This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Author: Hondo

  • Lonesome Tuesday

    I’ve long thought of these two tunes as siblings – even though they have different authors, and are separated by close to 30 years.

    No, that doesn’t make much sense – until you listen to each of them, in sequence, in the order they were written. Then I think you’ll understand my point.

    I’m personally convinced that the latter was inspired by the former, albeit possibly subconsciously. It just simply . . . fits.

    That’s all I’ll say about the pair. They speak for themselves far more eloquently than I can speak about them.

    One caution: if you’ve suffered a recent loss – as has at least one TAH regular – maybe you want to give these a pass. If that’s your situation, now probably isn’t the best time for these two.

    I think we can all empathize.

    (And to our regular reader I alluded to above who’s currently dealing with loss: hang in there, amigo. We’re here if you need us.)

  • A Blast From the Past: “Uncle Walter” Predicts the “Coming Ice Age”

    Way back when – e.g., in the 1970s – climatologists weren’t worrying about “global warming”.  At that point, the prospect for general global cooling was the big concern.

    However, today things have changed.  Today, the claim is that man is causing runaway warming of the planet.  Most current climatologists (or at least the most vocal ones) blame pretty much any bad weather that occurs – even harsh winter weather and extreme snowfall – on said “runaway global warming”.

    Most of today’s      global warming “true believers”      grant-grubbing tools      current-day anti-mankind Luddites        eco-whackos      climate change proponents don’t want to talk about the fact that 40 years ago the consensus was that man was causing a “new ice age”.  Hell, concerns along those lines – in particular, the introduction of small particles into the stratosphere leading to high-level cloud formation and resulting runaway global cooling – was one of three things (along with sonic boom issues and concerns regarding commercial viability) that combined to kill off the US supersonic transport (SST) program in the late 1960s/early 1970s.

    It’s understandable that they wouldn’t want to talk about that past prediction.  The fact that they’ve done a 180-degree “flip-flop” – and still can’t really explain things like the Roman/Medieval Warm period, the “Little Ice Age” and the much cooler weather of the late 1700s/early 1800s, and the recent nearly two-decade pause in global warming (which examination of unadjusted raw data shows actually likely extends back to the late 1930s or 1940s) leads to an obvious question they’d like to avoid.

    That question is, “If you guys were 100% wrong only 40 years ago and still can’t explain all that other stuff without ‘adjusting the data’, do you really even know your ass from a hole in the ground concerning the subject?”  That’s an eminently fair question IMO.

    Regardless:  though you don’t hear much about it today, back in the early and mid-1970s the media reported on the possibility of a coming ice age. In 1972, even the then “most trusted man in America” joined in beating that drum.  On September 11, 1972, he reported on that “coming ice age” – based on predictions of one of the day’s preeminent climatologists, Hubert Lamb.

    Now, just who was this Hubert Lamb fellow?  He was no crackpot – he was the guy who founded the Climate Research Unit at the UK’s University of East Anglica, the same guys who today are the leading proponents of the theory that mankind is causing uncontrolled global warming.  On his death, he was lauded by the Global Warming Policy Foundation as being “the greatest climatologist of his time”, and for making “climate change a serious research subject”.

    Well, of course those guys would pay him homage, even if he was saying exactly the opposite of what they preach today.  He’s almost certainly the one who created their meal ticket –  by showing them how to get government funding for their activities.

    Here’s a direct link to an MP4 clip of “Uncle Walter” waxing eloquent on the subject.  The article linked above also contains an embedded version of the clip. Unfortunately, I can’t seem to get it to embed properly here.

    Unlike many TAH readers, I’m old enough to remember that this was no isolated incident. The prospect for a “new ice age” was all the rage in scientific and other publications during the early and mid-1970s. Go take a look at past issues of Science News and/or the New York Times from that period; it’s there. Even the CIA published assessments concerning the possible impact.

    Do I know whether or not the planet is warming? No. Neither do I know whether it’s cooling, or if what we’re seeing today is just normal variation.

    But neither do today’s climatologists. Calling it “settled science” is pure bull. Until they can adequately and accurately explain the past, their current models are simply not good enough to be considered accurate and predictive. And today, they don’t seem able to adequately explain even the last 20 years – much less previous periods of truly extreme planetary warming or cooling documented in the geologic record – with out convoluted machinations and “adjusting” historical data to make it fit.

    There’s an old proverb that’s IMO applicable here. It starts out, “Fool me once, shame on you; . . . . ”

    (Hat tip to TAH reader Veritas Omnia Vincit for the first link above.)

  • Is Anybody Surprised?

    Is Anybody Surprised?

    Looks like those rumors of Eddie-boi’s return from the land of borscht and vodka were a bit premature.

    Snowden says U.S. not offering fair trial if he returns

    Yeah, right. My guess is Snowden’s first mention of a possible return was a “trial baloon”, and he got word (or correctly read the tea leaves) that he’d almost certainly end up doing time.

    So now he appears to be backpedaling. If you’re surprised, put up your hand.

    Yeah, me neither.

    Still, and with apologies to the late Sir Winston:

    “Come back home, Master Edward.
    We are waiting. So is your needle.”

  • About the Petraeus Deal . . . .

    Jonn’s written a couple of articles (here and here) recently concerning former GEN David Petraeus’ recent plea-bargain deal. And in truth, I generally (no pun intended) agree with Jonn’s assessment.

    But I have to say that I agree with him for very different reasons.

    Many have castigated Petraeus for his carrying on an affair with his biographer, former USAR MAJ Paula Broadwell.  (Yes, former MAJ; her promotion to LTC was reportedly revoked, and she no longer seems to be a member of the USAR.)  While I don’t condone such behavior, for a number of reasons that’s not my primary problem Petraeus’ actions.

    Why?  Well, for starters the affair was consensual, and reportedly began after Petraeus had left active duty.  While IMO such conduct is morally wrong, no one is perfect.

    Further, expecting perfection in senior leadership is IMO foolish.  I don’t really think we want – or should expect – either senior military leaders or the head of the CIA to be saints.  Intel can be a dirty business, and exceptionally few GOs/FOs are Chaplains.  Saints aren’t normally the people you’d expect to excel in such roles.

    My issue is with a different failing – and its potential effects, which we may not yet have seen or even know about.

    Petraeus has pleaded to unauthorized retention of classified materials.  That’s bad.  But here’s a quote from one published article concerning the recent plea deal that describes just what he retained.  I’ve added emphasis (italics) in the quote below.

    All eight books “collectively contained classified information regarding the identifies of covert officers, war strategy, intelligence capabilities and mechanisms, diplomatic discussions, quotes and deliberative discussions from high-level National Security Council meetings… and discussions with the president of the United States.”

    Those notebooks were apparently stored unsecurely at times.  They were reportedly kept by Petraeus “in a rucksack”, and were loaned for a period of several days to his biographer and mistress – Broadwell – for her perusal.

    That means we don’t really know who else might have seen them.  We know Petraeus and Broadwell have.  But do we truly know if anyone else looked them over – with or without their permission?

    Maybe no one else has in fact seen them.  As this point, that appears to be the case.  But if access to them was achieved clandestinely . . . we might not know that for a while.

    Some might ask if that’s really a “big deal”, or “what difference does it make?”  For anyone asking those questions, let me refer you to Dmitri Polyakov, Adolf Tolkachev, Sergei Motorin and Leonid Poleshchuk.  You can ask them if being exposed by-name is a “big deal” or “makes a difference”.

    Or, more precisely:  you can ask their surviving family and friends.  Each of those individuals was reportedly executed by Soviet authorities not terribly long after being exposed by Aldrich Ames and/or Robert Hanssen as a US intelligence source.

    Intel isn’t a game.  And in real life, sometimes exposure as an intel source or operative ends more than that an individual’s usefulness.

    No, General – that risk wasn’t worth it.  And I can certainly see why you jumped at this deal.

    You got off damn easy.

  • Happy 100th “Birthday”, NASA

    Let me start by saying that I don’t know if NASA celebrates today as their birthday or not. But if they don’t – they should.

    Technically, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was created on 1 October 1958. On that date, per the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 the newly-created agency called NASA absorbed the functions of a number of other Federal activities and began operations under it’s own name.

    Less than 11 years later, we put a man on the moon.

    However, one of those “other Federal activities” NASA absorbed was a thing called NACA:  the National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics. The National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 abolished NACA – and transferred its functions and assets, part and parcel, to NASA. So in my book NASA traces its lineage directly to NACA, inheriting its accomplishments and history.

    Those accomplishments were hardly trivial. On 30 September 1958, NACA facilities included a few you might have heard of:   the Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory at Hampton, Virginia; the Ames Aeronautical Laboratory at Moffett Field, CA; the Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory (Lewis Research Center) in Cleveland, OH; and the Muroc Flight Test Unit at Edwards Air Force Base, CA.

    Mach 1, Mach 2, and Mach 3 flight were achieved under NACA – not NASA – managed efforts. The Bell X-1  (Mach 1), Douglas D-558-2 (Mach 2), and Bell X-2 (Mach 3) were all NACA projects. Ditto a host of other experimental flight programs dating well back before World War II.

    Why bring this up today? Because NACA – NASA’s direct predecessor – was established on 4 March 1915, or exactly 100 years ago today.  Establishing NASA and reaching the moon would IMO have been one helluva lot harder if that had never happened.

    So even if you don’t celebrate it (and IMO you should):   happy 100th, NASA.  In my book, today is your true birthday.

     

    (Edited to add that Mach 3 flight was also achieved under NACA.)

  • To Paraphrase A Great Man: “There They Go Again . . . . “

    Well, it looks like a couple of      tools     cretins     jackasses    everyone’s favorite individuals have been at it again.  A little birdie tells me that I’ve been identified!

    Yeah that little birdie tells me that SoMe GuY wHo WeArS pUrPlE-tIgEr-StRiPeD jUmPsUiTs and/or another guy in the Pacific Northwest (or SW Florida, if his move is now official) have been using their “mad skillz” as      jerks     dipsticks      fools      “trail assassin” and/or sleuth – as well as babbling semi-coherently – once again.  And since the same photos appear to have shown up on both their websites, they also seem to be coordinating their efforts.

    According to an item that little birdie screen-captured and sent to me, apparently now I’m a Captain in the Army – presumably serving on active duty.  They also appear to be saying I’m teaching at Appalachian State University.  But I guess they could mean I’m attending Appalachian State.  That part’s not really completely clear.

    At least that’s what they’re saying today.  Previously, I was Don Shipley.  Before that, a retired GO; afterwards, a retired SF SGM.  And maybe someone else sometime along the way, too.  Who knows?  Who can understand the workings of . . . “special” minds like theirs?

    Nonetheless:  be still, my beating heart!  Wow!  I’m a freaking university professor – or a university student.   Imagine that!  Now, I wonder . . . why I didn’t know that?  Did I miss the memo?  Did I have a memory lapse?  Am I suffering from selective amnesia?

    Oh, and if I’m an Army O-3 . . . that means I’ve managed to shed some years, too.  Damn – why didn’t anyone tell me about being younger!  I didn’t notice that!

    That also means the Army is supposed to be sending me an active-duty paycheck every month.  Damn – I guess I need to go see the folks at Finance.  I’ve apparently got a sh!tload of back pay coming my way – not to mention back housing allowance, subsistence allowance, and maybe others!  (I wonder if the assignment also qualifies for a civilian clothing allowance?  I can always use some nice new business attire . . . . )

    And I am either teaching at or attending Appalachian State University!  As Max the VW might put it: “That’s . . . . cool.”

    . . .

    OK, time to be serious.  I’d guess I could say, “Yeah, right.”  But it’s not right.

    I know you’re reading this, dumbclucks.  So listen up, you barely-literate, ignorant, addled-brained schmucks:   that’s the wrong individual.  Again.  For at least the fourth or fifth freaking time.

    Let me put this in very simple terms.  I’m doing that so you can understand it, hopefully without having someone else explain it to you.

    •  I do not now teach – nor have I ever taught – ROTC or anything else at Appalachian State University.  Hell, I had to do a Google search to find out where the place is located!

    •  I am not currently attending Appalachian State University.

    •  I have never been to Appalachian State University.  In fact, best I can tell I have never even been within 30 miles of Appalachian State University in my life.

    •  I most likely never will visit Appalachian State University, much less teach or attend classes there.  Trust me – if I ever end up teaching at or going back to college, Appalachian State is way down the list of places I’d want to attend or teach.

    •  And, finally, for completeness:  you have identified the wrong person – yet again.  I am not a Captain serving on active duty in the US Army at Appalachian State University.

    Is that clear enough – even for you?

    Out of courtesy towards the individual our     resident clowns and self-demonstrated fools      “good friends” here have misidentified as me, I won’t list his name.  He doesn’t need the hassle.

    What I will do is say the following, clearly and for the record:   the individual they claim to be me . . . is not.  Thunder Chickenchoker  and/or the guy from the Pac NW (or maybe now SW Florida) are 100% wrong – yet again, as usual.

    However:  I will offer you two “fine individuals” one bit of advice.  Since false written claims that tend to defame others are legally actionable as libel – if I were you two, I think I’d take that bit implying that a currently-serving Army Captain is engaging in “cyber stalking and harassment” down pronto.  You know, before that individual gets royally p!ssed and maybe files a non-frivolous lawsuit against one or both of you for defamation.

    But that’s your call.  Suit yourselves.

    . . .

    This whole business is getting fairly tiresome, though.  I’m considering telling one or more of these dipsticks where to go, and even giving them step-by-step directions on how to get there.

    I’m thinking they wouldn’t much like the results of the trip.  (smile)

  • The Kids Really Were Alright

    Regular TAH readers know that I’m a music fan. And they also know that Jonn tolerates my occasional ]off-topic ramble on the subject.

    Well, brace yourselves – here comes another such ramble. You’ve been warned. (smile)

    . . .

    It’s no secret that popular music went through a massive change in the 1960s. The impetus for much of that change came from Britain – the famed “British Invasion”.

    Many bands and individuals were part of that change. Most lost popularity or broke up shortly thereafter. Few had real “staying power” into the 1970s and 1980s; I’ve written here previously about one band that continued to grow and change with the times.

    Yet there was a second band from Britain from this era that did the same. And for a while, they rivaled the Stones and others as a draw.

    The Who.

    The Who’s early work can best be described (with one exception) as catchy, formula pop tunes – though some of them did explore serious subjects. I mean, really: give a listen to “I Can’t Explain”, “Happy Jack” and “Pictures of Lilly”. Pure pop pablum, though the latter did address a somewhat more controversial than most. The exception in their early work was “My Generation”; it captured the mood of British early-1960s youth perhaps better than most tunes of the era.

    Like the Stones, the Who also grew up musically . But unlike the Stones – whose growing-up was over a period of about a year, and appears to have been due to personal difficulties and the possibility of jail – IMO you can pinpoint when the Who changed from being yet another group playing “cute pop” into a bona fide musical force. That happened in October, at the end of 1967’s “Summer of Love”:

     

    From that point forward, the Who weren’t merely purveyors of catchy, formula pop. They were rockers – serious ones, and truly innovative. Their work contains much that is legendary: multiple excellent albums and two released “rock operas” (Tommy and Quadrophenia). A third such rock opera was planned – Lifehouse – but never made. In a way, that’s a pity; music written for Lifehouse led to two albums and some additional music released as singles. It’s possible it would have been the best of the three.

    (If you doubt that assertion about Lifehouse, consider: one of the two albums made from music initially destined for Lifehouse was Who’s Next. I’d argue that it’s perhaps the finest rock album made in the 1970s – and one of the best ever.

    The second album derived from the Lifehouse? Who Are You. Plus “Pure and Easy” and “Join Together”, which were initially released as non-album singles, were also intended for Lifehouse.)

    The Who continued making exceptional music for a full 15 years after coming of age – from 1967’s The Who Sell Out through 1982’s It’s Hard. They are also considered one of the great live acts as well; their Live at Leeds albums is considered one of the best live albums ever recorded.

    Oh, and they were one of the headliners at Woodstock, too – early morning hours of 17 August 1969.  As you might guess from the timing, they performed Tommy.  (smile)

    Today, The Who is considered one of the most influential rock and roll bands of all time. Pink Floyd considered them a formative influence. Jimi Hendrix adopted Townsend’s “Marshall stack” amp setup in the mid 1960s, as well as adopting and expanding Townsend’s pioneering use of sound effects. Even the Beatles were reputed to have been influenced by the Who in at least two of their later tunes. Tommy is considered the first rock opera.

    Here’s a sample of The Who’s music between 1967 and 1982. Enjoy.

    Yeah, I guess you could say the kids really were all right.

    . . .

    If you’re still reading this – thanks. Hope you didn’t find it boring.

  • Rest in Peace, S’chn T’gai

    Rest in Peace, S’chn T’gai

    leonardnimoyuniformveteransdaytweet2014

    Another bit of Americana has passed into history.

    Leonard Nimoy has died.  He was 83.

    Nimoy is best known as Spock of Star Trek fame (as if I really needed to tell anyone reading TAH that).  However, he was a talented actor who worked extensively in his chosen profession both before and after that series which made him a household name.

    Nimoy was also a veteran.  He served in the US Army from 1953 to 1955, attaining the rank of Sergeant.

    Rest in peace, Leonard Simon Nimoy.  While it’s associated with you perhaps more than any other phrase, somehow “Live long and prosper” just doesn’t seem particularly apropos at present.

     

    (In case you’re wondering:  although not canonically accepted, “S’chn T’gai” is given by multiple sources – including this one – as Spock’s “unpronounceable” first name.)