Friday, June 28, 2019
"Could a Solar Superflare Destroy the World?": Joe Scott says the risk is less than other pundits warn
Joe Scott asks “Could a Solar Superflare Destroy the World?” (June 24, 2019, recent)
Scott, who lives in Texas, gives a rather alarming account of the Carrington Event in 1859, which caused auroras as far south as where he lives.
He also says that they are dangerous for astronauts, and would have been on the Moon with a proton stream had they been there for about ten days in 1972.
He talks about the Quebec power outage in 1989, which was about one-third the strength of a Carrington event.
He says our near miss in July 2012 might have cut power for months as far south as Washington DC.
Yet he says, inexplicably, that were it to happen today it would be less of a big deal. Is our infrastructure in 2019 better hardened?
Extreme solar storms have been presented by Ted Koppel and others as comparable to an EMP thermonuclear high altitude E3 event, but probably they are less severe.
One thing in our favor is that the Sun is an older star, and our magnetic field is on Earth is quite strong.
Tuesday, June 25, 2019
Tim Pool took up my suggestion that he do a video on the #EMP threat the same day that I suggested it on a long comment on another video about possible war with Iran.
The title is “You Don’t Have What It Takes to Survive the Coming Apocalypse. Do You? Or Do You?”
Pool now has a van with solar power and can move around and broadcast. He says solar power might keep some cell towers up.
Pool also denies that he is a doomsday prepper.
The threats are varied: A fission high altitude weapon produces largely an E1; a fusion, an E3; microwave fluxes that the military has can do E1; extreme solar storms like Carrington do E3. We apparently had a narrow miss in 2012/
The video uses a Fox News video by Doug MacKinnon June 22. I have trouble getting 403’s if I link to Fox from here, so I will link to my Tweet that also editorializes.
Monday, June 24, 2019
“Milo on the Alt-Right and Anti-Semitism”, on the AskDrBrown channel.
Milo considers the “alt-right” as simply a reaction to the extreme Left. Mainstream conservatism does not radicalize people. He doesn’t think that Donald Trump does (although the way people behave at his rallies makes me wonder).
Milo attacks the propensity of the radical Left to assume “guilt by association”. He implies he is not responsible for radicalizing people just because people think the Proud Boys do that (and even that is not a very reliable presumption).
Milo also says he is matrolinearly Jewish even though raised Catholic. He also makes the point that the Holocaust is not "real" to younger generations the way it is to mine.
I was hoping he would refer to the 2016 Atlantic article (previous post).
I don't know if Milo was speaking from Miami or from London, but he is supposed to speak at a free speech rally in Washington DC July 6.
Saturday, June 22, 2019
Two videos: The "real" alt-right is a very limited concept, and very unlikely to mean anything in political influence
I know that the emphasis on this blog has changed recently, but I found a video from PSA Sitch UnDaily that really pins down the definition of “alt-right”, which hardly existed until 2016.
The title is, "David Pakman Doesn’t Know What the Alt-Right Is: Re: Ben Shapiro."
The definition is, wants an ethno-state for white people only. Likely to implement communism or socialism within that “group”, however. Richard Spencer is the main example. Donald Trump himself does not count as such.
Most of the other conservative speakers so smeared do not believe in this ideology as stated.
Atlantic had made an 11-minute short film explaining the concept in December 2016, included in this article.
Friday, June 14, 2019
“Should We Limit Free Speech for Nazis” was a debate at City College of New York in November 2017.
The first of the four speakers was quite the absolutist and said that if we limit free speech, we are giving people licenses to speak, and they don’t have real freedom.
Another panelist said that universities are institutions and do not have to accept all marginal ideas as legitimate.
Sunday, June 02, 2019
Here is a six-year-old Ted Talk (Jan. 2013) “Surviving a Nuclear Attack”, by Irving Redlener.
Chapter 0, where the US was the only nuclear power, until 1949. Then the British Red Joan gave secrets to the Soviets, and we wound up with mutually assured destruction, until 1991, when the Soviet Union broke up.
Now the threat is mainly terrorists, or rogue state, or maybe North Korea.
You only need 8 Coca Cola cans of HEU for a potential nuclear weapon. He even shows an illustrated “terror farm”.
At 16 minutes he discusses the “suitcase nukes” (discussed on my DADT II book, 2002).
Then at 17:30 he demonstrates a suitcase explosion in lower Manhattan, and explains that if you survive it, you should run about a mile from it, perpendicular, before the radiation cloud comes down.
Nuclear war is not survivable, he says, but nuclear terror probably is.
There was no direct mention of EMP in this talk.