Uncommon Insights

What do we want to do in space?

2006-03-17T16:52:00.000-08:00

My pithy answer, live there, would seem to require a bit more elaboration.

Let's forget NASA and the how of it for now and focus on the question. Although who should pay for it is a relevant question, it's off topic (although people should pay for themselves seems to cover it.)

What do I mean when I say live there? I mean that people should have the same freedom to choose to live in space or other planets as they do about where in this world they would prefer to live (and all that implies. Do I need to elaborate?) This means like everything in life, it will be unfairly distributed; however, it should be an option as widely available to satify the public desire that exists to the greatest extent possible.

People do things because they want to. They work, they explore, they play, they learn; because that's what we are. First and foremost, we should do it because we can.

Second, because the eventual economic repercussions are enormous. Enormous simply isn't a big enough word. We measure a nations wealth, but what is money? Ink on paper? No. It's activity. When we widen our horizons we increase our wealth. Once we begin living by the millions and billions in space the positive impact on people that remain on Earth is impossible to imagine, but it will be huge and it will be positive. Wealth is created by activity. People that never leave Earth will be able to invest in companies that will make huge profits in more ways than simply mining minerals and providing energy resources. What those other things are will simply not be limited to the imagination of a few. People do different things pursuing their own pleasures much of which is economically profitable. Everybody will benefit (on average with the rising tide.)

Third, because it will make us better people. New situations create new issues. Resolving those issues is growth. Imagine two planets. One with people that never leave orbit. The other explores the stars. Which would be considered the mature civilization? Isn't it obvious?

I might add survival to this list. We'd look pretty stupid and short sighted if we never colonized outside this planet and some disaster came along and wiped out the Earth. Such disasters exist, but may not happen in our lifetime, so... let's just eat, drink and have fun and not worry about such things. Right?

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness... For some, living in space is the embodiment of all three. As humans, it then becomes an imperative.

Update: I did it again. It's the INTJ in me. I answered the why question and not the what question... silly me. I guess it's because the what answer seems just too obvious to me... yeah, it's just LIVE. THERE. The details of living there include mining asteroids and solar power (as I mentioned) but also include, developing real estate, opening a hot dog stand, etc. In other words, all the activities we do now, but there rather than here. It includes new political movements and religions. The glory days of scientific discovery and exploration. Philosophy and hamburgers. You know, life.

UN.BE.LEAVE.A.BULL

2006-03-16T06:01:00.000-08:00

"I've tried to be measured in this critique of Ginsburg's speech, but the truth is that it is more reprehensible than I have suggested."

We need to start treating the documents of the founding fathers more like contracts and start holding political animals in contempt when appropriate. Impeach indeed.

Glad she's gone.

2006-03-10T18:35:00.000-08:00

Although she makes some good points, to say that without the judiciary we'd be a dictatorship is not the sound reasoning you'd expect from a former supreme court justice. Ok, she said it could be the path to, rather than the actuality, but still.

Poorly played by all.

2006-03-09T19:56:00.000-08:00

According to a well written article by the Anchoress the Dubai port deal wasn't handled well by anyone. I wouldn't argue with that, politics being what it is.

However, I see a dangerous subtext of elitism (not pointing any fingers, but feel free to self examine. I'm a great believer in daily self examination.) The smart people know that the deal would have been a good one and not threatened our security. Those uneducated American citizen's should just shut up. Right? Wrong! The people of this country understand something that smart people are willing to diminish in value relative to other considerations (with a great deal of intellectual analysis)... Ports are among a relatively short list of central issues essential to security and putting any foreign nation (no matter how friendly) in a position of control, weakens our security. To argue that they are not doing security or responsible for security misses the point.

Security risks result from access. The inside job doesn't require total access, just enough to observe and exploit a weakness. We're an open society and have lot's of security weaknesses. That's not an excuse to just keep piling on more. Especially in an area that is among the central points of the security issue such as ports.

In my opinion, we are going to get nuked. I'm seeing two scenarios. One is a sea-launch off both coasts of emp nukes. The other are ships exploding at our ports. This deal may have nothing to do with either of these scenarios. OTOH, this deal might have made them more likely. I and many other Americans would rather err on the side of caution.

Another issue. How is our friendly ally responding to the news? It's understandable that they are upset. But should they respond with threats? What kind of friend responds with threats? We were attacked and are now in a gurilla war. The rest of the world, friends and foes alike, need to come to terms with the fact that we take responsibity for our own security. Anybody that doesn't like it can stuff it. American's are a generous (in many facets of the term) and friendly people with no ambitions of imperialism (when acting imperalistic for a short while might be in our best interest.) Moral relativist can get stuffed too.

Update: My post at the Captain's Quarters in full...

Dubai lost some financial interests in America. While hard feelings are understandable, true friends aren't going to let it shake them. The UAE may prove to be such a friend. Some may say they've already done so.

But I think everyone that's calling Americans phobic and racist are dead wrong. We're angry and perhaps hypersensitive to potential threats. We have reason to be. Those that know the heart of the American people don't need to be concerned with how we're perceived.

Good people in the world have a greater responsibility not to be insulted and just continue to act as good people. Anybody that believes they received such insult that they need to become one of the bad guys deserves the pending result.

Figuring out who your friends are isn't easy in this world. American's don't need to prove our friendship to the world. We act on our friendship constantly. Usually we're insulted for doing so. Yet we always act predictable in a time of need. You want to insult the American people for being stupid, go ahead. You'll be doing it without me.

There's anger, then there's righteous anger. The world made a mistake when they did not see the righteous anger that we hold after 9/11 and is continually fed by the continued acts of terrorism worldwide as well as the insensitivity of our friends. This anger will have result. Especially if any terrorist provides another trigger for it's release. Is the world afraid of America? They damn well better be.

Update: The silver lining.

The deals undone, but let's suppose foreign control of our ports was not a security threat. In any case, the American people were heard, loud and clear, "Congressman, you need to be very sensitive to anything that even smells like a security issue." Are congress critters going to make intelligent decisions? Are they going to take the time to inform the American people of the issues, truthfully and objectively?

We can hope, can't we?

Update: Other points of view.

Some strong persuasive arguments. While Michelle may have introduced this issue to me I got involved becomes I kept hearing other bloggers call American's stupid. I didn't like it. Ignorance is universal, we all have our share. I take offense when American's are called bigoted racists, even if a small minority are to some extent. This had very little if anything to do with racism, but perhaps a lot to do with ignorance. The president says, 'trust me.' The president has a duty to communicate with the American people. It's obvious to most, that he often fails at that duty. I believe he's a man of good character and I'm more likely to trust him than scores of others; however, nobody has the right to expect to be trusted when millions of lives hang in the balance. If those lives are not in jeapardy, you need to show why... trust me just doesn't do it.

This really doesn't seem to be that big a financial issue to Dubai. If they feel stabbed in the back, they can take comfort that it wasn't intentional. The American people were reacting to a perceived security threat. The fact is the only people that can get close enough to stab you in the back are your friends. America's taken it in the shoulders many times and will many times more. We just don't want to see it raised to the level of a holocaust.

Update: Somebody else saw the same silver lining I did (and as usual said it much better than I.)

Fear is not Hate

2006-03-06T19:26:00.000-08:00

The landscape of hate and fear includes that which is healthy as well as the morbid. This well written article touches upon and clarifies the point.

Where are all the moderate muslims?

I think when people ask this question, they mean Islamics rather than muslims, and the answer is that by definition there are none. Islam is a terrorist religion from it's inception. Because of it's strangeness we call terrorist radical and extreme when the fact is they are establishing the norm. This is witnessed by the fact that any 'moderates' are subject to attack. This is the problem when you try to understand a group from such a radically different and tolerant perspective.

Sweet Sixteen

2006-03-04T22:34:00.000-08:00

Happy birthday, Son.

Zubrin in China

2006-03-02T04:03:00.000-08:00

Often at odds with Rand, Mark has an interesting post regarding Dr. Zubrin visit and speech in China.

Zubrin makes an interesting comment in his speech, "...as we enter the 21st Century, two nations stand out as leaders, the USA and China."

Some people might say, "well, he's just being nice to his hosts." In which case they could dismiss the comment. That would be a mistake, IMHO. People that look at the GNP (or whatever they call it these days) between the two countries might feel comfortable in dismissing China. People that say they're only doing things we did over 30 years ago would also be missing the relevant issue. I believe that Zubrin correctly shares my intuition that China is going to be a major player in space in the next few decades. I suspect the American government will not be as is suggested by this comment of Zubrin's, "...the United States has set itself the objective of sending humans to the Moon and Mars, but is actually spending over 90% of its manned space budget on the Shuttle and Space Station programs in activity that contributes almost nothing towards the achievement of that goal, and furthermore, plans to continue doing so for the next five years."

The bright spot is the vision of people that plan to take matters in there own hands regardless of what governments do. While no company by itself may be up to the task, in combination I think they'll provide all the elements for the private move into space. With access to the resources of space, government involvement may not matter that much.

Of course, you can't get away from the politicians. People have been trying since the dawn of time. Even with nukes, China is a limited threat to us now. They still live in a world where MAD works. But it would be another mistake to think they may not take advantage of any opportunity to diminish the power of American in world affairs. For example, what would a big rock hitting Yellowstone do and could we determine if it was a natural event or mischief by a country learning to move rocks?

Why Yellowstone? No reason, it's just brainstorming about a super volcano that's right about ready to blow given a geological minute or so. Might make a good movie, eh? Flying jumbo jets into skyscrapers might have made a good movie before 2001. What do you think, Harrison Ford or Bruce Willis?

I used to be a Ford fan, but I've always liked Bruce. Even his stinkers.

How's that for serious analysis?

Update: "...[competition] is a fact of existence. If you choose not to compete, you may (and likely will) still find yourself on the loosing side."

Well said.

What if?

2006-02-16T00:45:00.000-08:00

If we were a nation of laws?

Lighter moment

2006-02-16T00:04:00.000-08:00

You scored as Serenity (Firefly). You like to live your own way and don't enjoy when anyone but a friend tries to tell you should do different. Now if only the Reavers would quit trying to skin you.

75% Serenity (Firefly)
69% Nebuchadnezzar (The Matrix)
69% Millennium Falcon (Star Wars)
63% SG-1 (Stargate)
63% Babylon 5 (Babylon 5)
63% FBI's X-Files Division (The X-Files)
63% Moya (Farscape)
63% Deep Space Nine (Star Trek)
56% Galactica (Battlestar: Galactica)
44% Andromeda Ascendant (Andromeda)
38% Enterprise D (Star Trek)
31% Bebop (Cowboy Bebop)

Your Ultimate Sci-Fi Profile II: which sci-fi crew would you best fit in?
Created with QuizFarm.com

Never seen the show, but have seen the movie.

The Queen gets it right.

2006-02-04T19:48:00.000-08:00

Notice she never says radicals.

She says very clearly... "We have to show our opposition to Islam." Period, that's it.

For this she is labeled a xenophobe, but her answer... "...we have to, at times, run the risk of having unflattering labels placed on us because there are some things for which we should display no tolerance."

I say for any Muslim or non-Muslim that is Islamic, corral them, determine if they are a terrorist... if terrorist they die, no appeal. Any peace loving Islamic is a liar because Islam is about submission, not and never has been about peace. Isolate the lying Islamic, let them blow themselves up... in isolation.

She appears to understand the difference between Muslim and Islamic when she states... "[we need to] encouraging Muslims to learn Danish so they could integrate better." In this country I would say english and think she's got it right.

Strategically important. We need to do this now.

2006-02-03T17:34:00.000-08:00

Zubrin, provides the right answer and Rand immediately knocks it. Instead, I would think he would join Zubrin in exposing the fraud of the hydrogen economy.

Although ethanol is a lower energy density than gasoline (which would require larger tanks to get the same range) it returns 126% of the energy needed to produce it verses 83% efficiency for gasoline according to this Arizona Republic article.

Many people think we need less government and I'm certainly one of them (on all levels down to the local.) However, the one job the federal government is required to do is national defense. This is a defense issue. It requires strategic thinking on the scale of decades. The world, including many nations we consider as friends, hate us. China in particular is working hard to close the military gap with the U.S. It's a big gap, but it doesn't need to be entirely closed before China decides they are willing to move militarily against our interests. This may not lead to a direct war, but it could.

Back to the energy issue. Flex fuel vehicles can be produced which use any mixture of gasoline and ethanol from zero to 100%. The same with methanol and perhaps even an ethanol/methanol/gasoline mix. Probably the best way to encourage manufacturer to produce cars (which they do already for other countries), for gas stations to provide pumps and for consumers to buy those cars is by tax relief. This is certainly within the pervue of the government. I mean drastic tax reduction to eliminate any added expense so that business can get right to it.

The gasoline pumps won't go away. Flex fuel vehicles will continue to use gas when ethanol is not available. Older vehicles will continue to have a suppy of pumps. We can do this. We've already started but we need to make it a priority. If we do, probably few will realize the crisis we've perhaps avoided, but who cares? Just as long as we do it.

Surprise me!

2006-01-27T21:37:00.000-08:00

I'm a Lamborghini Murcielago!

You're not subtle, but you don't want to be. Fast, loud, and dramatic, you want people to notice you, and then get out of the way. In a world full of sheep, you're a raging bull.

Take the Which Sports Car Are You? quiz.

Didn't expect this... but I would like a test drive!

2006-01-12T18:31:00.000-08:00

This is an old post by Russ and he doesn't make the issue as clear as usual but I've decided to make it new again in this post because it's so important.

The result of centralization of power is destructive in my view. The single most important principle the founding fathers seemed to follow was decentralization of power. We often get this centralization as the result of screaming by moonbat idiotarians that haven't had a rational thought in decades and the complacency of elected officials that should know better but haven't developed the spine needed to support rational convictions against an onslaught of mindless critics.

It's too bad they don't understand that making things 'fair' actually makes things worse for almost everybody. People used to understand that monopolies were bad, but now they don't. Instead they justify them. Why is everyone so afraid of fighting for principles? It's the only fight that is actually worth fighting.

Another Backbone Request

2005-12-01T14:16:00.000-08:00

Again she's right.

Cooperation or Competition

2005-11-30T20:24:00.000-08:00

Sam Dinkin thinks (via transterrestrial) that getting spacefaring underway takes cooperation and the bickering should stop.

It's a good article, but I can't say that I agree. My take is that the bickering is mostly noise. The real issue is economics (which I have some thoughts on.) So how do I think spacefaring will get underway? It's already underway in that private companies are taking a crack at it. They are spending real money on precursor projects that are in the chain of events leading directly to a spacefaring civilization. It will have arrived when people live in communities that are mostly independant of the Earth. I see people living on Luna, Mars and in freefall... no need to bicker about that.

He also says something I strongly agree with, "Instead of constantly seeking the optimal in technology and space policy, we can make do with the commercially viable." Yes, it's all about the commercially viable which makes the bickering irrelevant. The whole point about space is that it's the new high seas, government will matter less than the captain you're riding with or the community your living with.

LUNA CITY

Economic development is done by speculators. Down the road from where I live is a retirement community called Sun City. It's a planned community where lots of electric golf carts ply the road. Even the grocery store has parking slots sized for the carts. One day some developer is going to create a planned community on the near side of the moon (one-sixth gravity may have advantages when they fall and can't get up?) It may cost a lot to buy a property and get there, but living there can be cheap as long a abundant energy to grow food and recycle water exists. They'll still use their golf carts! I expect with economy of scale it'll cost no more than 20 million for two people to get transportation to an apartment which includes an annuity to provide for all their basic needs until they expire. Lot's of people will be able and willing to do that. Probably within the next 20 years.

Orbital Habitats

While lagrange points are fine and dandy, orbits around the Earth and Moon have economic purpose. If Earth orbit is half way to anywhere, then that's where the gas pump (refueling depot) is going to be. In Moon orbit will be shuttle service to the surface and back. I believe ships in general will be simpler and more specific than most people imagine. Today we think of ships like the space shuttle that are launched and return to Earth. But general use ships are not going to land in any gravity well. Once launched they will spend the rest of their existance in orbit (or transfer orbits.) Either they will carry a smaller ship for landing and ascent like the old lunar module without leaving pieces of itself behind or they will dock at a station that provides a permanent service to do that like for Luna City or Mars Spaceport.

Most ships on the seas are private or corporate owned and it will be no different in space. People will live on ships they own that provide charter services, sort of a long term roving bed and breakfast with solar sails (governments may have a monopoly on the fast nuclear drives for the forseeable future.)

New Earth: Mars

Mars will have the fastest growing community for the next hundred years because the resources to grow exist in one place. Once established no launches required and no years of waiting, just farm it or go dig it up. Zubrin's 'Case for Mars' sums it up this way, 'There will be a "triangle trade," with Earth supplying high technology manufactured goods to Mars, Mars supplying low technology manufactured goods and food staples to the asteroid belt and possibly the Moon as well, and the asteroids and Moon sending metals and possibly helium-3 to Earth.'

How much will you pay for this asteroid?

Asteroid miners, the stuff of pulp science fiction. What kind of person will spend a fortune and a good part of their life to hit paydirt? This one is a bit harder to imagine, but it would seem to be required if "triangle trade" is going to be a reality. I don't know.

Regarding the title of this post. Obviously some cooperation is going to be required, but economic vitality requires friendly competition. Economics is about self interest as a driving force. This can be and generally is a good thing. Some see this new frontier as a new wild west, but space is a big place with plenty of room to grow. The next few hundred years should be exciting.

House democrats 'are gutless traitors'

2005-11-27T05:00:00.000-08:00

According to Ann's reasoned voice. Yes, it's over the top. Some democrats are not traitors, just those that open their trap giving aid and comfort to the enemy, demand we bring home the troops, then voted not to.

I say it's time we got the Senate on record too!

Iran again

2005-11-26T00:50:00.000-08:00

Iran trying to develop nuclear-tipped missiles. I repeat, are we just going to wait?

Parting Company with Libertarians

2005-11-25T17:52:00.000-08:00

It's the drugs. The idea that drugs only hurt the people that use them is false. Perhaps a good Libertarian wouldn't be affected by a sibling that overdosed or drove a car into a building because they were drunk, but it does seem to affect most families negatively.

I tend to think of myself as a capitalist without capital, but this said I'm something else.

I'm not a big fan of preemptive laws... Laws designed to babysit people because they might do something wrong. On the other hand, I wish citizenship meant something and that harmful acts of one citizen against another should have the possibity of revoking citizenship. Violent acts (beyond bare hands and yelling) by non-citizens against anybody should result in immediate deportation. My wife is a legal immigrant. Immigration is part of what makes this country great. I just think it should be controlled more than it is (some would say it's anarchy now.)

I don't care who hates America, as long as they don't cause destruction in America.

I believe in freedom of speech... even lying, hate filled speech against one's own country which is deplorable. But when you repeat a seditious lie for mass consumption, you should be putting your citizenship at risk at the very least.

It's tough when somebody tries to put you into a box... me, I like to think I'm a rabid, whacko, extremist, with a love for people and truth. I think the bad guys need to be marginalized if not destroyed. I find I don't love the bad guys much.

Update: What an incoherent rant. I must have been on drugs. About time I read this guys book.

See the Invisible

2005-11-25T17:24:00.000-08:00

It's a neat trick and Russ does it all the time. Here's a great example.

What am I?

2005-11-20T17:42:00.000-08:00

Here's a test that says...

You are a
Social Liberal
(60% permissive)

and an...
Economic Conservative
(68% permissive)

You are best described as a:

Libertarian

Titan

2005-11-20T10:53:00.000-08:00

Here's an insight via Rand.

Calling Bruce Willis

2005-11-19T04:42:00.000-08:00

I just reread this article which I've posted on before. It strikes me that this is the movie that needs to be made. How about it Bruce?

Iran da' Bomb

2005-11-18T18:10:00.000-08:00

If they have parts of the bomb and intend to wipe countries off the map... Isn't it about time to do something about it?

Are any of the guys that worked with the Afghan's rested and ready to go?

What's the Public Opinion?

2005-11-18T17:54:00.000-08:00

Earlier today I was at the MVD (what they call it in AZ which sounds strange to California ears that expect it to be DMV) and had a conversation with an idiotarian. 'Bush lied (= Hitler)', 'We need to pull out of Iraq now', yada, yada.

After about 20 minutes the quiet older lady sitting near him, that looked like the cookie baking kind, had had about enough when he started talking about Viet Nam. 'You don't know what you're talking about' she said, a conclusion I'd reached after only a few moments of talking our conversation. She then said to me she thought he was just too young to understand. I think, sometimes we strangers are just too kind to the idiots. I'm kind of tired making excuses for them, but that's what gentle society does.

The interesting thing is I saw heads nodding all around and nobody seemed to support the guys blather. You might think that half the countries gone mad supporting the extreme left views, but I found this reaction quite encouraging.

It's been done!

2005-11-16T22:44:00.000-08:00

Isn't this pretty much just this?

Does the truth matter?

2005-11-16T21:36:00.000-08:00

Some things are life and death issues. Popularity is not one of them. It's articles like this that make me really love Ann.

Will they be held accountable?

2005-11-08T17:32:00.000-08:00

A great post and good comments with just a twist of lime.

If the battle is for hearts and minds then it's time to take the battle to the enemy. People need to call the media on their sedition and make it long, loud and clear. The war needs to be fought on all fronts.

I Stand in Support...

2005-11-03T18:32:00.000-08:00

...of the Plame Game Rule.

The CIA is supposed to spy on foreign governments, gathering intelligence for our government. It's part of the art of war necessary to keep us safe. The agency should respect the office of the president regardless of the party in office. It should respect the citizens of this country.

Give 'em hell, Zell!

Let us not forget.

2005-09-11T04:24:00.000-07:00

I will add links throughout the day as I find them related to 9-11...

Victims List
Driscoll
phredsworld
Michelle Malkin Counterpoint Surely, this is just random chance?

I need a rocket scientist

2005-09-10T06:59:00.000-07:00

I think this is cool.

But if they were, "tossed around by the giant planets" wouldn't they have elliptical orbits that came back into the inner system? I don't know, I'm ignorant when it comes to celestial mechanics.

$60 or $30, which would you rather pay?

2005-09-05T21:50:00.000-07:00

With gas prices so high, this sounds encouraging.

Dog pile! Woof! Woof!

2005-09-05T13:15:00.000-07:00

He's reading your thoughts and mine.

Via Rand.

Plans? What plans?

2005-09-01T21:58:00.000-07:00

Rand has a link to this guy (Aug and Sept.,) who has some insights in disaster planning (and the lack thereof.)

His banner mentions the 9th amendment, here's a good book on the subject.

We really miss the daily read.

2005-08-31T22:11:00.000-07:00

Giants indead. Wow! R.E.A.D T.H.E. C.O.M.M.E.N.T.S

Ok, now that I've read all the commentary myself - including the original via link - I can say it... who won?

The important question in my mind (without any pessimism at all) is, can we lose? I'm talking about the actual destruction of our country. I think the answer is that, while it's not likely it is possible.

Bill thinks we are not doing enough, SDB says we're doing good enough.

I have to side with Bill on this, without disagreeing with SDB's argument. I think Bill is entirely right that cold war analogies miss some points. We are not in the same stand-off situation we were in then. Although there is the possibility of a hot war against nuclear armed opponents, China, Russia or others using Islamic nations as channels, it is a distant possibility unless we appear vulnerable. Even the aftermath of Katrina would not indicate a vulnerability sufficient to exploit. (Now if Yellowstone decides to blow, all bets are off.)

I believe everyone is arguing that it's about hearts and minds and can be summed up with these two quotes...

GWB said:

"Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success."

FDR said:

"No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people, in their righteous might, will win through to absolute victory. I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us. Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger. With confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain the inevitable triumph. So help us God."

While I applaud what GWB said, it appears quite... uh... effeminate? compared to FDR.

Why the difference? I think it's because of the other enemy, those living in this country that hate it. That's one battle that can be lost. It's not the only one.

Right now there's rioting and looting in the wake of Katrina. Many more are going to die. The limits of local government (to the state level) while not world shattering are still being exposed for all to see. Could it happen on the national level?

Not likely, but yes it could. The question is what makes the possibility of this danger more likely... going after the regimes that support terror now, or hoping the enlightenment of radicals will fight our war for us?

What prevents us from following FDR's lead? Now we're back to the enemies within.

On a personal note, it's good to see SDB making a public argument. I used to read his blog several times in a day (and never missed a day.) He and Rand are the reason I blog.

More about me!

2005-08-30T22:25:00.000-07:00

Really, it's more of a critique of this personity type as it applies to me.

Internally=intuition, External=rationally and logically. Sounds like me.

"INTJs live in the world of ideas and strategic planning. They value intelligence, knowledge, and competence, and typically have high standards in these regards, which they continuously strive to fulfill. To a somewhat lesser extent, they have similar expectations of others." I expect people to be people (within all the extremes of the spectrum.)

"Their mind constantly gathers information and makes associations..." Yup.

"...usually are very quick to understand new ideas." Uh, huh.

"..they do not follow an idea as far as they possibly can, seeking only to understand it fully..." Yes, I am lazy.

"INTJs are driven to come to conclusions about ideas." Too deep for me.

"...excellent scientists..." Except that California prop. 13 cut the funding so I never interned at JPL. I gave up a chance at a full scholarship at Harvey Mudd. I settled for computer bum instead. I do wish my life had taken another path.

"It is not easy for the INTJ to express their internal images, insights, and abstractions." Change not easy to near impossible. Nothing in my mind can really be expressed with language. It's very lonely.

"The internal form of the INTJ's thoughts and concepts is highly individualized, and is not readily translatable into a form that others will understand." Ok, so they say the same thing. (Update: I need to emphasize the 'highly individualized' point. INTJ's are a very rare type, but I've met and worked with a few. There thoughts processes were not anything like mine, even though I'm definitely an INTJ. I've been tested during a management workshop and have retested occasionally, many years apart, always with the same result. Interestingly, I was able to perceive some things that only a different group of types -represented by about 25% of the population - are usually able. I may be a rare bird indeed? But then, there's only one and only you too!)

"...their ideas, which are non-linear." Most truly.

"However, their extreme respect of knowledge and intelligence will motivate them to explain themselves to another person who they feel is deserving of the effort." Yes.

"...natural leaders, ...they usually choose to remain in the background until they see a real need to take over the lead." Right, many examples in my life.

"When they are in leadership roles, they are quite effective, because they are able to objectively see the reality of a situation, and are adaptable enough to change things which aren't working well." Quite effective? This requires followers. Not being able to get people to understand something or a willingness to follow often produces less than effective results.

"They are the supreme strategists - always scanning available ideas and concepts and weighing them against their current strategy, to plan for every conceivable contingency." Supreme huh, I'll try not to get a big head... but the fact is, I _IS_ good!

"...lot of time inside their own minds, and may have little interest in the other people's thoughts or feelings." Not entirely true. I do care, but it doesn't really matter. Does it?

"...a tendency to ignore details which are necessary for implementing their ideas." Always a danger.

"...put everything that they encounter into an understandable and rational system" Sounds about right.

"...they are quick to express judgments." Yes, but subject to revision at any time with new data.

"very evolved intuitions" Perhaps.

"...convinced that they are right about things." Only if evidence supports the belief and subject to suspension of (dis)belief when contradictory evidence exists.

"Unless they complement their intuitive understanding with a well-developed ability to express their insights, they may find themselves frequently misunderstood." I'm doomed! Oh, that's why I blog!!!

"In these cases, INTJs tend to blame misunderstandings on the limitations of the other party, rather than on their own difficulty in expressing themselves." No! I blame me.

"This tendency may cause the INTJ to dismiss others input too quickly, and to become generally arrogant and elitist." I have a highly developed sense of humility... but this is often not observed by others. I abhor arrogance.

"...ambitious..." Off and on.

"...self-confident..." Who else am I suppose to be confident in? God, are you listening?

"...deliberate..." Which is a real pain when it comes to writing.

"...long-range thinkers..." Lot of good it's done me. Waited until I was 40 something to marry, three years later I'm divorced.

"...dislike messiness and inefficiency..." But I could be a frustrated perfectionist.

"...truly have affection or regard for others, they simply do not typically feel the need to express it. Others may falsely perceive the INTJ as being rigid and set in their ways. Nothing could be further from the truth, because the INTJ is committed to always finding the objective best strategy to implement their ideas. The INTJ is usually quite open to hearing an alternative way of doing something." Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. - Commited? I don't know.- Yes.

"When under a great deal of stress, the INTJ may become obsessed with mindless repetitive, Sensate activities, such as over-drinking. They may also tend to become absorbed with minutia and details that they would not normally consider important to their overall goal." Interesting point, must watch for this. I do see examples that might fit this description (and I should be a diamond already with the stress I've had in my life.)

"INTJs need to remember to express themselves sufficiently, so as to avoid difficulties with people misunderstandings. In the absence of properly developing their communication abilities, they may become abrupt and short with people, and isolationists." Generally I am not short with anybody.

"INTJs have a tremendous amount of ability to accomplish great things. They have insight into the Big Picture, and are driven to synthesize their concepts into solid plans of action. Their reasoning skills gives them the means to accomplish that. INTJs are most always highly competent people, and will not have a problem meeting their career or education goals. They have the capability to make great strides in these arenas. On a personal level, the INTJ who practices tolerances and puts effort into effectively communicating their insights to others has everything in his or her power to lead a rich and rewarding life."

So? Effective communications is the problem? I've always known that, but have never been able to do anything about it. I've always been bothered when somebody praises me for how well I've expressed something when I know that I absolutely haven't been able to express anything at all. Yes, it is lonely. Now, let's never do this again, ok?

A very reasonable argument

2005-08-30T21:31:00.000-07:00

Which I would agree with if not for certain little details.

Much of grade school is taught by rote. One time I failed a math test in the seventh or eigth grade. I checked my answers (it's math, I didn't need anybody else to do it for me!) and determined that every single question was answered absolutely correctly. At that point I brought this to the attention of the teacher. She agreed that I answered 100% correctly. So what happened? What I didn't know was that the test had answers in the back of the book (what a concept) and the book was wrong in every answer to this particular test. Every other student got 100%... with book answers.

I stopped asking questions in that class soon after (the last straw was when I asked a question regarding division by zero to which the teacher reacted badly.)

My personality is INTJ, sometimes refered to as the scientist. I'm a lover of truth and real pain in the neck because I want the details to come out right. Have you ever read the Cuckoo's Egg, written by a character with more ants in his pants than any I've ever observed? He discovered and tracked an international spy because of less than a dollar accounting error. Sometimes small things matter!

I'm a great fan of Martin Gardner and quite skeptical myself. I remember some of Evolution theory as was taught to me in high school. What I was taught was verifiably wrong... pepper moths and giraffe necks. This was the fifth grade. Doing this at that age is nothing more than propaganda. It certainly wasn't science.

The fact is the word evolution is used as a slight of hand trick. The details of evolution are definitely so (as far as basic science produces data) the problem is when these details are used to assert the idea that new kinds of animals are created. Yes, you heard me right, 'evolution' is true and never produces any new kinds of animals. Most people would consider that a contradictory statement, but only because the details regarding evolution are often/always muddled when people argue about it.

Do mutations occur? Yes, evolution requires it to be so... the only problem is that mutations occur more rapidly than evolution can account for. So what gives? Even with the multitude of mutations, we don't get beneficial changes which leads to...

Survival of the fittest which works to keep animals pure. Unlike what we've all been taught, it works directly against the common understanding of evolution. Mutated animals are less fit and die. They generally don't reproduce and so the chain of mutations that might produce a new kind of animal never occurs. It doesn't matter how long you give for it to happen. Ok, if you bother to apply some statistics you discover that in a few zillion ages of the universe you might in theory have one animal turn into another. That's the definition of impossible, folks!

I believe in science. I believe in truth. I hate religion, but I believe in a loving God (which sounds like a contradiction to many, but I would not believe it if I didn't clearly see the evidence that it were true.)

People are hypocrites and many are loony toons. Me, I'm just me (with a different drum.)

More deaf ears?

2005-08-28T00:25:00.000-07:00

It is appalling that this continues in many places in this country.

Science IS a way of looking!

2005-08-27T23:07:00.000-07:00

Edward J. Larson says Intelligent Design is not science and I certainly don't know enough about it to absolutely disagree with him. However, some of his statements in this article, while better written than most all others I've read in the same vein, still tends to make some assertions with which I can't quite agree.

He says, "Darwinism is not a comforting world view for conscious, egotistical beings like us." If evolution is true, why shouldn't it provide comfort? If this life is all there is, certainly I could use that to my best advantage, as could anybody. Personally, I don't like the idea of ignorant bliss. I don't find any comfort in that at all. On the other hand, many racists seem to find quite a bit of comfort in viewing themselves superior to others and use perversions of evolution theory to support their view.

Then I have a few minor quibbles with some of his modifiers... "Intelligent design, despite its proponents' claims to the contrary, isn't modern science... It's part of that rebellion against it." "Science is a particular way of looking at natural phenomena." Why modern or natural? Isn't science, science? Phenomena is simply a thing observed? I saw an ID book in the bookstore the other day. I didn't buy it, but I think I could spot science verses crap. Now I may have to buy it to determine if it is or not. Stating that something is a rebellion against science requires some pretty demanding evidence if that something is being conducted in an objective way.

"Intelligent design, in contrast, is a critique of all that. Its proponents may challenge the sufficiency of evolutionary explanations for the origin of species but they have not — and cannot — offer testable alternative explanations."

So he's saying that ID is not just not science, but anti-science, a rebellion in his words. Personally, I don't think a rebellion every once in a while is such a bad thing. However, is ID the anti-science!

"The best they can offer is the premise that, if no natural explanation suffices, then God must have done it."

God (done it) is a conclusion. IDers seem to be steadfast in only claiming that there is evidence that some things were designed rather than possibly being the result of random actions. Is it scientific heresy to examine the argument? Claiming something is not science doesn't mean much. Examining an argument and making an argument against it (that actually addresses the points of the initial argument rather than sidestepping them which happens all too often) could very well be considered within the realm of science. If an argument is ridiculous, show it to be so! If it can't stand scrutiny, then scrutinize it! That's science!

"People prefer purpose in their origins." I agree. Might there be an explanation for that within the realm of science? Concocting an evolution hypothesis to explain it isn't much more scientific than the tooth fairy without some concrete evidence in support of the hypothesis which often seems to be lacking. We are often told to just accept it on the basis of some authoritive voice. Sounds like church doctrine to me.

Mr Larson makes some other claims that do not ring entirely true...

"What we know about evolution allows us to...
...combat pathogens by discovering ways to disable or eliminate them.
...understand ecological relationships and preserve habitats.
...explore genetic relationships and push the frontiers of biotechnology."

It's not evolution that allows these things. Science makes progress by using scientific methods, regardless of the prejudicial views, one way or the other, of the scientist. The history of science is the pulling of scales away from eyes. It starts when a lone scientist has an insight and pursues it. By definition, science is the modification and even overthrowing of previous scientific conjecture.

Science often goes against common sense. Quantum theory, which is strongly established science, questions everybody's view of reality But sometimes common sense is right. Many people are qualified to perceive that something is designed (and anyone refuting them would appear idiotic.) Is it a stretch to imagine that someone with more education in a field would be able to spot design in that field?

Update: Very well said.

Actually knowing something helps...

2005-08-23T22:12:00.000-07:00

It's sad that this rebuke will probably fall on deaf ears.

Words fail me, but I'm glad they didn't her.

You may need to scroll down past the advertisements to where "It's called courage" begins the article.

Enjoy the View

2005-08-22T00:47:00.000-07:00

I've never been a big fan of the idea of a space elevator. I've always been uneasy with the idea thinking there is some physics problem with it we just aren't seeing. However, this article does put a very positive spin on the idea. While this article suggest it might actually be doable in the near future.

Does this mean goodbye rockets? I don't think so. But it may mean goodbye to small payload rockets. As with any industry, there is always a shakeout. I would hope the rocket industry gets itself off the ground sufficiently so we can have the shakeout down the road. We shall see.

Update: The same point

Another article

Tales of Tails

2005-08-09T22:01:00.000-07:00

Perhaps there's more to the flying spaghetti monster than I first thought... perhaps his presence can be felt in the tail?

Have you felt the presence of his noodly appendage?

2005-08-09T20:58:00.000-07:00

Now this certainly qualifies as an UNCOMMON INSIGHT.

Generally I have a low regard for ridicule when legitimate issues are being raised, but this is too funny. I assume that most people think that "Intelligent Design" is a thinly veiled way of introducing creation into public schools and I tend to agree with that viewpoint. If true, it certainly doesn't belong in a science class, but then most of what's taught as evolution theory doesn't belong there either.

Science in schools should teach students how to observe and reason using the scientific method. Regardless of what a person chooses to do as an adult in life, they should understand the basics of reasonable logical thinking. Schools generally fall far short of that mark. Perhaps they should start by teaching law and what constitutes evidence?

They should also teach about fallacies so people can recognize them. The pasta lord includes a fun example of that as well, argh!

Is this Clear Enough?

2005-07-26T22:49:00.000-07:00

What do the terrorists want?

Update: Ok, to lazy to read the article, here's the short version...

to cite the Daily Telegraph, their "real project is the extension of the Islamic territory across the globe, and the establishment of a worldwide ‘caliphate' founded on Shari'a law."

Nuthin ta do with worms, eh...

2005-07-22T19:53:00.000-07:00

This is a great thread from a must read blog which lead to this well written post.

I always enjoy an intelligent debate with plenty of interesting facts.

Why stop at Taiwan?

2005-07-19T22:55:00.000-07:00

"Some of China's military planners are surveying the strategic landscape beyond Taiwan" - no kidding?

It's hard to know, but I'm hoping we are spending enough on spies to keep close tabs on China. America's people would like nothing better than to just get on with our own lives. We have no dreams of conquest. We have no desire for any involvement other than commercial trade. Live and let live is our motto. If the terrorists had been less successful, as they had been for at least a decade before 9/11/2001, we would have pretty much ignored them... even though regime change in Afghanastan and Iraq were moral imperatives.

China is the greatest threat we face. When it finally comes to a head, it will make everything that came before seem unreal. Russian support is likely. France would like to sell them the latest weapons.

I hope I'm not in the neighborhood when the nukes start landing.

China, anyone? Bueler... Bueler...

2005-07-15T18:32:00.000-07:00

I'm of the opinion that this is more important that what Karl Rove might have said (or rather what Novak said to him.)

Three, One or None?

2005-07-08T21:18:00.000-07:00

So now what are the chances that Bush and/or conservatives will get someone in the mold of Scalia or Thomas on the bench?

Thugs never change.

2005-07-08T20:45:00.000-07:00

It's thugs that use bombs, this time in London. It reminds me of another time. I was in high school at the time and had a strange thought... "is this the death of journalism?" I later learned he had a brother.

I don't know why this event always stuck with me? But I compare it to today's car bombings in Iraq. I see Saddam as a type of Mafia thug. I think of Bin Laden as a type of twisted thug (who thinks he's Harry Seldon) and imagines he can predict the future in his twisted wishful fantasy (Al Queda apparently means Foundation.)

Journalist today don't do journalism. Journalism is not about asking people how they feel because of some tragedy. It's about digging and exposing facts... It's certainly not some form of entertainment and media ratings are not the point.

It's one of the reason web logs give me hope. The people that write blogs all have their own personal reasons. Within some bloggers beat the heart of people that want to expose the truth and now they can. I'll be reading.

Iraq Arms Sales... A Complete Picture?

2005-07-06T20:27:00.000-07:00

Sometimes a picture does tell the story. Feel free to use liberally when rebutting airheads or asshats.

Scathing Opinion on the Opinions

2005-07-06T19:27:00.000-07:00

I could feel the heat coming from my monitor as I read Ann's latest. Wow! Her denunciation of Sandra O'Conner actually surprised me. I don't expect the courts to honor the constitution (which is a deed rather than a word) but I never really paid much attention to examining the opinions beyond a cursory glance. I might note which Judge voted the way I might, and was really disappointed with their latest decision regarding theft of real property to give to others for which I gave O'Conner points for a dissent...

The thing is, the Supreme Court is suppose to be the final say on matters. Which suggest it requires of pretty high standard for those writing an opinion. When you or I talk about opinions, we are reminded of the comparison between a certain anatomical orifice which everybody has... but the written opinion's of the Supreme Court are supposed to be of a different nature. Those opinions are supposed to be based on written law, the words of which are suppose to contain meaning. They just can't disregard the law to give what a lay person would define as an opinion.

Well, when you filter out the harsh venom (ya gotta love her!) that's basically what Ann is claiming - in 25 years, O'Conner has not contributed to legally clarifying the law with regard to contentious issues... the Supreme Court is not suppose to make law (that's what those other bums are suppose to do) they are suppose to support and defend the Constitution from attack, foreign and DOMESTIC.

She covers a lot of ground, but just one example makes her point. Ann says... she preferred her own words, "entanglement" and "endorsement," to the Constitution's word "establishment."

This really is the heart of the matter. A clarification of what establishment means constitutionally is what we expect once the matter reaches the Supreme Court. To muddy the waters by introducing issues that don't exist is the law, taking the matter away from the point, is horrendous.

Even Judge Judy gets it. She's says, when you come into her court the issue is money. If you want psychiatric help, call Dr. Phil!

Each to it's own venue.

It's not really funny.

Ann makes one point that she doesn't directly substantiate... "It's often said that O'Connor's problem is that she is not a judge, but a legislator." Although she gives a number of examples where the judge is acting as a legislator, she doesn't indicate where it's often said. I expect somebody else will point this out to her in order to attack her opinion. To which I expect Ann will provide the references. Sometimes I wish Ann weren't quite so over the top, but it is fun to watch even when the most serious of issues is the topic.

Flame on!

Update: Someone agrees with her.

Space... finally a frontier.

2005-07-03T21:46:00.000-07:00

I'm pretty sure the politicking behind the scenes has been tremendous considering the money, jobs and votes involved but it seems the direction of NASA is coming into focus. Rand had a link before hand to some of the big players propaganda here with some good comments from readers.

I have some strong feelings about space. I was ten when Neil and Buzz made history (and Mike too... can you imagine his mixed feelings? I'm sure he felt that some time in the future he would also walk on the moon. Men had vision back then..."Saturn by 75!" I even remember a math book in grade school had a photo of the Nerva engine in it.) I've also been a fan of hard sf forever. I believe in frontiers and personal liberty. Most of the last 30 years have been a disappointment for a kid that used to read about torch ships and such.

I think all the arguing about going about it misses the point, but then I've got my own ideas too.

I want to see private companies doing things in orbit and beyond. I think it's unstoppable. I also know that government will continue to spend my money in ways I don't always agree with... so I don't have much simpathy for those that think I'm a stinker because I'd like to advocate those ways when they don't agree. That's life.

It confuses me a bit that people don't see that being able to put 100 tons into orbit is a useful capability. I think people that would rather put little pieces into space and hope to build something useful in a reasonable time frame are unrealistic... even lacking in vision (which of course, they would accuse of me.)

Too many people are looking at things as either/or... I don't believe it's going to fall that way. Here's what I see...

Real spaceships don't land on planets. They are a means of enduring long duration flights to places. 100 tons is the mini-cooper of spaceships. It's how we are going to spend six to 18 months in flight to some destinations. Later we will put together 100 ton modules for larger ships. Governments will build the first of these ships and later private corporations will want them for themselves because government is going to lose it's tight grip on space activities. Why? Simply because they will not be able to compete in cost to orbit. Astronauts will get to their spaceships by buying a ticket from private companies.

This seems good to me.

I think we will colonize Mars first, but any colony, any where, that is self sustaining, will be the beginning of an economy that will keep us in space. Not only keep us in space for good, but give us a new expansive perspective on life, liberty and all that intangible stuff, ya know, like happiness. Life, liberty and happiness... sounds like something only guys with their heads in the clouds would write about, eh?

I've got a copy of Harry Stines book, "Halfway to Anywhere." Signed by the author who is an Arizona native. This is what may be that taxi to space.

Update: Leave it to Zubrin to design a torch ship!

An American Housewife

2005-07-02T18:11:00.000-07:00

I'm of the opinion that average America can be pretty insightful, here's a housewife that supports this proposition.

It may take a moment to get to the right link once you reach the site... be patient.

China Threat

2005-06-26T21:47:00.000-07:00

This report warns of the growing threat that China represents in the decade ahead. If they see us as choking their energy supply they may feel the only response is to seize territory.

"...likely targets for China are the Russian Far East, which has vast oil and gas deposits, and Southeast Asia, which also has oil and gas resources."

Says the article, which makes me wonder if they haven't already made a deal to purchase Russian oil, which would seem to be a smart strategic move and provide Russia with funds to fuel their ambitions?

PayPal Hitmen

2005-06-26T14:27:00.000-07:00

The blogfather had a great idea. So why doesn't some entrepreneurial mercenary support group set this up?

All that would have to happen is that they collect small payments until a threshold was met, then post a fee for service. Alternatively, they could apply the small payments as they come in to a contract, with the fee growing over time until the contract is filled (for whatever the fee finally ends up being.)

What? Some real intelligence?

2005-06-21T21:12:00.000-07:00

Somebody got it right. The question is, is it an accident or has someone finally figured out the need?

Hello Nuclear Power

2005-06-20T20:41:00.000-07:00

If this insight is correct (and it certainly makes sense to me) I believe the result will be we will eventually be forced to use the only power source capable of satisfying the need.

It's about time we standardized on the safest design and got cranking.

Reparations?

2005-06-11T07:03:00.000-07:00

Here they count the cost.

Clinton and China

2005-06-11T06:55:00.000-07:00

This seems worthy of consideration

Free to Trash

2005-05-22T23:38:00.000-07:00

Here's a point to ponder if you live somewhere other than the U.S.of A... What would your leader do if a national publication did this in your country?

What about the Fuse?

2005-05-22T23:13:00.000-07:00

If Newsweek was the match and the fanatics were the cannon, what about the fuse?

Performing Arts You Say?

2005-05-21T19:48:00.000-07:00

Hmm... insight... un... common?

What's a Multiverse?

2005-05-15T21:28:00.000-07:00

Karl asked me, "And what's this about the 'multiverse'? Not a standard physics concept and even if it were, how does this result in a feeble attempt to "deny" the existence of a god or gods? I am confused."

In reply to my statement, "The Matrix, for instance, is a movie crying to be rewritten. In the multiverse (a ridiculous attempt by physicists to deny the existance of God) I can imagine some truly great plot diversions."

A good place to start might be the wikipedia. In particular the many worlds theory.

So I'd have to say, yes it is a standard physics concept. Now the second point, how is this an attempt to deny god's existance (feeble or otherwise?) That's because honest hearted scientists have noted that a multitude (quite a large amount) of physical parameters must be precise (to an extreme degree) for life to exist at all.

The solution to this conundrum for some is that the parameters are what they are because if they weren't we would not exist to measure them. But even given that fact, an infinite number of universes are required to make the statistical obsurdity of life (without God to control matters) a possibility.

And that's about it folks.

The Lybian Option

2005-05-12T14:12:00.000-07:00

Might Syria see the light? Kadafi did. Check out the map.

Update: Syrian democracy prospects?

When 60 percent is not

2005-05-12T05:42:00.000-07:00

Some insights just require historical accuracy.

Is 20 billion barrels of oil a lot?

2005-05-12T04:45:00.000-07:00

A lot of blogs are reporting this, but a good fisking of it is very revealing.

A New Hope

2005-05-12T02:32:00.000-07:00

In 1977 it was awesome. Next week an era will come to a close. Star Wars will be over... Although, if money is yet to be made, they ain't gonna let the fat lady anywhere near the stage.

But actually, my new hope is that I may write a blog worth reading. I'm actually not ready yet, but just want this page started... just so it will nag me to do something with it.

Sometimes I feel the need to comment on something I've read, but to add a zillion words to someone elses blog comments seems to me to be in very poor taste. Instead I will put my thoughts here (with the hope that anyone out there may rip it to shreds.) I'm a great believer in the idea that genuine criticism (as opposed to bogus slander) can greatly benefit the recipient. Happily, I have a thick (fireproof) skin.

My theme will be the insights of others... Particularly if I find them well expressed. Insights, of course, are more than simple observations. An insight is the revelation of a hidden truth. I like the simple truth, but sometimes it's not readily apparent and often counter-intuative. My hope is to recognize it when I see it; to share it; and perhaps tear it apart and look at it from other angles. Nothing is sacred.

Bloggers are like a family and I find I have warm feelings for many when I read their thoughts. I like people. I even like people that are not very likeable. As a matter of fact, if you put many of the people I love into a single room it would be the match that lights off the next world war... really, I have such eclectic taste in friends. I hope that whether you agree with my thoughts or not, we can be friends. Can you have too many friends? I think not! BTW, can I borrow a few bucks until...

Some thoughts may be expressed with laser like focus. But I'm really not an essayist and I will ramble. Oh well, that's me. Thanks for all the fish... 42!