Category Archives: science

Liars and whores

Posted on by
6

It’s deep frost on all the roofs here, the temperature is definitely below zero. However, the weather app on my computer shows 4°C. I looked at other sources – yup, they show 4°. I already noticed a pattern there; they always show at least 2° more than the sensor in my car, which is within 0.5° from the sensors reporting the condition on the road, so I know it’s accurate. But, how is that possible? Shouldn’t the meteorologists have the most accurate sensors? They should, normally. However, in the recent decades in the West, this is not how it works.

How it works is that the “higher ups”, the ones holding the wallet from which the scientists are paid, decided that we’re having a global warming, and that’s the scientific truth. Since the scientific truth is already known and should not be disputed, all the measurements should reflect it and show that the global temperatures are indeed rising. The countries and stations that don’t show accurate measurements will have their funding removed. So, we now live in a world where scientific measurements are accurate if they align with politics, and not the physical reality, and political accuracy is rewarded with funds, so that the databases can be filled with politically accurate temperature readings, and those who dare to measure the actual physical reality will be perceived as wildly inaccurate compared to the adjacent measurement spots, and the heads of departments will get demoted and their funding removed.

One will ask how is it possible to spoof temperature readings, and I’ll just laugh. I don’t think they even use thermometers anymore, I think they just use some infrared satellite map and the computer reads out the values based on what somebody told it to read out. Also, all the scientists know what to say in the media when asked about anything. It’s like that joke about the Sunday School, where a nun made a small quiz, and the answer to all four question was Jesus, and she then decided to cheer the kids up a bit and asked “What is it that lives in the trees, has a fuzzy tail and gathers nuts for the winter?” One kid answered “I know the correct answer is Jesus, but to me it sounds a lot like a squirrel.”

The scientists know the correct answer to every question is global warming. No amount of walnuts in a hole in the tree will change this truth, because they know who holds the wallet. They are just like a whore telling her customer he has the biggest cock she ever saw, because a happy customer returns and pays extra.

Campi flegrei volcano acting up

Posted on by
3

There is a serious increase in earthquakes at Campi Flegrei supervolcano site near Naples, Italy. Essentially, it’s an earthquake swarm indicating a rise of magma, which is already shallow enough.

From what I can tell, this one doesn’t need much to go critical, and it’s hard to tell what magnitude of a disaster is imminent, because those things happen on a scale, it’s not just “nothing happens” and “everything explodes”. However, since there’s a city of 6 million people there, even a small eruption would cause mass panic and ashfall would endanger a significant portion of the population. A moderate eruption happening there would be a huge disaster, merely because the area is so densely populated. However, if this thing really blows, there’s no need for warnings or evacuations because the safe area will begin somewhere outside Europe.

Campi Flegrei is a supervolcano, like Toba or Yellowstone. If that one blows up, I’m close enough that I’ll likely end up under a meter of ash. That’s why I’m not worrying about it much, because there’s nothing I can do about it. I am, however, posting this notification, because it suddenly became a thing, and I don’t think all those volcanoes are just acting up by accident or at random. There must be a common causal factor, either something geological like that magnetic pole shift that seems to be going on, or gravity causing tidal forces in the Earth’s molten interior (either planetary conjunction or something else), or some kind of a neutrino flux from the Sun increasing radioactive decay and thus increasing the convective movements in the molten interior. Too many things are acting up, and those that are closest to being critical already might go over the limit.

Santorini volcanic activity

Posted on by
Reply

As expected, the politicians and their regime “scientists” lied again, claiming the activity so far was tectonic in origin, while they knew for at least ten days that there’s water temperature rise and volcanic gasses detected around the resurgent dome island within the Santorini caldera.

How can you tell that the politicians and scientists are lying? Their lips are moving. The fucking bastards are only interested in “not creating panic”, unless they want to create panic, then they’ll create it around every non-issue at hand.

That’s why I have a radiation sensor at home, because I just can’t trust those bastards. They will either claim there’s radiation when there’s none, in order to keep everybody locked down, or they will remain silent about radiation when it’s present in order to hide something. The only way to be able to tell is to have a reliable sensor under your own control. But to return to the issue at hand, Santorini. I suspected it was volcanic activity from the start, because the seismic explanation was not consistent with the position and character of the earthquake swarm, which was centered in the volcanic area, and looked as if magma on the move is breaking through rock. So, what now remains to be seen is not whether there will be an eruption, but how big, and how destructive.

Historically speaking, it can be a small one that just fizzles out after a few weeks, or it can be a big one, like Krakatoa, that blows up the island sky high and floods the Mediterranean with tsunamis, also covering the surrounding area with ashfall. So, let me just model it.

When Krakatoa erupted, it was initially a perfectly common Plinian eruption: a column of gray smoke, very bad for the locals but nothing that much out of the ordinary, and this lasted for I don’t recall how long, days or weeks, until the magma chamber emptied. However, that’s when it all went south, because the underwater part of the magma chamber got eroded and the almost empty chamber got flooded with sea water. This all instantly turned into steam and the entire island exploded. My hunch tells me that something very similar happened at Santorini when it created the bronze age cataclysm that ended the Minoan civilization. Basically, there’s initially an eruption, and everything looks like a common local calamity until sea water breaks into the underwater magma chamber, which is when all hell breaks loose. So, those are the basic parameters of the situation. There’s going to be a volcanic eruption, and it’s going to make earthquakes, gray column of volcanic ash, and make lives miserable for the people in the vicinity. Then it’s either going do die down and sleep for the next few centuries, or, if we’re really unlucky, sea water is going to break into the fire pit and make a big boom.

My recommendation is to keep an eye on it. Even if it’s just a normal Plinian eruption, it’s going to disrupt air traffic in the neighboring countries, which is something to be aware of if you’re traveling in the region. Also, the volcanic ash might disrupt the electrical grid in the region, so power outages are to be expected in areas with abundant ashfall. Having air filtration devices at home, and particle filtration masks, is probably a good idea, because volcanic ash is essentially cement that turns into concrete in one’s lungs. Not fun. Also, it blinds you if it gets into your eyes. This means avoiding going out while it’s in the air, except if you’re very close, and you need to get the hell out. How do we know staying at home and waiting it out is a bad idea in areas immediately afflicted by a Plinean eruption? Because we found people in Pompei and Herculaneum entombed in volcanic ash. So, the advice for Santorini and the nearby islands would be to evacuate immediately, without delay, because they won’t be able to evacuate you once it starts properly, and whatever the ultimate size of the eruption, it will be bad locally. As for everybody else in the region, watch the direction of the wind, and watch for the direction of possible tsunamis. You need to be ready to react in multiple ways, depending on what ends up happening. Plan evacuation routes in case of tsunami or volcanic ashfall in advance. Also have sufficient food, water and cash for two weeks. Be aware that electricity might go out regionally, and that air traffic might be grounded across Europe.

I didn’t mention earthquakes, because I don’t know the extent to which they may be a problem. They are definitely going to be a problem in the region, and the tensions might propagate across tectonic plates, creating tremors farther away. I don’t know where, or how big, but they are definitely another thing to be aware of.

Warning

Posted on by
1

There has been an increase of seismic and volcanic activity around the world, including recent precursors that usually indicate strong earthquakes; magnitude of 8 on the momentum magnitude tensor scale in the Mediterranean basin is realistic within days. Prepare accordingly.

Also, the earthquake swarm near the Santorini volcano is increasing in magnitude, and something appears to be imminent.

There is a correlation between this increased seismicity and volcanism and the current solar maximum, but the correlation might not necessarily mean causation – for instance, both might have the common cause in the major planetary conjunction that’s going on, meaning that the same tidal force is squeezing the Sun, causing increasing activity, and the Earth, causing increasing tidal forces in the magma, resulting in increasing seismic and volcanic activity. There might, however, be a different explanation, where the planetary conjunction causes increased activity in the Sun, and some type of neutrino is increasingly produced, that causes some minor increase in the radioactive decay, which actually causes the interior of the Earth to remain molten, and even a minor increase can cause major events on the human scale of things. In any case, the whole thing is poorly explored.

In any case, I would avoid travel and have supplies sufficient for two weeks of autonomy in the entire mediterranean basin, just as a precaution. The recommended minimum of 3 days of food and water is probably sufficient if you’re not really close to the areas most likely to be afflicted – Greece, Turkey, Italy, and so on. I would treat this as a serious enough threat to act on it. Also, it’s not a distant threat, since electromagnetic precursors of strong earthquakes, usually indicating a big one within 96 hours, were detected 2-3 days ago.

What the …?

Posted on by
Reply

Just in case, I looked at the official Los Angeles plan in case of nuclear war:

IMMEDIATE ACTION FOR NUCLEAR EVENTS

If a nuclear event is occurring or about to occur:

GET INSIDE a sturdy building as quickly as you can, even if you are far from the blast site. Go to a room without windows on the lowest floor that’s close to the center/core of the building. If you are unable to get inside, take cover behind a sturdy object and stay low to the ground.

STAY INSIDE the building. Shelter-in-place. Do not go outside or look out windows to observe the blast and fallout, as this can expose you to radiation and cause serious damage to your eyes.

STAY TUNED to updates from public safety and government authorities or trusted media sources. Some communications systems may be down. During emergencies, simple text messages often work best. You may also want to have a battery powered or hand-crank radio.

My immediate thought was that this doesn’t make any sense, since the houses in the LA area are made of super-combustible material, as evidenced in the recent fires where the houses burned down faster than trees. The main hazards in a nuclear blast are overpressure and thermal radiation, which means fires and 3rd degree burns. The entire LA building code is a terrible match for sheltering in situ in case of a nuclear blast. Then I thought I already saw identical instructions a while ago, and indeed, it’s the city of New York. It looks like someone in FEMA figured out they don’t have any realistic plan in case of a nuclear war, so they made a plan-like list that is now mindlessly copied everywhere, including places where such “plan” would amount to suicide.

This is so stupid I don’t know whether to laugh or cry, because I know how those morons are thinking: they need to “have a plan”, because someone could ask them what’s their plan for x, and now they can say “we have a plan for x, go to our web site, it’s a great plan”. However, let’s see what it all means.

Back in the 1950s, people in America were taking nuclear war very seriously, and the plans were made by the people who actually made the atomic weapons in Los Alamos, and who had first-hand experience with nuclear blasts, having observed the tests from the closest possible proximity. What they recommended was widely ridiculed later, but as I learned more about the nuclear weapons, I got to understand their thinking.

Their plan was to evacuate the political and military leadership into nuclear bunkers or high in the air, in order to preserve the chain of command and have control over the situation. The next idea was to evacuate the major populated centres, but they soon realised that this can’t be done. Basically, you’d have to do it in a timely and orderly manner, have enough shelter space, with food, water and fuel, for population of every major city. They ran simulations and figured out that an order to evacuate would cause instant widespread panic which would block the roads and make evacuation impossible. Even if they managed to evacuate, they couldn’t possibly care for hundreds of millions of people. Also, an order to evacuate would necessarily be given too late, because they would avoid giving it until the rockets were already flying, and then it would be too late for anything other than sheltering in-situ. If you gave the order early enough, the enemy would take it as a sure sign that you are preparing for a first strike, which would increase the probability of pre-emption, and it would make the political solution less likely. Also, when you give the order to evacuate everything, your society essentially ceases to exist. Your economy is no longer there. You started spending the supplies of last resort. No, that’s not something you want to do unless the nukes are already in the air, and then you have 20 minutes max, which is not enough to evacuate anything. It is, however, enough to move into your own basement, essentially to shelter in-situ.

So, let’s make a list of the dangers of a nuclear strike, and see what kind of measures would make sense.

If you are close enough to the blast, nothing can help you. You are dead. In some rare cases, being in a very deep bunker would help, but that calculation doesn’t matter for the urban centres, only for the military command bunkers. Basically, the urban centres are impossible to evacuate in time because of the traffic, there aren’t enough shelters for the population, and for them, the only advice you can give them is to shelter in situ, avoid the windows and all kinds of objects that could become airborne in conditions of overpressure, hide from the debris and cover yourself with a white reflective cloth to reflect as much infrared as possible; that was actually tested and it helps a lot. Similarly, paint your house white, because it reflects most of the radiation. Dark stuff burns much more quickly. Also, yes, duck and cover. Hide under a desk, a chair, and cover your head and face with clothes in order to protect yourself from heat and debris. Depending on the strength of the blast, you will either die or not, but if you take those measures you will reduce probability of all kinds of injuries that would get you killed in the aftermath even if they are not that serious normally, because forget medical care, that’s not happening. Also, the area where the nuclear blast is absolutely deadly is quite small compared to the area that is quite survivable if simple protective measures are taken, and you can’t do anything for those in the ground zero of the blast anyway. Imagine concentric circles of the target – those in the black centre are dead anyway, and no measures could save them. Those on the periphery of the target might survive with the simplest of measures, such as avoiding the windows, hiding under a desk and covering themselves with a white sheet. Between those two, there’s a gradient of probabilities, circumstances and luck.

So, their thinking was that the most likely targets are going to be military sites and urban centres (black on the target). For those, nothing could be done. Those close to the blast (grey on the target) are mostly fucked; probability of serious burns, lacerations, radiation injuries, being buried alive in the ruins etc. are very high, but some general precautionary and protective measures could still help them. However, the largest percentage of people are going to be more lightly impacted (the white on the target), and very simple measures such as “duck and cover” could drastically improve their outcomes.

There’s a very good reason why those protective measures were introduced in the 1950, only to be completely abandoned by the 1980s. You see, in the 1950s there was a very limited number of nuclear weapons, and delivery vehicles were very primitive. The calculation was that America had to deal with a dozen or so hits in the urban centres, at worst. However, by the 1980s, as the number, yield and sophistication of the nuclear weapons grew exponentially, it meant counting on thousands of hits in the urban centres, with hydrogen bomb MIRVs. The calculation then became obvious – nothing can be done to save the population once the nukes are in the air, so all efforts must be directed at avoiding the nuclear outcome.

However, we are no longer in the 1980s. Neither America nor Russia have tens of thousands of nuclear weapons armed for the first strike. Sure, the number is still high, but have in mind that those are mostly battlefield weapons, not the intercontinental ones. The expected number of intercontinental warheads expected to actually strike is numbered in the hundreds, and since those are precious, they will aim mostly at the military installations. Striking at the cities is useless for the first strike, and exists only in the plans for a retaliatory strike. As the number of deployed nuclear weapons grows, it becomes tempting to wipe out the urban centres as well, but as things are right now, very few if any urban centres would be targeted. This brings us back to the 1950s and the “duck and cover” exercises, because they become very relevant if we assume that civilian targets will be at the periphery of any nuclear strike, unless they are considered of military importance.

So, what would be the reasonable advice in case of a nuclear exchange? First, don’t be on the X. This means evacuating early and being nowhere near the expected target zones, or the zombie apocalypse zones of the aftermath, which for the most part means the urban centres. Second, expect to shelter in situ and have at least two weeks of supplies that would guarantee that you don’t have to exit your shelter early. Third, adhere to the “duck and cover” principles as laid out in the 1950s; those guys built and tested the nukes themselves and had hands-on experience with that stuff, and knew what they were talking about. Fourth, have a radiation sensor so that you can know what is safe and what is deadly, and fifth, yes, have a radio or some other means of getting the public broadcasts, especially the ones of local importance.