Disclaimer: “As an Amazon Associate I may earn from qualifying purchases.” Adsense and Infolinks were no help at all.

If you have enjoyed this article or it has been helpful to you please feel free to show your appreciation. Thank you.

Read The Third Wave by Alvin Toffler!
Categories
Phillosoph

More on Backups!

Last night as I got home a particular song came on my iPod. I decided I wanted to listen to this song, so found it in the files of my computer. I was using the Windows music app, which is kind of poor but at least does not take ten minutes to open like iTunes. Usually I have this app randomly playing tracks from my entire music files. Asking for a specific track seemed to confuse it. While attempting to get it to play other tracks again the computer shut down. It restarted, immediately shut down and then restarted again. Obviously something had gone wrong so when it offered me the option to “refresh” without any danger to my losing my files, I clicked “Yes”.

Apparently, “refresh” actually means “we will delete all of the programs you have ever personally installed, including the upgrade from Win 8 to Win 8.1”. We will also delete your system restore points too so you cannot undo this!
On this blog I have often spoken about the need for backups in life. All of my files were safely stored on an external HDD. It seems most of my programs were not. I have a list of over twenty programs that will need to be reinstalled on the computer. Some of them will be difficult to source. Some will need me to relocate registration codes. Some will come with a host of pointless programs that will try and install toolbars or change my search preferences. Some may no longer be available or the current version lacks features that I found most useful on the old one. Win 8.1 will not install until I have installed a host of updates, a process that has failed at least once so far. I am probably looking at at least several nights of work just getting my computer back up to scratch.
My advice in this blog is to make a copy of the installer application for all of your favourite programs and place them in a folder on your backup drive(s).
Categories
Phillosoph

Your Best Survival Tool : Science.

The other night someone I know began an vehement rant on the evils of science. As is often the case the problem with this is that they actually had little idea on what science really is and were using “science” when they meant big business, industry, government, the pharmaceutical industry and so forth. I was once required to take a University course on the “Sociology of Science” that in practice was a vehicle for some very-hazy left wing concepts and it was obvious most of the tutors had no idea of what science actually was. When they said “science” they always actually meant “industry” or “technology” or “corporate practice”. Ironically their example of “an alternative approach to science” was one of the best examples of structured scientific investigation I had then come across. Apparently it was “alternative” since Chinese “barefoot” doctors had done the work, which seems somewhat racist and condescending!
For a number of reasons I chose not to argue the issue the other night but it still meant a big chunk of our limited time together was wasted and soured.

What is science? This is something that many people are unclear on and certain factions deliberately attempt to obscure. The Wikipedia page does a reasonable job at explaining this. Science is a tool. It is one of the most useful tools that you may ever use if you master it. Like any other tool it is neither inherently good nor bad. Science, or rather its products, can be used either for good or bad. That is a choice of the user, not science.
Science is a tool for finding answers. The processes we usually use to achieve this are observation and systematic experimentation. Is an answer gained by science inherently true? Not necessarily! Science tends to give us the most likely answer based on the available data.
I used to tell my students the fable of the blind men and the elephant as an example of why you had to take multiple observations of a thing and examine it from different angles. If you were examining an event that was a sine-wave there is a chance your sample interval matched the frequency and you got the same reading every time, leading you to conclude from the available evidence that the event was a straight line.
I once heard about a Medieval monk who built a flying machine and jumped from the watchtower of an abbey. He broke both legs. I remember this because he is a clear example of someone who is an inventor but not scientific. If he had been scientific he might have tried his machine with a dummy first, or tried from progressively increasing lesser heights.
The accuracy of a scientific answer depends on the available data. This is why some scientific “truths” become less reliable as new and additional information becomes available. Science has inherent in it the principle of Fallibilism. It does not say “this is the answer” but “this is the most probable answer, based on the data we have”. If I had something in my pocket and it goes missing the most probable answer is that it fell out. This may not be the actual reason. Someone might have picked my pocket or the item disappeared through a quantum wormhole! I have no evidence to support the latter ideas so the most probably explanation is that I lost it. If someone produces security camera footage of my pocket being picked then we have new evidence and our theory of what has happened is modified.
Science is a tool for problem solving. One of the greatest fictional examples of a scientist is Sherlock Holmes, who wisely tells us “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.” I’d replace “truth” with “most likely explanation” but this quote nicely illustrates that to use science effectively you must be both open-minded and sceptical. 
Scientists are human and thus subject to human weaknesses and failings. Dogma and conservatism sometimes find their way into the scientific community. Occasionally a new finding or idea gets held back because of who proposes it or its potential effect on the reputation of the originator of the theory it displaces. Some ideas do not gain acceptance until the scientist who proposed the current theory has died!
That scientists cannot explain something does not mean that they ignore it or reject it. It should be a spur to investigate further and attempt new approaches. Science applies to everything. Some fields such as alternative therapy and parapsychology are ignored by conventional scientists yet these are exactly the fields where good science can be used to sort the wheat from the chaff and the bogus from the genuine. Scientific investigation of acupuncture discovered it stimulates endorphin production. The observations and experiments of a scientist discovered many incidences of hauntings can be attributed to infrasound. Radiations other than light were only discovered in the 19th century when we developed means to measure them or observe their interactions. Who knows what else we may discover or disprove once we have the tools?
True science only rejects what it can disprove, not what it cannot prove.
Sometimes you find insight in unusual places. The entertaining movie “Frankenweenie” says some interesting things about science. Mr. Rzykruski: “They like what science gives them, but not the questions, no. Not the questions that science asks.”
Science is neutral and will sometimes lead us to answers and conclusions that we do not want. This is where science sometimes clashes with some religions. Many religions have dogma, truths you are required to accept as immutable and absolute. Any evidence that may disprove the absolute nature of such ideas must be ignored and rejected. Some religions like to portray science as an alternative belief system or set of dogma but it is not. It is a device for testing assumptions.
I often wonder if the poor teaching of science I have observed in recent years is because those able to think logically and systematically are poorer consumers. If you are better equipped to see through bullshit it is harder for advertisers, politicians and other controllers
Can the knowledge that science produces be exploited for bad purposes? Yes, it can. Any knowledge can be exploited but that produced by science is the most likely to be used since it is verified. Man may use his knowledge to do wrong but science can also be used to prove that such actions have harmful consequences.

Categories
Phillosoph

More on Foot Wrappings!

My girlfriend contacted me yesterday inviting me to meet her in a large shopping centre for a coffee. When I arrived the cunning trap was soon sprung! Turns out she needs new boots for work. We found a nice pair of ankle boots at a reasonable price. My girlfriend wanted to wear the boots so she swapped her sandals for her new acquisitions. She mentioned that she ought to buy some socks but she was hungry so we went for something to eat.
The meal took longer than expected and by the time we had finished it was dark and the local shops had closed. We headed for a pub where my lady had to meet someone and after a little walking she complained about one of the new boots rubbing against her bare feet.
Given the problems I have with my feet there was no way I could give her my socks. I began to look around for alternate solutions. I had a bandanna in my pocket, still knotted from when I had recently used it as an emergency head covering on an unexpectedly sunny day. Remembering my research on foot wrappings a year ago I offered it to her. She wrapped it around her ankle so that it covered the potential blister.
We walked to the pub and several times my lady told me “this bandanna is really comfortable!” For the rest of the night her feet gave her no problems as she was running around socializing and dancing.
I am going to have to dig out a couple of suitable bits of cloth and give the foot wrappings a try!
Categories
Phillosoph

Knife Defense Video

A friend sent me this video for comment. It rather echoes the my recent posts on Silver and his comment that “with this weapon there are no grips and no wards”.
For the most part this video is better than many I see. Knives are poor defensive weapons but they are good counter-offensive weapons. My main criticism of this video is that the knife user makes no attempt to use his other hand when his knife hand is grabbed. He could strike, switch his knife to his other hand or a number of other techniques, many of which are detailed in my book.
When watching videos such as this it is a good idea to consider both sides. You are intended to identify with the figure on the left but also consider what you might do if you were the guy on the right.
Categories
Phillosoph

Get Training -Push a Wheelchair!

I spent this Saturday on Hampstead Heath. My girlfriend’s father was visiting from Brazil and she had decided to take him for a day out in the park.
Communications due to a defective phone meant there was a problem with the rendezvous point. I ended up walking several kilometres through the park and was just about to give up and leave when I spotted a man sitting in a wheelchair. It has been about five years since I saw her father and in that time he has lost his beard and I have grown one, so I wasn’t certain it was him and he did not initially recognise me. It was quite possible I was about to approach some other one-legged man who would be mystified as to why a stranger was greeting him in bad Portuguese!
Things worked out OK and against the odds the three of us managed to spend a pleasant few hours in one of the largest parks in London. As you may gather from the previous paragraphs my girlfriend’s father has lost a leg and in a wheelchair. Some of the paths in Hampstead Heath are quite steep, even if you have the blessing of both legs. They are quite rough too and at one point we had to stop and tighten the screws on his wheelchair that were working loose. Yet another use for the Swiss Army Knife and Leatherman Squirt I always carry!

My girlfriend’s father mainly likes to propel himself but he needed help on some slopes. I will admit that my lady did most of the pushing but I did a few stints myself. The handles are set rather low so pushing was difficult for someone of my height and I was feeling it in my back and hip joints. While I was pushing I was passed by a number of cyclists and joggers, so the thought occurred to me:
“If people want to exercise, why not do something constructive with it?”
This idea is admittedly half-formed, but might there not be some kind of charity event or program that unites athletes and running enthusiasts with wheelchair bound citizens? Not sure how to organize or publicise such an idea, but thought I would throw it out and see if someone comes up with something.
Categories
Phillosoph

George Silver's Dagger and Knife Fighting

In my recent book review of “Slash and Thrust” the knife fighting instructions of George Silver were mentioned. It is only logical that today’s blog is about these. Silver’s chapter on knife/ dagger fighting is very brief, but very informative.
To make things easier for readers who do not have English as a first language, or those that just have trouble with archaic English I have used a version of the text rendered in a more modern form taken from this site. My own comments and clarifications in green.
Chapter 15
Of the single dagger fight against the like weapon
1. First know that to this weapon there belongs no wards or grips but against such a one as is foolhardy & will suffer himself to have a full stab in the face or body or hazard the giving of another, then against him you may use your left hand in throwing him aside or strike up his heels after you have stabbed him.
Here Silver tells us that the single dagger cannot be used to parry/block (“ward”), nor is it advisable to try and grapple or hold (“grip”) a knife armed foe. To attempt this is to invite an injury. “your left hand in throwing him aside” seems to suggest striking with the free hand. “strike up his heels” is interpreted by some analysts as a low kick to unbalance the foe.
2. In this dagger fight, you must use continual motion so shall he not be able to put you to the close or grip, because your continual motion disappoints him of his true place, & the more fierce he is in running in, the sooner he gains you the place, whereby he is wounded, & you not anything the rather endangered.
“place” is used by Silver to mean a position or location from which you can strike an enemy without needing to step forward.
3. The manner of handling your continual motion is this, keep out of distance & strike or thrust at his hand, arm, face or body, that shall press upon you, & if he defends blow or thrust with his dagger make your blow or thrust at his hand.
4. If he comes in with his left leg forwards or with the right, do you strike at that part as soon as it shall be within reach, remembering that you use continual motion in your progression & regression according to your twofold governors.
A Twofold Mind (“Twyfold mynd”) is Silver’s term for the mental state that allows you to be prepared to fly back (retreat) as you advance and vice versa.
5. Although the dagger fight is thought a very dangerous fight by reason of the shortness & singleness thereof, yet the fight thereof being handled as is aforesaid, is as safe & as defensive as the fight of any other weapon, this ends my brief instructions.
For more information on self-defence, see my books.

Categories
Phillosoph

Slash and Thrust by John Sanchez

When I first started this blog, I expected that I would be writing more book reviews than I have done. The problem is, many martial arts books are somewhat lacking in content.
The reason I wrote my first book was to address many of the points that I did not feel were adequately covered. Hence it is very hard to review a book such as “Slash and Thrust” without making the point that my own work does a better job at covering the techniques of defensive knife use or throwing objects in self-defence.

Back in the days when I was a regular on a knife throwing forum, John Sanchez’s book “Slash and Thrust” would sometimes be mentioned.
These mentions were usually due to the short section on throwing weapons in the book, and in particular a weapon Sanchez called the “Irish Dart”.
Years ago, I flipped through a friend’s copy of the book, but I admit we were mainly interested in the throwing section at the end.
Recently another friend commented that he intended to brush up on his knife techniques by rereading his copy of Slash and Thrust.
I decided to finally treat myself to a cheap second hand copy.
According to the blurb: “Until Slash and Thrust, no book ever presented a complete, practical knife fighter’s training program. This classic covers choosing the martial knife, quick-kill strikes, footwork, deceptive movements and using such exotic weapons as the shuriken, shaken, Irish dart, chakram and Chinese cloth dart.”
Quite a big claim for a small book of only 68-72 pages!
Having now read the book properly, my impression is of an inflatable structure that tries to look substantial but has very little content.
For example, Sanchez notes that there are a number of different footwork techniques used in various martial arts and then states he favours “natural footwork”. That sounds very logical, wise and sensible, but once you examine the statement, you realize it has very little actual meaning or content.
The footwork he goes on to describe involves moving with the knees bent. While this is a good technique, it is not what I would describe as natural.
The book has a number of statements or references that seem to be placed there mainly for the effect of making it seem more learned or insightful than it actually is.
In its handful of pages Sanchez uses the phrase “common sense” at least four times. Readers will be aware that this is a fiction, and any time someone uses this phrase instead of providing detail or justification, any information should be treated with skepticism and suspicion.
Sanchez also describes thrusting with a kukri as “at best, awkward”, which makes me seriously doubt that he has ever handled one.
There is a section on carrying techniques where Sanchez advocates carrying a belt knife inclined with the edge up.
He makes an argument that because the hand is inverted and turned palm out to draw from, this position it is better defended.
In fact, this would expose the more vulnerable area of the inner forearm with its nerves, blood vessels and tendons.
It also ignores that if the enemy is within attacking range you should be defending rather than attempting to draw a weapon.
The book does have some points of interest, but it was easy to overlook these among the padding.
You may pick up a tip or two, and one or two good points are made, but there is no way that this should be used as your main source of instruction. It gives little glimpses rather than a comprehensive view.
Occasionally he refers back to some ideas “already described” but these were in fact detailed very briefly.
Areas such as the guard posture could have been described better and would have benefited from an illustration.
There is an illustration of useful target areas, but important information such as that there is a high probability that attacking through the ribs can cause a blade to jam or be lost is not mentioned.
Sanchez suggests a number of books to consult for further study.
Paradoxes of Defence” by George Silver is mentioned a number of times. I have mentioned Silver’s works on these pages, and in my books too.
Silver is worth a read but his comments on knife fighting techniques are only a few paragraphs long.
Also, Sanchez fails to mention that Silver’s discussion of actual techniques are in his related work “Brief Instructions upon my Paradoxes of Defence”.
Musashi’sBook of Five Rings” is also suggested for reading. Referencing this book was quite common in the 80s. The Book of Five Rings contains some techniques for sword use. I don’t recall any knife relevant stuff in the book, but it has been a while since I read it, so will give Sanchez the benefit of the doubt there.
“Cold Steel” by John Styers is another suggestion. This is an interesting book providing you understand it was built on the ideas of Drexel-Biddle, whose knife fighting ideas were heavily influenced by sword-fighting techniques.
The last suggestion was Cassidy’s “Complete Book of Knife Fighting” See here for my review on that book. It is an interesting read, but I would be very cautious on trying its techniques in a real encounter!
As I have mentioned, there is a brief section on a variety of throwing weapons.
Sanchez admits that there may be situations when there is no other option but to throw a weapon, and briefly describes a number of historical examples of hand thrown weapons.
His explanation of how to throw knives and shuriken is reasonable if a little inaccurate on a few points.
Contrary to the claims of some reviews, the section on throwing weapons does not take up a third of the book. It is just a handful of pages.
For alternate information on self-defence, see my books.
Categories
Phillosoph

Watching the Fire Alarms

Many years back there was a trend at the local Students' Union for setting off the Fire Alarms. This very childish and irresponsible behaviour was only curbed when the Fire Brigade threatened to have the bar’s alcohol license revoked.
A friend of mine at another university has seen a similar trend. His suggested solution is quite brilliant but also very simple. He suggested to the campus police that Fire Alarms should incorporate a camera. Where this is not possible cameras should be positioned so they can view anyone operating an alarm. If someone is operating an alarm legitimately the camera footage will allow them to be identified and commended. If someone is operating the alarm as a hoax then the footage will also allow them to be identified, hopefully so it can be arranged that they spend some time with others who have no regard for others’ welfare.

The intelligent reader may be objecting that hoaxers may attempt to cover the cameras. This likelihood can be reduced by use of small concealed cameras positioned in a variety of locations. A camera does not actually need to be mounted in the alarm, just have a view of the alarm's operator.
I am sure a lot of rot will be raised against this idea under the banner of “civil liberties” but it is just that, rot. University campuses are already under surveillance and this idea is just to ensure that alarm points are included in the field of view. It would be a big contribution to improving public safety and preventing some genuine criminal behavior.
Categories
Phillosoph

Long Range Pistol Shots and Zero

In yesterday’s post, I mentioned that the purpose of a military pistol round is close combat, and therefore a supersonic round more suited to longer range shooting is not a logical choice. It is worth bearing in mind that the longer range performance of even subsonic rounds like the .45ACP is much better than most people assume. I have seen estimates that the De Lisle Carbine was effective to 200 yards and possibly as much as 400 yards.
The following table, taken from FrFrog’s Ballistics pages, is interesting.
With weapons zeroed to 50 yds, the rounds tested hit just 5 to 12" low at 100 yds. Rounds such as the .40 S&W, 10mm and .357 SIG can be expected to perform rather like the .357 Mag. Evidently the higher velocity rounds fly flatter, but in practical combat terms there is little to choose between them. A shot aimed at head or shoulder height at beyond 75 yards is going to strike in the thorax, whether you have a 9mm, .357, .44 Mag or .45 ACP.
Zeroing a pistol at 50 yards may not be practical, so a good approach is to zero your pistol to hit 2" high at 25 yards. Using this zero, the round will have dropped less than 12" below point of aim at 100 yards and the maximal ordinate will not exceed +3". This holds true for nearly all common combat pistol calibres. Higher velocity rounds will have a flatter trajectory and have dropped less than slower ones, but all these rounds will hit less than 12" low at 100 yards and not exceed 3"+.
For more details, see my books.

Categories
Phillosoph

Army Wants More Powerful Pistol: Only One Real Answer!

I have just glanced at an article claiming the US military is looking to replace the 9mm pistol with something more powerful. The obvious move is to simply go back to the .45 ACP, but the article also talks about looking at the .357 SIG and .40 S&W.
Military trials in the past have often not been that scientific. A decision gets made in advance and the main purpose of the trial is to find evidence to support this decision. Some of you might reasonably be asking hasn’t the US military ever investigated handgun ammunition before? Yes they have! A very extensive study back in 1998 It found the .45 ACP to be superior to all lighter, higher velocity rounds. These findings have been mainly ignored.
Millions of dollars will doubtless be wasted selecting a new calibre.
Let us just consider for a second what the military actually needs from a pistol.

    • It needs a round that works well at close range.
    • It needs a round that can be used effectively with a suppressor.
Logically it needs a heavy, subsonic round, not a high velocity supersonic round optimised for ranges of more than 75 metres. Only one military pistol round meets those criteria and in addition has a proven combat track record. The .45 ACP.