Thursday, September 1, 2016

Deja vu?

Hey,.. ?Donald Trump plays the lead role in 'Hair'. [ Big Hair- who remembers?] :-

"When the Moo.o.oon is in the Seventh House
And aligns with Mars
Then peace will guide the pla.a.nets
And will steer the stars. "
( youtube )
" ... And then I thought of Donald Trump, who advocates military force as the solution to all international complexities. Who, despite having graduated college at the height of the Vietnam War, managed to avoid military service. ..

America's very own Rodrigo Duterte

 " .. Donald Trump, who says he would force the military to commit war crimes. Donald Trump, who advocates waterboarding because “if it doesn’t work, they deserve it anyway.” Who advocates plundering oil from oil-rich countries, in violation of the Geneva Conventions. Who disparaged John McCain’s war service because he was captured by the North Vietnamese. Who rallies his supporters with name-calling and chest-beating about vanquishing all foes and being bigger and tougher and more ruthless and never apologizing or backing down. Who promises to bring those same traits to his foreign policy. " [Huffington]

Trump, who operates from an entirely emotional [gut-feel +middle-finger narcissistic - not compassionate] base, is endorsed by The National Police Union. ..
"The union’s president, Chuck Canterbury, said in a statement that Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton hadn’t bothered seeking the union’s backing." [Huffington]  
 By design or oversight doesn't matter.  What's he saying - that the police are to be bought with promises of ever-harder tactical enforcement weapons [tanks in schools maybe]?  With policemen already downed to sniperkill, and the National Rifle Association supporting flooding the place with guns, that's becoming a moot point.  It's the "Never apologising and backing down" that's the kicker; brinkmanship develops push-back.

Emotions.  Running high.  Harbinger of things to come?  [Written all over him.]  There's a trajectory here that is more than a little disturbing, given the acknowledged decline of America as a stabilising force in  the world.  Why for example do we need battleships enforcing the right to protect trade routes that let us buy stuff that China wants to sell us?   America with its bases in Japan, Korea, the Phillippines.  Where does China have its bases off America, in the interest of "global stability"?  

That expressive middle finger (lifted high) will seal the deal between China and Russia (and quite possibly the rest of the Middle East) for sure. 

(Refrain [ the gambler]:-)
" You've got to know when to hold 'em
Know when to fold 'em
Know when to walk away
And know when to run
You never count your money
When you're sittin' at the table
There'll be time enough for countin'
When the dealin's done .. "
Obama's legacy(?)  .. handing over now to The Donald, Vlad, and  Xi Jinping  (singing karaoke on an emotional high?).  I doubt it.   Be careful what you wish for.  Half the world's on fire already (from within); or on the verge of it.  And that's just courtesy of a Phantom from the Opera (religious and cultural differences).  Throw The Donald's hair (and transparency) ["We've come a long way from nudity, baby"]  into the mix and it could be very eXpl0sive indeed.

Nudity revealed :-: " Who promises to bring those same traits to his foreign policy"  And is thus undone by his own middle finger.  Sticking to domestic policy is what everybody wants and thinks he's promising.  But do people really think an ego like that knows its limitations?

The Donald does, but God does not (play dice).  
The world might be in a spin but it is not a casino.  
Donald Trump does not herald the Age of Aquarius 
(For American 'greatness') any more than Assad does for Syria.

There's a certain inexorable certainty about all of this that we've seen before, centred around economic unrest,  .. something that nobody seems to want very much to talk about.  Who exactly is Trump waving that middle finger at?  Wall Street?  Mexicans?  Muslims?  And does it really matter very much? 

 "Great (again)" ?  What does that actually mean?  Frankly I doubt if he  knows either, but there does seem to be something getting lost in translation - like a pathological ego just bursting to get out.  With an "I don't give a Flying F***!! " finger like that, in the office of Commander-in-Chief, whether it be on his shoelace or the big red button, .. well, .. talk about one night in Bangkok making a hard man tremble, .. it's enough to make me limp out like lettuce - and go and play Pokemon before I too become virtual reality.

P.S.  Which come to think of it is the game everybody is playing.  There has arisen a P.M. (a Pokey Monster). .  At least with Clinton you know what you've got, and are therefore more able to deal with it, but this is the Pied Piper Ego Incarnate, the Devil of Democracy staring back at the very people who magicked it into reality and playing catch-me-if-you-can.  You can take away all those flags and any notion of public office.  They mean nothing.  The last resort could be staring everybody in the face. ["an inexorable certainty.."]   Seems to me Trump is not the issue, .. merely the embodiment of one.  He is a chimera - "virtual reality" made real,   The Establishment (and the 'Democracy' it supposedly represents) is under attack.  And on notice.   It's more than jobs.  It's 'Brexit' turned in on itself and ratcheted up to National Identity and 'the Dreaming'.  How far is push prepared to go when it comes to shove?

Friday, November 13, 2015

The Meaning of Life and Everything

[or .. The Pathology of Connectedness ]
 "Show me the normal person and I will cure him" (~Sigmund Freud)

    Themes above the line are musings on the human zoo

===========  Plimsoll line (keeping  the boat afloat) ===============
Themes below the line are about the geology.  Sometimes they get a bit mixed up because it can be difficult to separate them.

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

A Mechanism for an Expanding Earth

 [An 8-element supplement to the above paper including this figure may be viewed here]
[See also ]

For some considering this matter of an expanding Earth, a mechanism for expansion would appear to be central to their acceptance before any physical expression such as the creation of the ocean floors ( = two thirds of the Earth's surface) would be credible.  Seeing,  it would appear, is not necessarily believing.  However, if such a mechanism were to be discovered  (such as the much-celebrated Higgs boson, discovered on the stroke of a funding midnight  and considered to be a credible expression of an expanding universe)  would they abandon their conviction of the 'reality' of subduction?  I doubt it.

In the meantime therefore, they may care to read  Mr E. Ellis' assessment of how an expanding universe is expressed on Earth.

Mr Ellis posits that :-
"The decay of five elements (O, Fe, Si, Mg and S) as exemplified by their ionization properties is responsible for the Earth accumulating sufficient mass to double its radius at least twice in the past billion years [and was] responsible for the oxygen in water doubling seven times in mass and volume for a one hundred and twenty-four fold increase to incrementally fill the growing ocean beds created during the crustal expansions of (the) past 180 to 200 million years."

.. and supports his narrative with six tables and seven figures that clearly reflect the considerable time and thoughtful effort he has invested in this enterprise :-

Table 1 =  Mass doubling rates for the above-mentioned elements
Table 2, 3 =  Earth mass and radius growth over past 540my
Table 4 =  Ionisation potentials of the five elements
Table 5 =  Variable Earth-mass growth rates from ionisations of the five selected elements
Table 6 =  Mass from table 5 with lagging radii

Fig.1 =   Geological time scale of five ions
Fig.2 =  Percentage mass v. time (Graph of table 5)
Fg.3 =    Mass, Radius, Density and gravity curves of Table 6.
Fig.4 =   Uncertainty on mass calculation
Fig.5 =    Uncertainty on radius calculation
Fig.6 =  Uncertainty on density calculation
Fig.7 =  Uncertainty on gravity calculation

I don't have a background in physics sufficient to evaluate Mr Ellis'  work, but I do recognise that in addressing this subject from a perspective of the atom rather than from the traditionally geological one (as I do), he takes an angle that not only returns us to considerations about the age of the Earth, how it formed and how it is warmed, but also invites us to consider how the intrinsic properties of elemental atoms may increase over time to form the material stuff of the planet.

Mr Ellis tells me that according to our present understanding of the universe the standard model of particle physics involves 2 entities, matter (4.9% atoms and 26.8% dark matter) and energy (68.3% dark energy) which are interchangeable.  However the mathematics of the standard model indicates something is lacking, .. hence the need for more sub-atomic particles and more complex math.  Mr Ellis believes that the ionic paper fills that void with a third entity - entropy, which is not interchangeable with the other two - mass can convert to entropy all right (burn a piece of paper), and energy can convert to entropy (how the Earth came to be heated in the first place), but not the reverse :: entropy is a one-way street.

The paper should be viewed as offering a method for finding the mass and radius of an expanding Earth that matches the observed geology. It is significant that all the points in Table 5 and Figure 4 are at, or very close to, a geological boundary where highly significant changes in the fossil record are noted.

Comments are welcome either here, or on the 'contact author' link provided in Mr Ellis'  paper.

Good reading.

Thursday, August 22, 2013


(Blog for website at )

Readers interested in the argument for Earth expansion v. Plate Tectonics might like to revisit *this post* while I reorganise things here.  I think the whole business is encapsulated in those two points 1.  Subduction and 2. Along-ridge spreading.  Though of course it gets quite complicated in the detail (which it would of course, since everything geological is incorporated).

The essential point is that whichever is correct (expansion or subduction) (and they are mutually exclusive) the evidence has to be *writ large* to the point that it is hardly worth talking about - like day and night, Earth rotation and the Earth being round. [But just think of the wisdom that went into that lot! - which now is hardly even kindergarten stuff]

And that's it :-  *EITHER*  Subduction, 'evidenced' by the ambiguity of first motions of earthquakes and the destruction of an area of the Earth's crust = 2/3rds of its present area (that has 'disappeared' and for which there is therefore no evidence), ... *OR*  ...  Along-Ridge Spreading and Extension, which is a whole lot of ARSE staring Plate Tectonics in the face.

Saturday, August 17, 2013

Scientists behaving badly (again)

 (.. "again"..) ??

(Blog for website at )

 (Doing dishes and listening to the radio again - regarding the workings of 'science'.)  Putting the hot money on consensus can be fraught with banana skins :-

" .. Yet, as we have been reading lately the number of retractions in scientific journals suggests a rising trend towards deception of one kind or another.  Two years ago the British journal Nature attributed half of the retractions to plain mistakes, and half to scientific misconduct such as plagiarism, faked data and altered images." 
From  ::   Discovery ofStreptomycin     ( 6MB)
" ..  The result was one of the most vicious battles for credit of a major discovery in the history of science ... "

(" .. faked and altered images "  ??    For aspects of which we could well attend to the view of Don Anderson in regard to seismic tomography propping up Plate Tectonics. )

Shifting sands in Plate Tectonics too?
Dearie me, ..  Tch - Tch !  Who would think?

[Addendum, 20140224 :: And of course climate change.  Who are the bandits, .. the changers or the doubters?   And what is the subtext there with regard to the role of consensus in science?
Or, if we are to regard the broader picture of group behaviour, should the question rather be, "What is the role of science in consensus?"   If a consensus in global warming has been reached by the same devices that a consensus has been reached, say,  for Plate Tectonics, then I would say, .. well I guess you could guess what I would say.  But I have noticed over the last five to eight years maybe that the seasons seem to be gradually delayed by about a month, and in the last few, more like a month and a half, .. meaning that 'earinwesternoz we don't get December-'Christmas' weather till well into February for the last number of years.  Does that mean warming? I don't know, but it's certainly late going by the trees which seem to be confused as well, flowering at the wrong times, or twice a year to make up for the flowers that are out of kilter - and still getting it wrong. I don't know, .. but consensus is a pain when it comes to science.  So I guess that's what I would say (about consensus). ]

["We are a community of scientists.." ]
(Read :- Hey, ..  Shoot that messenger !  We're all in this together.)