when). He never quite says he will see the 24 hour moon on this trip.
“But, he says he’s going to make a video!”
No, he says he will hopefully procure a video of the 24 hour moon. Elsewhere he says obtain. Not take it. Procure it, obtain it, do not necessarily mean he makes it himself.
Alternatively, he had someone film a 24 hour moon, six months ago, during Antarctic night.
I don’t think he’s a chimp who forgot to look it up. His phrasing is too careful. He knows.
I do think, though, that an Arctic 24 hour Moon won’t be helpful; if Flat Earth can predict a 24 hour Sun during north hemisphere summer time, it should have no problem with 24 hour Moons in the Arctic. What Flat Earth has a harder time explaining is why 24 hour full Moons only occur in the Arctic around December. What forces the Moon to be at its farthest north when the Sun is at its farthest south? They’re running around in two separate race tracks over the disc in that model.
OK, so let’s think about this, some. Imagine being at the south pole, just before sunrise. Early September. You have 24 hour pre-dawn twilight. The moon could well be above the horizon when it is at first or third quarter (a “half moon”) and it would be up for 24 hours. That would be another cool way to get a 24 hour moon video. And that could have happened just this last September. That would be a 24 hour moon in Antarctica, filmed under conditions short of completely brutal.
So I’m waiting to see what Will has up his sleeve.
Thursday Writings
A slight clue dropped on Thursday…Duffy dropped another video acknowledging the difficulty, and agreeing that he never actually said he expected to see a 24 hour moon this coming week.
It doesn’t tell us how he’s planning to do it. Some commenters speculate he’s simply planning to stay for an extra week until the moon rises. That would be cool, but I think he want some witnesses, preferably at least one flat Earther, to stay with him.
More Goodies
Jeranism, one of the flat Earthers going to Antarctica, was near the southern tip of South America this last week, preparing to fly to Union Glacier. He made this video in the middle of the night, twilightdirectly to the south. This is in perfect accord with the globe model, where at that latitude (56 degrees south, if memory serves) the sun is just twelve degrees or so below the horizon at that point in the circle. The flat Earth model does not allow for this, so he has already seen enough evidence that he should give it up. I heard elsewhere he had noted the sunrise and sunset being to the southeast and southwest, also in perfect accord with the globe (as I will explain in the “science” section).
Astronomical Coordinate Systems
This is a bit of a quick and incomplete lesson on celestial coordinates. This is a working tool of astronomy that often gets glossed over in popularizations and certainly in “science journalism.” But there are millions of amateur astronomers who know this stuff really well.
In order to look at something, you have to know where to look, and in order to report a discovery (and amateur astronomers often make discoveries, e.g., of comets), you have to be able to tell others where to look.
Astronomers in some ways operate in a two dimensional realm. If you specify a direction without a distance, you know where to look, since everyone is pretty much at the same location, Earth. (This direction can change slightly when it’s the Moon we are talking about–this is how the ancient Greeks figured out how far away it is. Everything else is so far away, the difference across the 13,000 km diameter of the Earth is insignificant.)
Astronomers have this concept of a “celestial sphere” for visualization purposes. It’s not a literal hard surface, but they conceive of it as being centered on the observer, with a very large, perhaps even infinite, radius. You are on the inside of the sphere, looking outward. The surface is two dimensional, and astronomical coordinates specify points on that sphere with two numbers. (In the deep sense that’s what “two dimensional” means).
How do those coordinates work? There are multiple schemes used. There are two major different systems; they work totally differently and each have their strengths and weaknesses. Astronomers (particularly amateur astronomers) think in either or both systems depending on context. There are two other commonly used ones as well, one of them quite useful for working in the solar system (so I should have covered it a few months ago, right?), the other more useful for discussing the Milky Way galaxy. I’m not going to discuss them here.
Let’s take up the conceptually easy one first.
Local Horizontal Coordinates
Imagine yourself standing on a flat plane, the horizon plane. It’s basically an extension of the horizon out to infinity.
The celestial sphere is centered on you. How do you specify locations on it? First, you measure along the horizon an angle from north, clockwise. This is called the azimuth. North is 0, east is 90, south is 180, west is 270, then back around to north which is sometimes called 360 as well as 0.
Then you measure up from the horizon, another angle. This is called the altitude (or more often in my experience, the elevation, but this diagram says altitude).
The zenith is directly overhead. Azimuth can be anything, elevation is 90 degrees. One more important line is the “celestial meridian,” the line running from due south to the zenith, and then down to due north. This doesn’t seem to mean much at this point but it will turn out to be very useful.
This system is also used a lot in aviation, it’s ideal, for instance, for specifying the direction of an airplane seen by a radar. Also, those numbers at the ends of runways actually are a reference to azimuth; an runway with (say) 15 painted at the end runs in the 150 degrees azimuth direction. That’s the direction you need to point your plane to land on that runway (assuming you want to stay on that runway after touching down, that is). The one difference is here they determine which way north is with a compass, rather than off of true north. And, yes, at the other end of the runway the number is 33, because if you’re landing there, you’re flying in the opposite direction, which will differ by 18 (= 180 degrees).
Artillery is another application. Once they’ve computed the exact direction you need to fire the gun (based on a number of things including curvature of the earth) it’s easy to tell someone to point the gun at azimuth 267 elevation 39. (Actually I think they are more precise than that.) Also surveying; it’s relatively easy to measure the direction of a mountain, then how far it sticks up above the horizontal plane.
Some telescopes have mounts that swivel around a vertical axis, then allow you to tilt the telescope up; this is called an “azimuthal” mount (or more commonly, an “alt azimuth” mount) because it naturally follows this coordinate system.
An alt-azimuth mount is used for a lot of very large amateur telescopes; the other alternative (which will be discussed in due course) is much more expensive and impractical for large telescopes.
But there’s an even more specialized case. There’s a thing called a “transit telescope.” It does not swivel horizontally at all. It can only move in elevation. And it’s fixed so that its azimuth is either 180 or 0. In other words it can point only along the celestial meridian. Here is an example:
It doesn’t seem like such a thing would be very useful, but in fact it’s very useful. I’ll explain in due course.
The local horizontal coordinate system, by the way, works quite naturally for flat Earthers as well. In fact it’s in some ways more natural for them, because everyone on Earth is believed by flat Earthers to have the same horizon plane. On a spherical earth, every point on the globe has its own unique version of this system (though it’s very hard to tell the difference for distances less than a few miles). The ancient flat earth model had the celestial sphere at a great distance (effectively infinity) so this was a natural for them (the earth was flat and finite, and the stars were fixed to a literal sphere that would rotate around the earth, with stars actually going under the earth after they set). The modern flat earth model conceives of the sky as being a big physical dome only a few thousand miles away, so it makes some difference where you are on earth, describing the location of some star. You could be directly under it, but someone a few thousand miles away will see the star as not being overhead. The orientation of the system is the same for both people but their centers will be offset enough to make a difference.
So LHC is easy…but it has a major drawback. As the Earth rotates west-to-east, the sky appears to rotate east-to-west, and the stars will move along arcs that do not conveniently follow either the elevation or azimuth axes of such mounts. Literally from one second to the next, the stars change coordinates!
[A geek inside joke: LHC is a “left handed” coordinate system, unlike most, and people often claim that LHC really stands for “left handed coordinates.”]
Celestial Coordinates
It would be handy to have a system where the stars do not change coordinates. That way you can look up a star’s location. You then have to do some math to figure out, based on your location and the time, where the star should be in your local horizontal coordinates, but at least you can (in principle) do the math and know where to look. (Nowadays there are web pages and apps to do that for you.) But there’s a very important point here. The formulae to do this were derived based on a full celestial sphere (not a flat earther dome) and they require your location specified on a globe. If the Earth were flat, and the stars on a small dome, these formulae would not work because they’d be based on nonsense.
But they do work. Perfectly. You can predict sunrise and sunset times and azimuths decades in advance. You have to correct for refraction which is worse near the horizon, but then these formulas are dead-nuts on, without fail. The celestial sphere and spherical earth models work, and they work because the models are in accord with reality. Flat earth provides you no mathematical method whatsoever to even attempt to do these computations…much less a method that would actually give you the right fooking answer every time, in every place.
With that rant out of the way, I have to do an aside: There’s a caveat about what I am about to describe. Absolutely nothing in the sky is truly stationary. But there are fast motions (the Earth’s rotation, the Earth’s orbiting the Sun, the motion of the Moon and planets) that you can readily observe, and others that take decades to become apparent, and even then perhaps only with very sensitive instruments. We will ignore everything but the fast motions. I’m going to skip right past precession of the equinoxes and proper motions of the stars and perturbations to the Earth’s orbital plane. They’re there, but too small to make any difference in the short term, and people usually teach them after they teach the “simple” case I am presenting here. OK, finally we can move on.
I alluded to there being four major systems. The other three are all designed so that star, galaxy and nebula coordinates don’t change (at least not over the span of decades). They are the equatorial, ecliptic, and galactic coordinates. We are going to talk about equatorial coordinates here. How do they work? They are actually defined by analogy with the Earth. With the Earth, we specify two numbers and they identify a unique point on the Earth’s surface. (The fact that the Earth isn’t quite spherical introduces a lot of complications that only matter when you’re trying to be really, surveyor-grade precise…ugly, ugly math; I’ve had to deal with it.)
Similarly we can specify two numbers, and identify a specific location on the celestial sphere, and we even have analogues to the equator and poles.
On Earth, we have latitude and longitude. Latitude essentially [not quite because it’s an ellipsoid] measures distance away from the equator, in degrees along the Earth’s curved surface, or in other words, how far north or south the point is. Longitude measures an angle east or west from some meridian line (a line which runs from the north pole to the south pole, intersecting the equator at a ninety degree angle). The choice of meridian line is arbitrary; we’ve settled on using the one that runs through the observatory at Greenwich, England.
We can do something similar to latitude and longitude on the celestial sphere. It turns out that since the Earth rotates, we can extend that axis of rotation (which goes from the north pole through the center of the earth to the south pole) out to infinity; the points where it touches the celestial sphere are the north and south celestial poles. The poles are stationary [aside from the caveat above].
Similarly you can think of a plane that goes through the equator of the Earth and the center of the Earth. You can extend that out to infinity, and where it crosses the celestial sphere, that is the celestial equator.
You can measure an angle from the celestial equator north or south to some object out in space (a planet, star, nebula or galaxy). However, we don’t call it a latitude, we call it a declination.
The constellation of Orion actually straddles the celestial equator. If you are in the northern hemisphere, the right hand star of the three on Orion’s belt, Mintaka, is nearly dead-on the celestial equator; it’s 0.3 degrees south declination. (If you’re in the southern hemisphere, Orion looks “upside down” compared to what we see in the US, and Mintaka will be the leftmost star in Orion’s belt. If you’re still confused, it’s the first of the three to rise or set.)
The stars are stationary [besides the caveat]. On the other hand, the planets–indeed any object within the solar system–move visibly.
The Earth orbits the Sun. That causes the Sun to appear to move against the celestial sphere. The Earth’s orbit is a plane. The intersection of that plane and the celestial sphere is yet another circle, called the ecliptic.
Since the Earth’s axis of rotation is tilted about 23.5 degrees with respect to its orbit, the celestial equator is tilted 23.5 degrees with respect to the ecliptic, as shown below.
But since we’re thinking in a set of coordinates that goes from the celestial equator, we think of it the other way around: we think of the ecliptic being tilted with respect to the celestial equator.
The other planets’ orbits are in almost the same plane as our orbit. So what we see from Earth is that the other planets stick pretty close to the ecliptic. From the outside, looking in, looking at the solar system edge on, they stay almost in the same plane, sometimes a bit above and a bit below:
So when we draw the celestial sphere, we can draw the ecliptic on it. This line is the line the Sun appears to move along in the course of a year. The constellations this line goes through are the zodiac. Sort of. It actually goes through Ophiuchus as well as the “astrology sign” twelve, between Scorpius and Sagittarius, but no one is an Ophiuchus. (Actually since Ophiuchus is the “Serpent Bearer” Steve Irwin could have qualified. Unfortunately he was born at the wrong time of year.)
There are four key points on the ecliptic. Two of them are where the ecliptic intersects the celestial equator, they are the equinoxes, one the vernal equinox and the other the autumnal equinox. As the sun (appears to) move(s) along the ecliptic (counter clockwise in the diagram above) over the course of a year, it will cross from south of the celestial equator to being north of it at the vernal equinox, then from north to south at the autumnal equinox. The other two points are unlabeled on the diagram; those are the ones where the sun is furthest north or south from the celestial equator, these are the solstices. The December solstice is near the left edge of the diagram, the June solstice is near the right edge.
The solstices are where the Sun is at its minimum and maximum declination, respectively. (Stop and think about that, until it’s clear.) This is why the Sun is low in the sky at noon in December, and much higher at noon in June (or vice versa for southern hemisphere folks).
Those four points define the beginnings of the seasons. For example the center of the Sun’s disc will cross the vernal equinox at 3:01 PM Mountain Daylight Time [you guys in the Eastern time zone can do the conversion for a change instead of making us people in flyover country do it] on March 20th, 2025. That is the beginning of northern hemisphere spring. More immediately and relevantly, at 2:20 AM Mountain Standard Time on December 21 (a week from today), Winter begins; the Sun is, at that moment, at its lowest declination, or (another way of saying the same thing) its greatest southern declination. It’s pretty close to that declination right now.
I haven’t yet talked much about the celestial sphere equivalent of longitude, and deliberately so; I needed to discuss the ecliptic first. Because it turns out the vernal equinox is the “reference longitude” on the celestial sphere. It’s the zero line.
Only we don’t call it longitude, we call it “right ascension.” And traditionally, we don’t measure it in degrees, we measure it in hours, 24 to the circle–fifteen degrees make up one hour. And in minutes, 60 to the hour, and seconds, 60 to the minute. (Unfortunately degrees are divided up into 60 minutes and the minutes are devided into 60 seconds, so now we have two different kinds of “minutes.” A minute of right ascension is four minutes of the 360 degree circle.
(Sometimes right ascension is measured in degrees, that’s probably going to become the standard someday.)
Why is it called right ascension? I don’t know. This is a puzzler, because as seen from the Earth the numbers go up to the left, as you face south. (We are “outside” the sphere in the next diagram, in a sort of “God’s Eye View,” so they go up to the right. Maybe God named it right ascension.)
So here’s that first “celestial sphere” diagram, with the declination and right ascension lines and ecliptic, and solstices, and equinoxes, drawn onto it. The really bright “Sun” is at the Vernal Equinox. The one farthest to the right as you look at the diagram is the June solstice, the one on the far side of the globe is the Autumnal equinox, and all the way over on the left, is the December solstice.
Here is a map, plotted as if declination and right ascension were planar coordinates, of the sky, with the official boundaries between constellations noted. Note that the ecliptic is a sort of “roller coaster” track. The sun moves right to left along it over the course of a year.
[Side note: Notice, by the way that the Sun is actually in Pisces at the vernal Equinox…not just about to enter Aries, as the zodiacal signs’ association with calendar dates would imply. That is a result of the procession of the equinoxes having been able to act for a couple of thousand years since astrology was invented. In fact, we will eventually reach a point where the Sun will be just leaving Aquarius at the vernal equinox. That is what “the Age of Aquarius” means.]
So why on Earth is right ascension done in hours? To answer that, we need a bit of history. Before there were atomic clocks, how did we determine the time, and do so with some degree of precision?
Remember that transit telescope? You use one of those. You then watch for a specific star to cross the center of the telescope; when it does that it crosses your celestial meridian. You look up the right ascension of that star…and read off hours, minutes and seconds. That’s what time it is.
Well…not really. More work must be done. What you have is the sidereal time; the time with respect to the stars. (At this moment, you set a special sidereal clock to that time; if it’s accurate you don’t need to set it again for a while. Note though that a sidereal clock seems to run fast; it goes through one “day” in 23 hours, 56 minutes, and some number of seconds I’m too lazy to look up.) You have to do a bit of computation still. Sidereal time only matches your local solar time if the Sun happens to be at 12h right ascension. So you get to do some subtraction, where the sun is versus where that star is, and NOW you have your local solar time. Then you gotta correct for the fact that the Earth’s orbit is elliptical which means the sun’s motion along the ecliptic speeds up and slows down, to get your mean solar time (that involved looking something up in a table that someone else calculated, saving you the skull sweat). THEN you have to correct for the fact that you’re not in your time zone’s central meridian. That’s a simple addition or subtraction. And then…add a gratuitous fricking hour if you’re on daylight saving time.
THIS is why people used to call the observatory to get the precise time.
Mintaka, that belt star in Orion, is at 5h 32m right ascension. So, if it’s on the meridian right now, exactly south or north of you, the sidereal time is 5h 32m. Note though someone to the west or east of you is not seeing the star cross at the same time you are. You are your own personal time zone when it’s sidereal time!
Or think about it a different way. On the first day of (northern hemisphere) spring, the Sun is at RA 0h. When it crosses the meridian (i.e., at solar noon where you are), the sidereal time is 0h, which is sidereal midnight! Half a year later, the first day of fall, the Sun is on the other side of the sky, and it crosses your meridian at 12h sidereal time. Which means that at that time of year the Earth is facing the opposite direction (with respect to the stars) at noon, than it was on the first day of Spring. Sidereal time is actually a measure of which way the Earth is facing, with respect to the stars, not the sun. Solar time is a measure of which way the Earth is facing, with respect to the Sun. (If you find that confusing, you’re not alone. One of the Flerfer talking points is designed to exploit that confusion.)
Telescopes (and cameras) can be mounted on an equatorial mount.
There are two ways for this to pivot, one around the bar with the weights on it, for declination, and the other at 90 degrees to this, through the part that shows as diagonal lower left to upper right. That part of the mount should be set up parallel to the Earth’s axis of rotation, that way pivoting on that will change the right ascension the telescope is pointing at. This one has a cap at lower left, because there’s actually a small telescope inside the mount. You use that small telescope to ensure that you’ve pointed that axis directly at the north celestial pole; then you’re good to go. That axis is often motorized, too, so it will cause the telescope to turn as the sky turns. This is advantageous for long-exposure photography through the scope. That’s the advantage of this kind of mount, and the advantage of this coordinate system; as the earth rotates, a telescope can stay pointed at the same place simply by rotating through right ascension. There are other designs, too, like a fork mount:
The fork pivots around the black dot at its bottom for right ascension, declination is managed by the two joints joining the telescope to the fork. For extremely heavy telescopes you get an English or Yoke mount:
A yoke mount. This is the 100 inch Hooker telescope, which Edwin Hubble used to determine that those spiral nebula things were galaxies and that the universe was expanding. It is one of the two most historically important telescopes, the other being the one used by Galileo.
And finally the horseshoe mount, used by Palomar. If the telescope is actually pointing through the horseshoe, it’s looking very near the north celestial pole.
So here we are; we understand the celestial sphere, we understand the ecliptic, we understand how they tie together to define the seasons. As one last parting shot here, I’ll point out that the celestial poles are necessarily on the celestial meridian.
How do you as an observer standing somewhere on planet Earth, fit in? I’m showing a whole sphere of stars, but at any given time we can only see half of that sphere; the nighttime sky is half of the celestial sphere.
Remember these diagrams are for illustration purposes only. The real situation is the sphere should be drawn very large (oh, say a mile across) and the Earth should look like a pinhead. Even that isn’t enough, but it’s a lot closer.
What do you, standing in some particular spot, actually see? How does the equatorial celestial system relate to your local horizontal coordinates? I’m going to assume the northern hemisphere (as the people who draw the diagrams usually do), and so here’s the usual diagram.
There’s the viewer, standing somewhere in North America. It’s oriented so that he is standing vertically, which gives quite a tilt to the equatorial celestial sphere. Projected onto the celestial sphere is the viewer’s horizon.
In this diagram we are pretending the Earth is not moving, but rather that the sky is; an object on the equator appears to move clockwise, as you’re facing south. Turn around and face north, and the celestial sphere appears to be rotating counter clockwise around the pole. That pole is almost at the north star, Polaris.
The pole is above the horizon by a certain angle. What is that angle?
That turns out to be easy. If you were standing at the north pole latitude 90 degrees North, the celestial pole would be directly overhead, which is to say, 90 degrees above the horizon. If you happened to be on the equator, latitude 0, though, the north celestial pole would be sitting due north, on the horizon, i.e., 0 degrees above the horizon.
So in essence the altitude above the horizon of the celestial pole, is equal to the north latitude of the observer. This is true in the southern hemisphere as well, almost; the altitude of the south celestial pole is equal to the south latitude of the observer. Notice that the stars will appear to circle the south celestial pole in the clockwise direction (this is probably easiest to see if you imagine the paths around the opposite pole marked in the middle diagram below).
This is why the globe earth model predicts that the stars will appear to spin clockwise in the Southern hemisphere. Furthermore, it doesn’t matter where you are standing (Africa, Australia, South America); you will the SAME stars rotating about the same pole. This is impossible on the flat Earth, since people facing south are facing in completely different directions on the disc world. The stars cannot simultaneously be circling around a point due south to all viewers, when the direction “due south” is different for every viewer.
One more thing: Notice in the right hand diagram, that some stars will never set; the ones fairly close to the celestial pole run in circles that are small enough they don’t dip below the horizon. In fact, it’s those stars within a certain angle of the pole, and that angle is also the same as your latitude. Conversely facing south, there are stars that will never rise above the horizon, again a circle of stars centered on the south celestial pole, and being within “your latitude” degrees of the south celestial pole.
When at the North pole, you can see every thing in the north celestial hemisphere, all of the time, but can never, ever see anything in the south celestial hemisphere.
And this applies not just to the stars but to the Sun. During the six months the Sun is in the northern celestial hemisphere, it too can be seen all of the time; the north pole therefore has six continuous months of daylight. Once the Sun goes into the south celestial hemisphere, you get six months of night. Similarly, the south pole has six months of daylight when the Sun is in the south celestial hemisphere, and six months of darkness otherwise.
For places on Earth near to, but not at the pole, there is some period of time less than six months long during which the Sun’s declination is high enough that the Sun does not set, and you have a twenty four hour sun. At Union Glacier, the site of the Final Experiment, the latitude is 79.75 degrees south so any time the sun’s declination is 10.25 degrees south (or further south than that) Union Glacier has 24 hour sun.
When on the equator, absolutely everything will be visible for half of the sidereal day, but if it’s something close to either pole, it won’t get that high in the sky. The celestial poles themselves will be sitting right on the horizon.
Here’s one more diagram showing, for three different declinations, an object’s apparent path across the sky, for someone at 35 degrees north latitude.
The object is the sun, at the two solstices (declination +/- 23.5 degrees) and on the equinoxes (declination 0).
When the sun is at a high declination, it rises in the northeast, climbs high in the sky, is at its highest as it crosses the meridian directly south of the observer, then sets in the northwest. When the sun is at equinox, it rises directly due east, climbs somewhat high in the sky, culminating at the meridian, then sets precisely to the observer’s west. Finally when the sun is at a low declination, it rises in the southeast, doesn’t get too far up in the sky, but does reach a maximum at the meridian, and then sets in the southwest. Note that different fractions of the total sun path are below the horizon. Most of the Dec. 21 path is below the horizon, which is why the daytime is so short in winter. Conversely the summer path is mostly above the horizon, which makes for long summer days. The sun is covering the same ascension angle in the same time, it’s just that more of the total arc is above the horizon in the summer, and less in the winter.
In the southern hemisphere imagine all of those sun paths leaning the other way, with the south celestial pole above the horizon. Now the December 21 path is the one that has most of its length above the horizon. The sun rises in the southeast, swings around to a high spot north of the observer (and, of course, on the meridian), then sets in the southwest. This is another concrete prediction of the Globe Earth; the flat earth has the sun circling around a point well north of the observer, so the sun should start in the northeast, come closest north of the observer, then set in the northwest. At no time in the Flat Earth model is the Sun ever to the south of the observer, certainly not at sunrise and sunset (provided the observer is further south than 23.5 degrees south latitude).
So here we are. This is how celestial coordinates work. And they do work.
I found this whole kerfuffle about the 24 hour moon to be a “teachable moment.” That’s a Leftist mislabeling of “perfect moment to try to indoctrinate people” but I actually mean “teachable moment.” Flerfers reading this will, I hope, accept it as possibly the first coherent/comprehensive explanation of the topic they’ve ever read (assuming it is coherent), then they can decide for themselves whether it makes sense (though I hope they take into their accounting that it works and can predict, e.g., sunrise and sunset with perfect accuracy).
This one ran a bit overlong but I hope it was illuminating.
symbol) around the ecliptic…which means it moves through the Zodiac. The first point of Aries was actually in Aries from about 2000 BCE to 1 CE, then it was in Pisces. It’s about to leave Pisces and shift into Aquarius (“the Age of Aquarius” actually means something…but nothing magic here).
