Mindconnection eNL, 2017-02-19

Home

In this issue:
Good News | Product Highlight | Brainpower | Finances | Security | Health/Fitness | Factoid | Thought 4 the Day

Item 1. Restoration of law and order continues, following the exit of our evil dictator. From my Congressman on 06FFEB:

"The Congressional Review Act (CRA) is a Congressional resolution of disapproval to overturn last minute regulations from the previous Administration under an expedited legislative process. Passage of the CRA ensures that no substantially similar rule can be issued in the future. The CRA gives Congress an opportunity to vote to bring relief to Americans hurt by years of overreach and overregulation. This last week, the House reversed job-killing, harmful regulations."

Item 2. Yet another use for, you guessed it, graphene. Read the full story here:

http://spectrum.ieee.org/nanoclast/semiconductors/devices/graphene-infrared-eye-needs-no-cooling/?utm_source=TandM&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_campaign=TM02072017

Item 3. Barry Soetoro has not surfaced yet with any new attacks on America since leaving the White House. He said, "I'm not going away," but thus far it looks like "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan." Let's hope his threat is just another of his "you can tell he's lying because his lips move" thing. And good riddance to bad rubbish.

Item 4. Computer diagnoses skin cancer. Read the full story here:

http://spectrum.ieee.org/the-human-os/biomedical/diagnostics/computer-diagnoses-skin-cancers

Item 5. The evil corporation formerly known as "Google" lost court battles and now must pay. Read the full story here:

https://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2017/02/14/google-finds-hot-water/?google20msuit

Unfortunately, Google will never be held accountable in court for what it did to thousands of small businesses with its dishonest search engine scam. But the good news is Google must face the court of the marketplace, and it has lost that battle also.

Its search engine scam backfired on it, making "google search" an oxymoron and largely irrelevant for purchasers due to repeatedly bad search results. The scam rendered it totally irrelevant to the merchants who simply moved to eBay and Amazon, where customers now begin their shopping experience instead of with Google. Meanwhile, Bing and Yahoo went the opposite direction and strove for search engine accuracy; unfortunately, not enough people caught on to this. Yet.

iTRAVL2 Smartphone Translator

On sale for a limited time--we beat the Amazon price!

I have one of these and just love it.

You talk, it translates in 31 languages (no Internet connection needed; additional 50+ languages with connection).

The iTRAVL2 translator can translate anything you say or see, and access many useful travel tools. Everything is preloaded on your iTRAVL, no need to worry about difficult setups or downloads.

Easy to use and reliable; this rugged smartphone and voice translator will act as your own personal language assistant.

Watch the video!

It's accurate and easy to use. Two-year warranty.

Buy from us and save!
 

• Extreme durability: Completely waterproof, shock proof, and dustproof.
• Works with any GSM carrier for voice and data plans; in the USA: Tracfone, Consumer Cellular, T-Mobile, etc.
• Free incoming calls in over 160 Countries. No contract. European phone number, though....
• Voice translator: Translates anything you say.
• Photo translator: Snap a photo of almost anything and have it translated to your language.
• 13 MPX front camera, 5MPX rear camera.
• Travel guide: Packed with reviews, info, and images of international locations.
• Massive battery: Lasts for five days between charges. That's right, five days.
• Perfect for military use, security specialists, tradesmen, hikers, linesmen, farmers, Emergency Service Personnel, mountaineers, cross-country skiers, or anyone traveling in remote areas; also for those on or around water; perfect for fishing boats, use in the rain, or surf.

You can buy from us with confidence. We've been making online customers happy since 1997.

The problem with the first answer is a problem called "confirmation bias." The problem with the second approach is truth is not a democracy.

Confirmation bias

We are all subject to this. We tend to filter out things that contradict what we believe or want to believe. We filter in things that support what we believe or want to believe. We want confirmation that we are right.

The alleged "birther controversy" is an extreme example of this. Barry Soetoro is not now, and never has been, an American citizen. People took sides on this non-issue based on what they wanted to believe. Consequently, many people "know" he's an American citizen and their view is supported by the "evidence" they have viewed. They won't even ask basic questions that would reveal how wrong their position is.

For example:

• Where's the birth announcement in the newspaper?
• Why wasn't his mother in Hawaii when he was born (remote birth--how does that work, exactly)?
• How does the child of a minor and a foreigner gain citizenship (answer: he must apply for it).
• How did a C- student like him make it into not one, but two, Ivy League universities (answer: foreign exchange scholarship)?
• Why did he produce a clearly (and clumsily) forged birth certificate complete with someone else's SSN, computer fonts, the wrong word used for "race" (assuming back then they wanted to lie about his race that he is somehow "black" the word in 1961 was "colored"), and many other signs of forgery? Perhaps most laughable, his father's country was listed as "Africa".

Anyone who wanted to believe that Barry was somehow a US Citizen merely needed to engage in confirmation bias. Most "believers" did so through the avoidance of asking basic questions while giving total credibility to "evidence" that was either fabricated or not produced in the first place.

And there's the issue of his adoption by Lolo Soetoro. His name was legally changed from Obama to Soetoro, and never changed back (no record of any such change has ever been produced). More, the adoption made him an Indonesian citizen and there is no record of his application for dual citizenship or for changing back (becoming a naturalized would be required at this point, I would think).

Prior to this example of mass delusion, in which so many people engaged in braindead confirmation bias to an extreme that is hard to explain, I thought Dick Cheney set the mother of all examples with his "torture is legal" memos.

A similar confirmation bias existed; it flew in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary and all supportive evidence was either fabricated or not produced in the first place. The fabricated evidence, like Obama's forged birth certificate, was a product of the grossly incompetent. If you have not read John Yoo's idiotic arguments "justifying" torture, hold your nose and read them.

I sometimes wonder if Yoo also produced Obama's birth certificate but then I remind myself that fake certificate was even more patently absurd than Yoo's moronic memos.

Confirmation bias can be costly. In the case of Barry Soetoro's false citizenship, it cost the USA an additional ten trillion (12 zeroes) of debt while we endured 633 confirmed scandals (his administration set the record for scandals). If only people had sought to BE right instead of seeking confirmation that their belief is somehow right. Several of these scandals each justified his removal from office. Examples include Fast and Furious and Benghazi. Note that his anti-police remarks are not counted as scandals nor are his shockingly inappropriate remarks about the Supreme Court; this tells you something about how bad the officially recognized scandals must be.

Truth not a democracy

The truth is absolute. It does not change based on how many people vote for it to be one way or another. The fact that 9 sources say one thing and one source says the opposite does not mean the one source is wrong.

Sifting through the mudstream media

One way many people implement both of the above strategies is to subscribe to every disinformation source available. So on their smart phone, they have apps for the Communist News Network, the New York Lying Times, and the whole retinue of propagandistic, truth-averse disinformation outlets. They figure that each of these sources will lie in a different way and if you look for the common points and then filter those points through common sense you'll get at the truth. But this outcome simply does not happen.

What does happen is you begin to believe the lies because you hear them over and over. Don't fool yourself on this one, it's what happens.

But is it possible to even sort through the disinformation to get at the truth? Here's an experiment. Collect dog turds from different yards in your neighborhood. Now try to make a palatable meal out of them. That's essentially what the approach just described amounts to.

Sifting through the alternative sources

This isn't much better than the previous approach. Most alternative sources are poorly researched, agenda-driven, and highly biased.

Yes, you can cut down on the mental clutter by looking at the "polish" of the newsletter or Website. Grammatical errors, spelling errors, poor sentence construction, and other signs of carelessness clue you in that they are also careless about their "research." Or that they aren't competent researchers to begin with due to lack of literacy.

When people can't spell, they have serious reading comprehension problems; that's also a reason to reject their "information" outright. If they don't understand what they read and can't articulate their views properly, what kind of mental acuity do you think they have?

But even after you filter out the semi-literate, you still have your work cut out for you in determining if this source is any good. My advice is to look for logical fallacies and factual errors on the one hand and insightful arguments on the other. That is, look at the quality of what's written.

So first filter out the sources that fail the "form" test. Then look for sources that have substance. Do this, and you'll at least be using sources that have intelligence behind them. But many presumably intelligent people like to expound on things they know little or nothing about. You're still on dangerous ground here.

How to get it right

So how do you get the correct information on current events? The same way you get the correct information on historically recorded ones:

• Tap primary sources. Today, we have access to original footage and even live coverage of events. We can use that to get "the rest of the story" and see what's actually going on.
  
  An example is a particular Youtube video of the Ferguson rioting. According the mudstream media and many other sources, this was a situation in which armed black thugs looted stores. But in this video, employees of one store (some of them black) were protecting their employer's property with their own firearms. The store was not looted, proving that "gun control" is never the solution unless you define it as people knowing how to use their guns.
  
  Another example was another town where rioting was taking place. According to the state-run media, the cops were running rampant and, being all racist pigs, attacking innocent black people. One video, taken by a person on the scene, shows a line of cops facing an angry mob. The mob was mostly black, so did this video back the mudstream news story? No, because as the video continued to roll, a huge group of armed (guns, clubs, baseball bats) citizens marched into the fray. They turned their backs to the police, facing the mob. Nobody was going to attack THEIR cops, they'd see to that. This was police protection; citizens protecting their police. Did you see that on MSNBC News, CNN, or Fox? Of course not; it doesn't fit the narrative.
  
  Of course, Youtube isn't the only primary source. You can also talk to people. For example, the mudstream media released reports that our new President ordered the Army Corps of Engineers to clear away the protestors and start building that stupid wall. This defies logic, so I didn't believe it. I contacted a friend who works for the Army Corps of Engineers, and he confirmed this was true. So the mudstream media are not always wrong. But don't trust them until you have verified.
   
• Tap secondary sources. My friend in the ACE was personally a secondary source, but I consider his input as coming from a primary source (the ACE). Here's a more clear example of a secondary source. Kansas City, MO is short on police officers. For reasons I won't go into here, they've had a mass exodus of police. If I want to confirm this with reasonable reliability, I can ask another member of the police community such as a local cop in my own nearby city. He would be a secondary source.
   
• Eliminate obviously bad sources. Sometimes when I consider reading a book I am able to view the bibliography first. When I see that the author used the New York Lying Times, I dismiss the entire book as a work of fiction. For current events, you need to eliminate disinformation sources such as newspapers, television news, and that libtard at the office who is always talking about what he non-thinks is going on.
   
• Actively look for bias. I "attend" many recordings in the University Lecture Series. History is a topic I study often. Different professors present similar historical topics differently. When I find a conflict, I look for the bias and ask myself why it might be there.
  
  For example, one professor raved about what a great President Franklin Delano Roosevelt was; an assertion that shows willful ignorance. FDR was a great wartime leader (except for tossing Poland under the bus and doing a few other crazy things). But his domestic policies were, for the most part, highly destructive criminal acts. The bias here was on the evaluation of FDR. I could still listen to the information about FDR's accomplishments (there were some), understanding that the professor wasn't capable of presenting a complete picture.
   
• Recognize your own bias. If you've already formed an opinion or conclusion, actively seek information that could contradict it. This is a step almost nobody takes. Most of us want to "be right" and we would rather continue to be wrong than to discover the truth.
   
• Look for propaganda and manipulation techniques. The main one, in my opinion, is the use of fear. If you don't put enough in the collection plate, you'll go to hell. Gee, there was a (non-IRS) terrorist attack and the deaths will continue unless law-abiding citizens lose their constitutional rights. If we don't permit torture, our way of life is threatened (that's a non-sequitor, too!).
   
• Look for English competency. Many "alternative" sources look like a third grader wrote the text. Others try to impress with big words when simpler ones will do, and they read so stiffly that you should see the big red flag that the writer is insecure and probably for good reason. Good writers seek to communicate clearly.
   
• Look for language abuse. How are concepts in the "news" communicated? Does the source use inflammatory language rather than an objective tone (e.g., "Gun nuts" rather than "firearm owners")? Does the source parrot word misusage (e.g., "the Internal Revenue Service") rather than words that convey reality (e.g., "the Institute of Reprobates and Sociopaths")?
   
• Look for the focus and what's repeated. Does the source focus on divisive concepts such as race or on the facts of the event? Race is an artificial construct that tells you nothing about the individual. Bringing it up all the time and/or casting every event as a racial issue is dishonest in the extreme.
   
• Look for nonsequitors. There are many logical fallacies. But the nonsequitor is the logical fallacy of choice for libtards. Since libtards are the main purveyors of stupidity and fake news, it follows that you need merely look for nonsequitors to protect against libtarded reports, most stupidity, and most fake news.

For my own part, this is just too much effort. I choose not to stay up with current events, generally. I can't do anything about what's going on if I don't like it. And there is only so much time in a day; I must make choices on how to spend it. I do, however, keep up on things like technical developments. For example, how many times have I reported on new uses for graphene?

You can reduce those costs. One way to reduce insurance costs is to consistently use defensive driving techniques (and avoid speeding) so that you're an attractive "insured" with a great driving record. Every couple of years, shop around for new insurance. The NRA offers a plan to members, and so do many other associations. Check into what's available.

But what about other costs? Well, defensive driving actually saves fuel. If you haven't graduated from one of these courses, sign up for one. I suggest looking for one that follows the Smith System.

Here are some other ways to save money:

• Use synthetic motor oil. Not a blend, but 100% synthetic. One of the ways that synthetic oil reduces internal friction is all of its molecules are the same size (Mechanical Physics 101). A blend destroys this advantage and costs you more than straight synthetic due to the fuel efficiency loss.
   
• Change oil and filter regularly. Keep an eye on that odometer, but also just pull the dipstick and look at it. If the oil is dark, it needs to be changed. Same thing if it smells funny. Check your oil this way perhaps monthly; make an appointment in your calendaring system.
   
• Use only high quality coolant in your radiator. Don't pick up something just because it's on sale.
   
• Keep your car clean. Washing the car (properly) helps prevent rust and other problems with the finish, while adding to the enjoyment of driving the car. Keep the inside clean, also.
   
• Keep your tires inflated. If using a generic replacement tire, fill it to the pressure stated on the door jamb placard NOT on what your buddy says he inflates his tires to. The tire inflation must match the suspension, which is designed and tuned for a specific tire inflation.
   
• Use the correct grade of gasoline. Many people believe their car will perform better if it runs on regular but they use premium. The reason for premium is it has additives that eliminate the pre-ignition knock that a higher compression engine will get. Higher compression is a fixed factor (for example, using taller pistons will produce higher compression). You can reduce knock by retarding the timing (most cars today will do this automatically) or by using premium gasoline. If your engine doesn't require premium, then you have no advantage to use it unless that particular brand also has an additive (only in premium) for cleaner combustion. But rather than pay for premium gas to get that, just pick up a bottle of injector cleaner at your local auto supply shop.

"You say your workouts focus on low-rep, high-intensity training instead of going for the pump. Why do you have such large veins, if you don't pump?"

As with anything else related to training, the body adapts to the demands placed upon it. Yes, it is true that high volume training tends to enhance vascularity due to the pumping effect. But think about what happens when tissues don't have enough oxygen. How does the body adapt to that kind of stress?

Various kinds of high-intensity training will quickly burn up the ATP stored in the muscles. Your fast twitch fibers are the ones that provide your initial strength, and when subjected to intense demand (e.g., high-intensity or burst training) they run out of ATP fuel in about 15 seconds.

Before they run out of ATP, the muscle cells produce ATP on their own through a process called glycolysis. It isn't very efficient, but it kicks in to meet the elevated energy demand placed on the body during training (or athletic performance).

This glycolysis process is what produces the lactic acid that we detect as muscle soreness later. Lactic acid is what triggers the adaptive response that we are after. This adaptive response requires a larger blood flow, thus blood vessels expand to provide it.

The anaerobic mode lasts between one to three minutes, depending upon many factors. During this time, the body kicks in with another way of producing the energy for contraction. It's the aerobic process, which uses oxygen to efficiently produce ATP. Getting that oxygen to the muscles also requires increased blood flow.

From my description, you've probably gotten the idea that  these processes overlap. Indeed they do. All of them can happen at the same time and each of them creates a demand for blood flow.

So this is the exercise part of the vascularity you see in my photos (look at my arms in the photo of my back, at right; that's serious vascularity).

Two other factors consider. One is I regularly supplement with the amino acid L-Arginine. The other is I'm not on the "vascular damage diet" that so many Americans are so devoted to.

L-Arginine is prevalent in preworkout supplements. It does relax the vascular walls and allow the vessel to expand. Combined with a heavy intake of water, it will temporarily produce an increase in blood vessel size. But I supplement daily and have a heavy intake of water routinely so this effect is something I have all the time.

Top photo taken 16SEP2016, just days before 56th birthday; bottom photo taken 3 days after 56th birthday

I won't belabor the vascular damage diet, other than to say it also causes cancer, obesity, osteoporosis, muscle atrophy, and several other conditions that most Americans seem inexplicably fond of. Or maybe these people just do not connect the rather large dots between diet and disease.

Diets that demonize a macronutrient also reduce vascularity or inhibit its improvement:

• Low carb/no carb. You don't have the energy for the intense exercise that produces the adaptive response. Also, the foods in this category tend to be nutrient-dense. You just don't want junk carbs. But don't avoid carbs as if doing so has any benefit. It doesn't.
• Low fat/nonfat. Allegedly, eating fat makes you fat and gives you hardened arteries. The truth is very different. I eat nuts, eggs, avocados, and other fatty foods. I use butter in cooking and baking. I use various oils in cooking and baking, also. Take the time to educate yourself on how to use dietary fats; you need the good ones in quantities sufficient to support several processes in your body.
• Low protein/no protein. Proponents claim the human body needs some absurdly low amount of protein, and if you cut back to that insufficient amount you will be slimmer. People do this, and lose lean body tissue. Yes, they weigh less but much of the weight loss consisted of muscle tissue and organ tissue.

And there's also the high-protein diet, which typically means just adding more protein. So a person with a poor diet buys expensive whey protein in a tub and eats far too much of it. Adding protein won't improve your vascularity and it won't make you slimmer.

Forget all of these fad diets. They don't work. Instead, eat a diet that is nutrient-dense. I've covered diet recommendations many times in this newsletter. If you haven't read those issues and don't have time to go through the archives, here's a tip. Buy 100% of your food in the produce department. Then add in this non-produce: nuts, eggs, oils, beans, rice, spices, and non-wheat flours. Don't buy any other edibles.

Do this for six weeks and after you see the amazing results you may consider adding in some other foods. Popcorn, for example, isn't on the above list. But it has several pro-health properties. Add only foods that have pro-health properties, and you are very, very unikely to ever get sick again. Ever.

People sometimes ask me if I signed up for health care. They mean Obamacare, which is a non-sequitor in this context.

My reply is, "Yes, it's called the produce department. That's my health care plan."

When they roll their eyes or laugh at me, my reply is, "I have not been sick since 1971. I'd say my health plan is working. What about your health plan?"

• The best workouts are short and intense.
• A good diet contains far more flavors and satisfaction than the typical American diet.