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]

Kitco “Ask” prices. Last week:

Gold $2,621.30
Silver $29.45
Platinum $930.00
Palladium $939.00
Rhodium $4,850.00
FRNSI* 125.805+
Gold:Silver 89.008+

This week, 3PM Mountain Time, markets have closed for the weekend. (This time, apparently, markets closed at 12:45, not 3PM.)

Gold $2,640.40
Silver $29.68
Platinum $945.00
Palladium $950.00
Rhodium $4,875.00
FRNSI* 126.729+
Gold:Silver 88.962+

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.