The Chemtrail Myth

As a professional aviator with 2,500 hours of flight time throughout our national aerospace system, and possessing a background in B-52Haerospace engineering and physics, I understand how and why some people without proper training in these disciplines might bite off on the chemtrail conspiracy crap.  Nevertheless, I never cease to be amazed at how they can turn a blind eye to rock-solid information and persist in their beliefs.

When I say the chemtrail crap is crap, I mean just that:  It’s crap.

Here’s what’s real:  The chemical equation for stoichiometric combustion of a hydrocarbon in oxygen is given as follows:


That’s a contrail, ladies and gentlemen.  You ignite a hydrocarbon in air.  It combines with oxygen, producing carbon dioxide and water.  The x and y denote the elemental fractions.  The z just means the combustion occurs in an excess of oxygen.

fuel + oxygen –> carbon dioxide + water

It’s that simple.

As for “chemtrails,” I’ll keep that one simple, too.  Chemtrails are a ridiculous, brain-dead myth.  The very idea violates the laws of physics and biology.  I’ve seen chemtrailthousands of photos and videos of supposed “chemtrails” online, not one of which has ever appeared to be even remotely more than a plain old contrail, composed of water vapor precipitating into droplets or ice crystals in the presence of cold, humid air.

Contrails were observed long before World War II.  Whether they disappear rapidly, slowly, persist, or foster additional condensation from the WWII Contrailsair around it is determined by the temperature, relative humidity, and density altitude of the air around it.  If the air is too warm, contrails will not form.  If the air is too dry or thin, they will not persist.  When the surrounding air is more humid or dense, however, they can persist for hours.  If the surrounding air is humid enough, contrails will cause additional precipitation, leading to the growth of clouds.

Contrails are so predictable, in fact, that during World War II, more than 70 years ago, the military’s weather forecasters would contrail-to-cirruspublish daily tables of time vs altitude for the aircrews, indicating where contrails were most likely to form.  Allied bombers used this information to steer clear of those altitudes where contrails would form and give away their positions, making them far more visible to ground forces than if they weren’t producing contrails.

The criss-cross pattern of contrails occurs when numerous aircraft fly over the same ground track while the air mass moves.  You can image028replicate this with a friend, two pencils, and a sheet of paper.  Start drawing lines, one per second, then slowly move the paper beneath the lines.  Draw your lines stationary relative to the desk, not the paper.  Your pencils are “flying” over the same location on the “ground” while the moving paper represents the moving air mass.  Result:  cross-hatch.  In fact, you can tell the general direction of upper-level winds by noting which direction parallel contrails go from sharp to fuzzy.  Fuzzy are older.  Therefore, they’re downwind.

The idea that spraying chemicals seven miles high would have any effect on the ground is absolutely ludicrous.  Even with some of the most cropdusting5_bshpotent chemicals available, crop-dusters must still fly within a few feet of the crops.  If they don’t, the chemicals disperse in even the mildest of air currents.  Even if you allowed that aircraft swapped out half their fuel load in favor of toxic or mind-altering chemicals, you’re still dealing with the fact you’re spraying them from an altitude 3,000 times higher than required for cropdusters.  As contrail1linear dispersion is proportional to the square of the altitude, however, you’re not talking about diluting the mix by a factor of 3,000, but by a factor of 9,000,000.  That’s 9 MILLION times more diluted than a cropduster.  Even if you were spraying pure botulism toxin, the world’s most potent toxin known to mankind, the concentration when it reached the ground would be so incredibly diluted that it would have no affect on either people or animals below!

Meanwhile, the increase in respiratory ailments is due to a number of factors, including the release of man-made xenohormones and other chemicals into our environment, primarily in the form of pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, pollution, and toxins found in a wide variety of industrial pollutants and man-made home furnishings, such as carpet and manufactured building materials.  I’m sure the addition of fluoride into the water supply hasn’t helped things, any more than does chlorine, which is in the same family as fluoride.  We know for a fact  other things also cause problems, and that humans are much better off breathing fresh air, drinking fresh water and eating wholesome, organic foods.

The idea of chemtrails, however, is scientifically and logistically impossible, thoroughly debunked a thousand times over.

It’s absurd beyond the extreme, and only blithering idiots persist in such beliefs in the face of all known scientific fact to the contrary.

Nay…  We’re dangerously polluting our environment and living spaces, all right, but we certainly don’t need to entertain the myth of chemtrails in the process.  Fortunately, a number of aviation professionals have stepped up to set the record straight, such as this post found on Facebook:

chemtrailUpdate (Dec 2, 2015):  Another blitheringly idiotic post on Facebook claims “Conspiracy Theorists Vindicated:  US Senate Reports Chemtrails Are Real and are Killing…”

Well, no.  Here’s a copy of the photographed report, all 746 pages of it.  No mention of chemtrails, there.

And here’s a copy of the searchable text of the report.  Still no mention of chemtrails, much less anything about “killing,” with the sole exception of this sentence:

6. Dynamic effects:
(c) Cold thunderstorm downdrafts, either killing local convec- 
tion or sotting off new convection cells elsewhere.

Update (August 20, 2018):  I came across Phil Plaite’s,”Chemtrails conspiracy theory gets put to the ultimate test.”  Rather good!

Open Carry for Demonstration Purposes, Yet…

Youtube is rife with various pro-2A activists who open carry firearms as much for show, defiance, or antagonism as the rest of do for self-defense.  I’d like to show you one such video, which I think is better than most.  However, I would also like to add the following comments.  Feel free to review the comments and video in any order you desire. 🙂

1.  I do not advocate open carry as a means of showing off, making political or sociological statements, establishing “turf,” or for any other reasons save for the following two:

2.  I only open carry for two reasons:  Response time and deterrence.

2.a. Response Time:  The least amount of time between drawing and hitting one’s target is achieved by means of open carrying on one’s hip.  That’s why competition handgun shooters carry on their hips.  It’s why all openly-marked law enforcement officers carry on their hips.  It’s why I and most members of the military who carried handguns into either combat or hostile fire zones carried on our hips.  And it’s why I open carry on my hip today.  My open carry response time is less than a second.  If I have to conceal, it ramps up to at least a second and a half, if not two seconds.  Should you ever find yourself in a firefight, things usually happen very quickly, hence the expression about “the quick and the dead.”  I’d rather not be the dead one.

2.b.  Deterrence.  The visible presence of a firearm in modern society is a deterrent.  This is quite different from combat, where the enemy could be anyone, and if you look like a member of the American military you may indeed be a target.  In modern American society, criminals want just one thing, but in two parts.  The one thing is to survive.  Most are in a situation where they feel they have to steal.  That’s Part A.  Most also do not relish becoming wounded or killed (Part B).  They have no interest in reliving any semblance of the “Wild West.”  In fact, the “wild west” really wasn’t the wild west, either.  That’s largely Hollywood fiction created to sell movies.  The firearms death rate per capita back then was a fraction of what it is today, even though several times more people routinely carried firearms.  Wait…  What?  You heard me.  In any given society, there is an INVERSE correlation between the percentage of citizens who’re routinely armed and the firearms death rate per capita.  Amazing how that inverse correlation keeps popping up, isn’t it?  🙂  You can’t compare between dissimilar societies, though, such as the U.S. and Yemen, because there are so many more factors at work than merely the number of firearms vs the number of firearms related deaths.  That’s why I said, in any given society, there is an inverse correlation between the percentage of citizens who’re routinely armed and the firearms death rate per capita.

Regardless, the visible presence of firearms in modern America is indeed a deterrent.  That’s the other reason why law enforcement open carries, that’s a primary reason why the military open carries, and that’s the other reason why I open carry.  Criminals are into stealing from you, not mixing it up with you.  They have no idea how fast or accurate you might be, or the nature of your demeanor of disposition.  If you’re carrying concealed, you or may not be a target, depending on other factors.  If you’re visibly carrying, you’ll probably not be considered a target.  The often-voiced objections of “they’ll kill you to get your gun” or “they’ll kill you first because you’re armed” bear no resemblance to reality, and are not supported by any number of crime statistics, for good reason:  When faced with a choice between walking away or attending their own funeral, criminals are pretty similar to the vast majority of you and I: Live to fight another day.  I always use my brain first (stay away from trouble), feet second (get away from trouble), and firearm third (deal with trouble, in that order.  All the testosterone posing in the world will only increase your chances of injury of death.  On rare occasion you might encounter a different response, but that’s the exception, not the rule.

3.  Speaking of which, I believe a large part of these YouTube “open carry demonstrations” are little more than a testosterone exercise, choosing to err on the side the of the law, hoping for the best, or recording the worst.  While I admit they’ve had have some utility with respect to checking the actions of a wayward department or catching a rogue cop in action, I’m not an advocate.  The vast majority of the planned ones seem rather silly, and some have been downright dangerous.  I think the unplanned ones have had the most utility, but usually only after serious civil rights violations.

4.  When I open carry, I simply go about my business.  Whether that’s to the bank, a restaurant, or the grocery store is really no one else’s business but my own.  I have a CC permit, and do so when it’s expedient or more appropriate to do so.  The choice, however, remains mine.  I exercise sound judgement, reasonable caution, and do so as I see fit given all involved circumstances.

This is a freedom upon which our country was founded, the freedom to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, on our own terms, non someone else’s.  The criminal element in our society exists, but it’s a very small percentage of the remainder of us law-abiding citizens.  It’s up to us law-abiding citizens to ensure the over-zealous control freaks in our government remain in check and continue to work with us to enforce the laws as necessary without crossing the line, trying to force us to do their bidding.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the primary reason why we carry in the first place.  It’s both the first line in the sand against everything from aggression, robbery, rape, homicide, as well as the last line in the sand against tyrannical aggression.  Those in law enforcement who respect this, and they are many, we’ve got your backs, and we know you have ours.  Thank you.  You should know by now from the above reading we’re not in this for show.

Those who don’t, if I may, please start with the Library of Congress.  Better start at the beginning.  Follow the links.  Follow the history, lest we repeat it, and please, let’s not repeat the massacres of the 20th Century.

Bullies and Lunch Money

The Beatles said it best:  “Can’t buy me love.”

ObamagriftFriends who would be your enemies if you did not give them your lunch money are not your friends.  They’re you’re enemies!  The only way to deal with a bully is to put him in his place.

I was bullied on a number of occasions growing up.  When that happened, I tackled them, and sat on them until they cried, “Uncle!”  After that, no more bully!  At least not to me, anyway, and usually, no longer to others.

When a country or a religious group gets out of line and starts bullying ourselves or others, they need a swift kick in the pants.  You don’t need to enter into a prolonged conflict on their soil.  You just need to hit ’em hard and fast, while telling them “KNOCK IT OFF!”  If they don’t listen, hit ’em again.

Sooner or later one of two things will happen:  They’ll either knock it off, or they’ll declare war on us.  If the latter, no matter.  Doesn’t mean we need to go fight them on their own soil.  That’s what they WANT us to do.  We have superior intel and firepower, so, sit back and let ’em stew.  They’ll either forget about it or will continue to “wage war” against us.  If the latter, then impose and enforce trade sanctions.  If they build something that’s bad, take it out.  If they start waging ware on our soil, take them out.

Whatever you do, DO NOT give bullies your lunch money!

Sadly, our burden of Obamagrift runs into the TRILLIONS of U.S. dollars.  He is fiscally raping our nation, and this must stop.  What do you tell a rapist?  You tell him “NO!”

Write your Congressman, whether they agree with you or not, and tell them “NO!”  Write the President and tell him “NO!”  Tell them, “It’s our country, and you can’t have it!”  Tell them they’re not authorized to give it away, either.  Be polite, but be firm, and never back down.  Remember, ours is a government of the people, for the people, and by the people.

This only works, however, when WE THE PEOPLE stand up and take our country back from those who would run it into the ground.

Our Time of Reckoning Is At Hand

If any of you might be thinking “our time of reckoning is at hand,” you’d be right.

The American People need to come to grips with something, and they’d better get it real quick, before their government takes away something they granted a long time ago.

Owning and carrying (that’s the “keep and bear” part) is NOT a “privilege.”  We do NOT have a “Bill of Privileges.”  We have a Bill of RIGHTS.

The Second Amendment, number two in the ten Amendments in our Bill of RIGHTS, reads as follows:  “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the RIGHT of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” (emphasis mine)

In February of 1982, the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the United States Senate, 97th Congress, Second Session, published document 88-618 0, entitled The Right to Keep and Bear Arms Report.  Therein, you will find such quotes as:

“In my studies as an attorney and as a United States Senator, I have constantly been amazed by the indifference or even hostility shown the Second Amendment by courts, legislatures, and commentators.”

“James Madison would be startled to hear that his recognition of a right to keep and bear arms, which passed the House by a voice vote without objection and hardly a debate, has since been construed in but a single, and most ambiguous Supreme Court decision.”

“Thomas Jefferson, who kept a veritable armory of pistols, rifles and shotguns at Monticello, and advised his nephew to forsake other sports in favor of hunting, would be astounded to hear supposed civil libertarians claim firearm ownership should be restricted.”

“No fewer than twenty-one decisions by the courts of our states have recognized an individual right to keep and bear arms, and a majority of these have not only recognized the right but invalidated laws or regulations which abridged it. Yet in all too many instances, courts or commentators have sought, for reasons only tangentially related to constitutional history, to construe this right out of existence. They argue that the Second Amendment’s words “right of the people” mean “a right of the state” — apparently overlooking the impact of those same words when used in the First and Fourth Amendments. The “right of the people” to assemble or to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures is not contested as an individual guarantee. Still they ignore consistency and claim that the right to “bear arms” relates only to military uses. This not only violates a consistent constitutional reading of “right of the people” but also ignores that the second amendment protects a right to “keep” arms. These commentators contend instead that the amendment’s preamble regarding the necessity of a “well regulated militia . . . to a free state” means that the right to keep and bear arms applies only to a National Guard. Such a reading fails to note that the Framers used the term “militia” to relate to every citizen capable of bearing arms, and that the Congress has established the present National Guard under its own power to raise armies, expressly stating that it was not doing so under its power to organize and arm the militia.”


“In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two landmark decisions concerning the Second Amendment. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. In dicta, the Court listed many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession as being consistent with the Second Amendment.  In McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government.” – Wikipedia’s entry on “Second Amendment to the United States Constitution,” Dec 25, 2012.

The problem with the Supreme Court of the United States of America is that they are SO bogged down these days in precedent and legaleze from the many thousands of decisions rendered by them and the lower courts with respect to firearms, that they’re unable to see the forest through the trees.  It’s a VERY SIMPLE forest, people, and it looks like this:  “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.” (emphasis mine)

Thus, when the Supreme Court “listed many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession as being consistent with the Second Amendment,” were they infringing on “the right of the people to keep and bear arms?”

Hell yes, they were!  Just as were the “many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms.”  Put simply, U.S. Supreme Court, Congress, and Mr. President, what in the hell do you think “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” means, anyway?  Here’s a clue:  “infringe: 1
: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another ”

By definition, ANY “prohibition” or “restriction” is an infringement.  Therefore, it logically follows, by definition, that any ruling by the U.S. Supreme court which upholds an “prohibition” or “restriction” is also an infringement.

So, was the Supreme Court’s “Heller ruling which indicated that “traditionally lawful purposes” was restricted to “self-defense within the home” an infringement?

You bet your ass it was.

And was the Supreme Court’s “MacDonald” ruling which limited the powers of local and state governments an infringement?

No, of course not.  The reason it wasn’t an infringement is simple:  Our Founding Fathers, the ones who both founded this country, creating our Constitution and it’s Bill of Rights, NEVER wanted to EVER AGAIN see American citizens at the mercy of their government.  Instead, they wanted American citizens to know, understand, and act upon just one thing:  That the United States of America is a country of the people, by the people, and for the people.

This is why I founded RYOC – Run Your Own Country!  It’s not our government’s country.  It’s OUR country!  WE THE PEOPLE are the ultimate authority in this great nation of ours, and it’s up to US to ensure our nation remains on the narrow path, the one upon which our Founding Fathers sent us, the one which lead to the greatest nation on Earth, and the only one which will get us out of this mess we’re in today.

How do we do that?  Simple, and it takes just two steps:

First, stop drooling over politicians’ rhetoric.  Look at their voting record, instead.

Second, vote ALL those who fail to adhere to our Constitution, the law of our land, out of office.  Obama, H. Clinton, Pelosi, Steinfein, and Reed come to mind as the WORST offenders on this point.  They just need to go.

That’s it!  Continuing education, however, is critical.  If you haven’t read our Constitution lately, please do.  An initial read should take you no more than ten minutes.  You can read it, as well as the other documents upon which our nation was founded, at the Library of Congress’ website, here:  Also, take a look at that Congressional Report.  It was written thirty years ago, but it was never more applicable at any time between then and now than it is today.

Good luck, and God Bless!

World Domination 101 via the 47%

World Domination 101:  Obama’s no fool, but he’s no Bobby Fischer or Gary Kasparov, either.  He’s admitted in public and on video multiple times that he he wasn’t born in America and that he’s a Muslim.  He’s openly given $1.5 billion American Dollars to the Muslim Brotherhood, and given the meteoric rise in our deficit, from $9 Trillion to $16 Trillion, I suspect he managed to siphon off at least $1 Trillion of that to Islam.

I’m a Christian, but I don’t view other world religions with distaste, as they’ve never given me any reason to do so.  Except Islam.  It’s the only religion which mandates its followers either convert or kill infidels (unbelievers), as well as lie to do so.  Only socialism has resulted in more deaths, worldwide, than Islam.  Obama is both Muslim and a socialist, but not the latter in any sort of pure form.  He’s got his own brand of world-wrecking idealism, and if humanity ever manages to dethrone him, the history books will likely record it as Obamanism, right up there with Naziism, Fascism, Communism, Marxism, etc.

I haven’t a clue as to what’s been happening on Congress, why they haven’t impeached him for at least one of the several felonies (high crimes) he’s committed while in office, or any of his dozens of misdemeanors.  The only answer I’ve received was from John Boehner’s office, and they said they won’t start impeachment proceedings because they can’t possible get the 2/3 vote required.  Personally, I think they need to impeach him anyway, if for no other reason than to bypass the uber-liberal mainstream media who refuses to report Obama-wrongs.

I haven’t seen 2016, yet, but I’ve watched Agenda, and that alone ID’d all the players from the late 1800s on, and connected all the dots, all of which lead to Obama.  This problem isn’t just within our own borders.  It’s worldwide, and has existed for more than a century.  It has resulted in two world wars and dozens of smaller skirmishes.  More than a billion humans are dead as a direct or indirect result of this sickness, and three times that many have been harmed, most often physically (maimed).

I say “sickness,” because that’s what it is, and all the major players, including Obama, Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Khrushchev, Emperor Sh?wa (Hirohito), Ahmadinejad (Iran), Putin, Chavez, and al-Assad (Syria), have one thing in common:  They’re all megalomaniacs (narcissistic personality disorder).

But they’re not the real problem.  They’re only the symptom of a far greater problem.  The real problem lies with the 47% who are either too lazy, stupid, ignorant, or idealistic to understand what’s going on.  These idiots mis-educate our youth, rewrite history, fail to properly report the news, and otherwise keep at least 47% of us secluded from reality.

It’s very frustrating to see otherwise intelligent people, friends for many years, get that deer in the headlights look before pressing the Obama lever at the polls.

In The End Times, We’re Still Saved By Grace, Through Faith

It may very well be the beginning of the end times.  I actually find a lot of comfort in that, not because I look forward to it, but because in spite of it I know where I, my son, and my ex stand with God.  Thus, no matter what happens, we are temporal here on this Earth, passing away sooner or later, but will reign with God forever.

That doesn’t keep me from fighting against it, though.  A lot of the Jews didn’t resist socialistic oppression and mass genocide common to socialism during WWII because they honestly believed the prophesied Messiah would rescue them.  When that didn’t happen, a large percentage of the survivors left the faith.

I believe our trust, hope, and faith in God should be as if everything were up to him, but that we need to fight as if everything is up to us.  That’s what David did, and God made him the head of all clans which followed!  The human side of Jesus descended from his line, as well.

Sorry, Islam, but illegitimate children such as Ishmael do NOT carry God’s covenant.  The proper lineage is Abraham (via his wife Sarah) … David … Jesus:

“And Abraham said to God, “If only Ishmael might live under your blessing!”  Then God said, “Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac.  I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him.  And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation.  But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year.” – Genesis 17:18-21

Ishmael’s mother was Hagar, who was not Abraham’s wife.  Hagar was Sarah’s handmaiden.  So, no dice — God did not establish his covenant through Ishmael.

Don’t go around wailing, gnashing your teeth, and killing people, though, as I’m not descended from them, either.  Most Christians are adopted into the Christian faith.  We become sons of God, brothers with Christ, not because of our lineage, or anything we’ve done, but because of God’s invitation all all peoples from all nations, an invitation made possible by the ultimate sacrifice for sin, a sacrifice good for all time, that of Jesus’ death on the Cross.  Our ONLY action is accepting God’s invitation, in faith of His plan for our lives.  “Ye are saved by grace, through faith.”

God’s grace, our faith.  It’s that simple.

A bit about Code-Breaking… Encryption Theory 101

Recently, the skeleton of a carrier pigeon was found in a chimney in Surrey, England, with a message canister still attached.  The canister contained an encoded message of 27 groups of five letters, that has “stumped” code-breaking experts.  Here’s a link to the article.

It’ll never be cracked.

It’s not that today’s code-breakers aren’t up to speed, or that the codes of WWII were that sophisticated.  It’s that the key space exceeds the message space.

This type of code is almost certainly a substitution cypher.  In other words, each group of five letters is probably a simple substitution cypher, in that each letter is a substitution for a different letter.  Substitution cyphers could be changed on a regular basis, even daily, by agents in the field, using information contained in dates and a simple algorithm.  As they can be cracked using statistics, particularly when the message is long enough, it’s only intention would be to have hidden what lay beneath.  The good news is that if what’s underneath is gobbledygook, it can’t be cracked by statistical means.

But that’s not why this will never be cracked.  If the only thing at play here were a simple substitution cypher, any laptop could crack it in minutes, if not seconds.  However, if the underlying message is itself scrambled in a different manner, the NSA’s best supercomputer could work on it for decades and find nothing but gobbledygook.

In addition to the substitution, the encryption almost certainly includes transposition algorithms, again, capable of being memorized by agents in the field.  These would be more complex, however, and would probably not have been tied to dates.  These transposition algorithms may very well have been agent-specific, meaning that if any individual agent was compromised, messages encoded by other agents would have remained safe.  This is not unlike modern RPK systems, whereby each individual has a public key they share with others to encrypt messages, only the intended recipient’s private key can decrypt them.  RPK systems are most widely used in securing e-mail.

But that’s not why this will never be cracked!  A third layer of encryption again goes back to substitution, but it’s not a substitution cypher.  Instead, it involves the use of code words, such as using “apple” instead of “Arnheim,” or “to” instead of “from.”  Thus, “Sally sells seashells by the seashore” might initially be encoded as “horses run planters under the stars.”  Contrary to popular misconception, no supercomputer in the world can decode this simple use of codewords, not without a boatload of additional information, including a bunch of other similarly-encoded messages and loads of historical operational data.  As with the substitution cypher portion, each agent probably had his or her own “dictionary,” that set of tables or code book with which they encoded the message and substitution cyphers.

Naturally, all of this becomes incredibly complicated back home, except for one thing:  They had ways of knowing which agent sent the message.  That may have been something as simple as an apparently random set of letters in, say, the 13th block, which may have been “siuev” three weeks ago, but has rotated every week, perhaps by one letter in the first digit, three letters in the second, two in the third, five in fourth, and four in the fifth, so that this week the 13th block reads “uoicd.”  Next month, all agents might be using the 11th block.  Who knows?  The folks at Bletchley Park knew.

The reason this worked so well is quite simple:  If each agent in the field has their own code book, transposition algorithm, and substitution cypher, it would have taken the best cryptologists months, if not years, to decode the message, and only then if they also had both the operational data and were able to make the suspected agent talk.  Yet an agent capable of decent memorization could learn these techniques, including their personal substitution cypher and code book in a week or two of intensive study.

So, the next time you see some secret agent at the movies crack a code in minutes with a computer, remember this:  “If the algorithm is unknown, it can’t be cracked,” as well as it’s corollary:  “Even if the algorithm is known, provided the key space is larger than the message, it can’t be cracked.”  And by “can’t” I don’t mean “in a reasonable period of time.”  I mean “ever.”

Some of you may be wondering, “How can I encode my messages today?”  Well, you can either invent your own encoding algorithm, which might be fun, but unless you’re an expert, will probably not be very secure.  Alternatively, some third-party e-mail systems such as Mozilla’s Firefox (my favorite) have third-party plugins such as Enigmail which do a fair job of securing your messages from prying eyes.  Enigmail uses triple-DES, which is decent, but child’s play for the NSA computers due to some inherent flaws in the DES standard.  Thunderbird also includes the ability to use certificates for both authentication and encryption, which is good enough for securing corporate communications, and the latest versions include the ability to use AES (Advanced Encryption Standard).  If implemented properly, the security is on par with that used by the DoD for material up to and including Top Secret.