Monthly Archives: May 2013

Johnny got his gun

The results of the wars of the past were bad enough. The wars of the future will be worse.

Strange… in World War II, there was a song, Lili Marleen, that both Axis & Allied soldiers loved. Wars seem to be misplaced feats of manhood for those who unwisely trust their leaders.

Application for the future? Avoid wars: they’re not being fought for your sake, and you aren’t the one who is meant to benefit.





The E-Cat and the Future

The first steps for third-party verification for Cold Fusion/LENR is starting up, with the report from (I first read the report form, and then the ELFORSK report on e-Catworld).

Assuming tings pan out, then we are on the cusp of truly widespread liberty. This can only be good for the future in general, and Christians in particular. All these glorious advances in such a short time – 3D printing and the Internet, encryption for the masses and on-line commerce, cheap computers and cheap food.

Frustrating quote:

With that being said, exactly what kind of reaction is producing the large amount of heat energy remains unknown. While the reaction was originally touted as cold fusion when Rossi first unveiled the device a few years ago, most analysts now suspect that the mechanism is more likely a low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR) that is not fusion. If the reaction involves the conversion of nickel into copper, as it seems, then it would be considered a transmutation.

Somewhat frustratingly, the seven scientists were not allowed to look inside the steel cylinder that houses the fuel, which is a combination of nickel powder, hydrogen gas, and—most mysteriously—a catalyst composed of unknown additives. This catalyst is an industrial trade secret, and the secrecy makes it impossible for independent scientists to understand exactly how the device works.

“It is frustrating to observe a mysterious phenomenon but not be allowed to investigate it fully, yes,” Essén said. “I understand, however, that inventors are mainly interested in commercial applications and that this requires the keeping of industrial secrets.”

What the scientists could do was to operate the device, measure the heat energy it produced, and compare that to the input energy to calculate the impressive values stated above. They could also assess the prototypes for any potential radioactive emissions, of which they found none.

Read more at:

I’m still waiting for my cheap 3D printer and 3D “tricoder” (so I can cut my ties to the medical establishment); it looks like I will have to wait for my cheap code fusion power plant as well.

How long? I’d guess a decade or two. If you use computers as a model for these new technologies, we’re still in 1969: the first build-it-yourself PC was in the mid-70s.

Wait, wait, wait….

The Future of the Police

It’s going to be like this

Something like this – instead of our current Above-the-Law government police system – is needed to gain the stars.

“But what does private law enforcement have to do with interstellar colonization?”

  • Heading into space is very expensive: to reduce expenses and build the capital needed, we will need as many non-violent (or, at worse, highly-selective, individually-targeted, last resort violence) solutions as possible. Anything else means power-hungry governments cooly wiping out billions from orbit, then singing songs on TV about their greatness – to the fervent cheers of their supporters.

Going into space is Serious Business. Getting it wrong can easily send us back to the immediate post-Flood era, with eight living people in all of Creation, surrounded by bloated corpses.

  • We need the social self-organizational skills shown in this video. Decent people have got to be able to help each other, without waiting for the direction or the permission of Our Elected Representatives.
  • Profitable institutions need to voluntarily plow some of those profits back to the community. It cannot be done via taxes: that’s just some politician boasting about his righteousness while stealing money for the sake of himself and his friends. The kind of attitude that naturally promotes ‘giving back’ to the community by businessmen – without the assistance of our Political Masters requires solid spiritual capital.

The collectivists and socialists among us understand this, which is why they have been hard at work denigrating, undercutting, and destroying Christian society for the last few centuries. Spiritual capital, self-governance, personal discipline… all this requires the internal strength Christianity provides, and people who live like this don’t need Political Masters. Socialists, on the other hand, wants everyone to depend on “Friends of the People, who Only Have Our Best Interests At Heart.”

The kind of people who are going to spend their centuries bringing life to other worlds will either be self-adoring, power-hungry monsters or servants of God and Men. The power-hungry monsters will fail – regardless if they are waving hammer’n’sickles, stars and crescents, or crosses – but monsters with that kind of power will destroy innumerable lives before they fall. It is best that society be structured to inhibit and cripple their growth and influence as completely as possible, while speeding and magnifying their every flaw and mistake.

This societal design cannot come from a single mind: such visions are inevitably too simple, and to easy to subvert by the power-hungry. Also, one suspects that the ‘single brilliant mind’ authoring such visions has a strong taste for controlling others… it’s best not to let such Glorious Philosopher-Kings gain any kind of power over society, regardless of their promises and piety and Love of the People.

But free people working together, guided by the Holy Spirit, can do the job… IF they don’t get distracted by the waves of prosperity and public respect that naturally follows consistent obedience, as night follows day.

Percision-engineered Animals

While reading Uncommon Descent, I came across this tidbit in The Edge of Evolution:

If Dr. Kozulic’s conclusion is correct, then it would have interesting implications for the creation-evolution controversy. On a material level, living things might still be biologically related, insofar as they sprang from a common ancestral stock: in other words, common descent could still be true. However, on a formal level, each and every species of living thing would be the product of Intelligent Design and could be viewed as a separate creation, as the unique genes and proteins that endow it with its defining characteristics were essentially built from scratch. In other words: living things might share a common ancestry, but their constituent proteins certainly do not. They were created.

That conclusion would mean that even animals as similar as rats and mice, which diverged between 12 and 24 million years ago) were designed separately. The common Norwegian rat (pictured above, courtesy of Wikipedia) is popularly imagined to be just a scaled up version of a mouse. However, scientists have identified no less than 75 unique genes (69 mouse genes and 6 rat genes) for which there is good evidence of de novo origin since the divergence of mouse and rat. Each of these genes is only found in either the mouse or rat lineages. If Dr. Kozulic is correct, that means that rats and mice have to be viewed as separate designs. Ditto for humans and chimps, both of which have chemically unique proteins and genes.

There are some interesting implications here.

One of the major ones is that it’s going to be very difficult to properly design new lifeforms to fit new environments. Assuming a near-universally dead universe – which is what the evidence points to – we are going to have to build our own biospheres. It’s going to be much easier to pick out near-earthlike worlds – in size, distance from the primary, received light, magnetism – and build up a biosphere than to design new lifeforms to fit a whole new world.

It looks like all the worlds of men will have to be created patiently, in layers. First, find the right physically compatible world, where only a few changes are needed to bring it up to snuff. Then, lay down suitable algae, bacteria and moss, say; then the more basic animals, then the complex ones. To quicken the pace and make a living world as cheaply and as quickly as possible, you want to use Earthly animals and plants, with as little modification as possible.

Any serious modification is going to be costly: there are a lot of things that can go wrong, and only a few designs that work in a given organism.

Moreover, from an actual library of 6×10^12 proteins each containing 80 contiguous random amino acids, Keefe and Szostak isolated four ATP binding proteins and concluded that the frequency of functional proteins in the sequence space may be as high as 1 in 10^11 [1 in 100,000,000,000 – VJT], allowing for their discovery by entirely stochastic means [55]. However, subsequent in vivo studies with this man-made ATP binding protein showed that it disrupted the normal energetic balance of the cell, acting essentially as an antibiotic [56]. One can conclude, therefore: had this protein been formed by random mutations, the cell with it would have left no descendants. Furthermore, the probability of its formation in a cell would have been lower than 10^-11, because random DNA mutations introduce stop codons and frameshifts whereas Keefe and Szostak avoided stop codons and frameshift mutations by experimental design [55]. The importance of distinguishing the results of in vitro from in vivo studies is highlighted by the finding that only a tiny fraction, one in about 10^10, of the active mutants of triosephosphate isomerase functioned properly in vivo [57]. (pp. 6-7)

World-building is likely to become as much an art as a science, and it will be difficult to match God’s creativity. I’d love to try though!

Siew and Fischer succinctly described the issues at stake: “If proteins in different organisms have descended from common ancestral proteins by duplication and adaptive variation, why is that so many today show no similarity to each other?” And further: “Do these rapidly evolving ORFans correspond to nonessential proteins or to species determinants?”

There are so many technical considerations that will have to be kept in mind, and our minds are so limited, that I’m personally very glad that computing technology will continue to soar into the future. Can you imagine a team of, say, a hundred hard-core Creationists attempting to create an entirely new world without the aid of computers?

If I were a betting man, I’d put good money on Creationists – as a Christian religion focused on creating living worlds across the stars, rather than the blindingly obvious objective truth that life needs information (and thus, an Intelligent Designer) to come into being – being the only ones willing to enliven a nearly-dead universe. Who else is going to risk an ageless life on such a risky venture?

With faith, you can afford the price of failure – “So I die and enter God’s presence. Is this supposed to terrify me?” Without faith, you are going to cling to what you have. And with nanobots and 3D printers and total VR worlds and flawless sexbots and the illusion of Perfect Safety, ageless non-believers will have a host of reasons to stay right where they are.

Why risk it all on a dream?

From Benches to the Stars

I believe that the best way to get to the stars is by working together freely, via voluntary co-operation or a private business, and not by a government bureaucracy (no more wildly overpriced space shuttles!)

My main inspiration is from this article, on students working together to build benches for buses. The Detroit government hates it, of course, but it’s far too bankrupt and lazy to do a thing about it. In the meantime, the students are openly ignoring the bleatings of the bureaucrats, and doing what they need to do to care for the oldsters.

This is what life is all about: initiative, love, imagination, hard work, and brushing away evil like the petty triviality it was always destined to be.

While 3D printing, agelessness and very cheap energy is on its way, I don’t think that I will live to see it. But if there is any possibility of FTL travel (doubtful) for STL travel, then the kind of power tech we will have in 2220 or so will make some kind of STL travel possible.

A century of advances before we have the power we need, at the current rate of technological advancement? Should be plenty. By 2300, a private, DYI project by a few hundred volunteers should be able to pick out a starsystem, map it out, and terraform it. By that time, the main cost is going to be time and risk, not money or material or R&D.

(I personally don’t believe that Faster-than-Light travel is possible, as FTL travel implies time travel, and casualty – time’s arrow only pointing one way – is critical to the administration of justice, divine or otherwise.)

The Auld Blogge: Mike Flynn’s Journal

I have recently discovered the Auld Blogge (yes, I saw that), and enjoyed the article Medieval Sci-fi. It looks like the medieval Christians were pretty sure that bizzarely-shaped nonhuman sophonts from Earth have souls:


The story of St Christopher from Ireland describes him thusly::
‘Now this Christopher was one of the Dogheads, a race that had the heads of dogs and ate human flesh. He meditated much on God, but at that time he could speak only the language of the Dogheads. When he saw how much the Christians suffered he was indignant and left the city. He began to adore God and prayed. “Almighty God,” he said, “give me the gift of speech, open my mouth, and make plain thy might that those who persecute thy people may be converted”. An angel of God came to him and said: “God has heard your prayer.”The angel raised Christopher from the ground, and struck and blew upon his mouth, and the grace of eloquence was given him as he had desired.’

St Christopher was baptized and abjured his erstwhile human-eating. As a result he gained human appearance before getting martyred.  Pay attention to that last: As a result of baptism, he “gained human appearance.”

Of course, this is different than space aliens: these dog heads (and other nonhuman sophonts) were thought to have been born and bred right here on Earth. Today, we had actually scoured the earth, and found some odd-looking types of humans (in European eyes), but no dogheads. We then dreamed up aliens in outer space, but we  – well, our Compassionate Masters anyways – also decided that there is no God, only billions of years of evolution. So, these aliens were supposed to prove that life can evolve elsewhere, without the special creation of Earth.

Except, if there was anyone out there, we would have known by now, given all these billions of years and the exploding pace of technological growth that we have gained.

(True: in a young universe, it is possible that God could have made low-tech sentient species on other worlds: but that is not what atheistic materialists want to hear. They want aliens rising by random chance, which implicitly means vast alien empires, meandering across the stars for millions of years. Except there isn’t a scrap of evidence for this.)

Once again, I will point out that the only aliens that will exist are the ones we ourselves will make. By our intelligent design, we probably will be able to make dog-men, or anything else. If the genetic code isn’t flexible enough – and I suspect that it’s a lot more complicated than we think – prosthetic technology is sure to jump forward in the coming years. AI is a reasonable possibility too, if you ignore the “self-awareness” aspect of it.

(How are you supposed to code for something you can’t even explain mathematically?)

The Auld Blogge is quite interesting from the Catholic Christian perspective. Even myself, a grimly optimistic Calvinist, find it quite educational. At the moment, the top post points to another blog, the TOF Spot, where Thomas Aquinas discusses the arguments of atheism.

Interesting, the actual logical arguments for atheism hasn’t changed much in the last few centuries: only the lust for untrammelled State Power has grown during that time.) And even that lust is going to suffer a serious kick in the gonads, after the secularists finish bankrupting the State via it’s Welfare State programs.

“The Answer Wiki” proclaimed that the most up-voted answers on the Quora presented the following arguments for atheism:

A lack of evidence for god.
Poor logic in arguments for god.
The evidence that contradicts claims for god’s existence.
A universe in which god exists does not make sense.

TOF’s Faithful Reader will immediately discern that none of these are arguments, but rather mere proclamations, rather like “Bible sez it; I believe it!” They do provide evidence of poor reasoning skills, however, in this, the twilight of the Modern Ages. Nietzsche was right, it appears, when he said that after the Death of God comes the Death of Reason.

Read the article yourself: it’s worth your time.

“Our American Pravda”

A good article from the American Conservative, outlining so many ignored stories regarding official corruption that it can only astound.

These three stories—the anthrax evidence, the McCain/POW revelations, and the Sibel Edmonds charges—are the sort of major exposés that would surely be dominating the headlines of any country with a properly-functioning media. But almost no American has ever heard of them. Before the Internet broke the chokehold of our centralized flow of information, I would have remained just as ignorant myself, despite all the major newspapers and magazines I regularly read.

Am I absolutely sure that any or all of these stories are true? Certainly not, though I think they probably are, given their overwhelming weight of supporting evidence. But absent any willingness of our government or major media to properly investigate them, I cannot say more.

However, this material does conclusively establish something else, which has even greater significance. These dramatic, well-documented accounts have been ignored by our national media, rather than widely publicized. Whether this silence has been deliberate or is merely due to incompetence remains unclear, but the silence itself is proven fact.

A likely reason for this wall of uninterest on so many important issues is that the disasters involved are often bipartisan in nature, with both Democrats and Republicans being culpable and therefore equally eager to hide their mistakes. Perhaps in the famous words of Benjamin Franklin, they realize that they must all hang together or they will surely all hang separately.

We always ridicule the 98 percent voter support that dictatorships frequently achieve in their elections and plebiscites, yet perhaps those secret-ballot results may sometimes be approximately correct, produced by the sort of overwhelming media control that leads voters to assume there is no possible alternative to the existing regime. Is such an undemocratic situation really so different from that found in our own country, in which our two major parties agree on such a broad range of controversial issues and, being backed by total media dominance, routinely split 98 percent of the vote? A democracy may provide voters with a choice, but that choice is largely determined by the information citizens receive from their media.