My Uninformed Opinion-Oscars Edition

So here is my rant regarding the Oscars that bugs me every year.
One of these years I am going to get into a prize oriented Oscar pool. The basic plan I would go with is that any leading actor/actress that is playing in a biographical film is going to be the front runner.

Lets go to the history:

Julia Roberts- Erin Brockevich '00
Marcia Gay Harden- Pollock '00
Jennifer Conally - A Beautiful Mind '01
Nicole Kidman - The Hours (Virginia Woolf) '02
Charlize Theron- Monster '03
Jamie Foxx - Ray '04
Cate Blanchet - The Aviator '04
Phillip Seymour Hoffman- Capote '05
Reese Witherspoon- Walk the Line '05
Forest Whitaker- The Last King of Scotland (Idi Amin) '06
Helen Mirren-The Queen '06
Marion Cottilard - La Vie en Rose (Edith Piaf) '07
Sean Penn - Milk '08

Granted, I haven't seen either performance, but I can't help but think that having a role as a real-life politically correct hero put Sean Penn over Mickey Rouke's fictional character.

I'm seeing something of an objective bias in the academy despite their pleas of artistic subjectivity.

Random Thought

Few things piss people off more than something good happening to people they don't like.

Save us From the Bad Rich People

Its all about decentralizing the power.

How’s This for a Media Conspiracy?

I had a thought about the LA Times sitting on the tape of Senator Obama toasting the one-time spokesman for Hamas. What caught my attention beyond the obvious was that the Times intended to release the tape after the election. This and that slow realization in the media that all may not be on the up and up in Obama land has some bloggers saying that the media will try to regain some credibility by criticizing their favorite once he is safely in office.

Allow me to play on some “the media is as biased as the corporations that own them” paranoia. The traditional press, in particular newspapers, are in dire financial straights. Eight years of Republican administration and scandals both actual and “squint and turn your head to see it” varieties have only lead to decreasing viewership and stacks of unsold newsprint. What could possibly turn it around for them?

What won’t do it would be four or, God forbid, eight years of vapid boosterism for President Obama. The news media needs red meat. Or would that be blue meat seeing as how making Republicans bleed has done nothing for circulation? The media might not be biased for just the liberal candidate, but for a candidate that they know will provide scandal and outrage and viewers for years to come.I doubt seriously that the traditional media will abandon their classic build up and tear down ways for President Obama.

The most extreme prediction, given the tendency of the MSM throughout the election, is that if Obama wins tonight, we are going to see some hard hitting exposes on ACORN and voting irregularities before the Inauguration. Of course, if McCain wins, then it will be Florida 2000 times five.

A thought on a slightly related note: if Obama wins, Jon Stewart will be left utterly without material.

Opening Up With Both Barrels

Orson Scott Card has put out a column in which he excoriates the media for what he calls a complete lack of honor or honesty:

But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie — that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain, and the Republicans. You have trained the American people to blame everything bad — even bad weather — on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to.

If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth — even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate.

Because that's what honorable people do. Honest people tell the truth even when they don't like the probable consequences. That's what honesty means . That's how trust is earned.

A Consequence of Marrying a Coworker

I have found that I now have direct deposit:

My paycheck is directly deposited with my wife.

Thank you, be sure to tip your waitresses.

I Have Got to Get This Book

But I probably won't. This election may already be doing bad things to my blood pressure, and I don't intend to vote for the guy anyway. So I'll refer you to someone who has read it:

I've Lost Faith in the Messiah

Let's Not Have a Neo-Deal

I was always taught that the New Deal was needed to end the Great Depression. Well, so much for the conventional wisdom.

So for the love of God lets not have the government "fix" our economy again.

So Who is Watching?

It would seem that the situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating. Clearly there is a need for new ideas.

Now I am not one who thinks that Congressional oversight is a panacea. But then, if you are of that type, you should probably be wondering why the Senate hasn’t been keeping its eye on the matter. Perhaps a member of that subcommittee could have lit a fire

Subtle Bias at Microsoft?

An observation from posting:

I use a tablet PC for blogging. Sometimes the handwriting recognition is a little wonky. Those of you who know my handwriting are now saying "Ted, a computer that could read your handwriting would be a contender for the Turing Test." But that's beside the point.

Until I programmed in Obama into the dictionary, it kept reading it as Osama.

So, Mr. Gates, are there some sneaky Republicans in your labs?

Learning Through Comedy

It has struck me the degree to which people view those in the other parts of the political spectrum by mere stereotypes. Not sure you know the stereotypes? Allow Richard Jenni to explain.



'Nuff said.

The Company You Keep

Some people would like to say that Obama's connection to the Weather Underground's Bill Ayers is no big big deal.

A simple question for those folks: Would a Republican's past history with David Duke matter?

Just trying to show what objectivity would look like.

Debate Storage Locker

This is where I put articles for those times where end up saying "I read it somewhere"

A brief history of lax lending standards. Via Instapundit

Even better via Protein Wisdom.

Remember, Obama came out of Chicago with no reputation as a reformer.

Wrong TV Plot Line

This idea hit me over the long weekend when I didn’t want to spend too much time online. With the revelation of Bristol Palin’s pregnancy, this observation has gotten stale. But here it goes anyway.

The Sarah Palin Fake Pregnancy rumor made me wonder where the hill they would have come up with that idea. Then I remembered the seen in passing (I swear) season finale to Desperate Housewives last year, the one where Marcia Cross’s character was faking a pregnancy while her daughter was shoved off to an convent hiding her condition.

What I think the plot line that is developing may well be Commander in Chief. The First female Vice President, after being chosen as a play for the female vote, comes into office following the death of the President. I never saw an episode, and from its brief duration on air it would seem that not many others had either.

Not the Valedictorian, I Take It

Good to know that there wasn't an actual plot to kill Senator Obama. But then again, do you really think that the dude on the right especially is all that much with respect to planning and execution?


Dude on right seemed rather familiar to me, and then it hit me:

'Nuff said.

More Ammo for the Drug Warriors

Many people seem to think that the more liberal persuasions would not prosecute the drug war as vigorously as the any-excuse-to-trample-civil-liberties conservatives.

I would argue that one would only need to look at this article and remember that it is the liberal persuasions that pushed mandatory car seatbelt and motorcycle helmet laws.

Remember: Conservatives think you are too degenerate to choose what drugs to take, and liberals think you are too immature to choose what risks to take.

Comedy Can Be Enlightening

I have been reading Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg. The primary premise being that Fascism is an essentially Socialistic enterprise, and that it is not a fit label for modern Conservatives.

But if Fascism was a product of the same thinking that founds much of current Liberal thought, then what about the recieved wisdom that Fascism and Communism are opposite ends of the political spectrum? Hadn't Hitler and Stalin hated one another?

The point lies in Bolshevism being the Marxist Socialism for the benefit of the international working class, Nazism was Socialism for the benefit of the German race, and Italian Fascism was Socialism for the benefit of the Italian nation. All pursued the notion that the State was the highest expression of human will.

So if the difference is not night/day, dog/cat, then why were they so set against one another? Often the smallest differences create the biggest fights. That's when I remembered this Emo Phillips bit (press on to the second half):

I was in San Fransisco once, walking along the Golden Gate Bridge, and I saw this guy on the bridge about to jump. So I thought I'd try to stall and detain him, long enough for me to put the film in. I said, "Don't jump!" and he turns... You've heard of the elephant man. He was kind of like that, he had a, well, you could say he had the head of a horse. And my heart went out to him. I said, "Why the long face?"
He said, "'Cause all my life people have called me mean names like horses-head or Flicka or chess-piece or Trigger..."
I said, "Well, don't worry about it, Ed. It can't be that bad."
He said, "My girlfriend's suing me!"
I said, "For palomino?"
He said, "Why was I put on this Earth?"
I said, "My friend, anywhere else you wouldn't stand a chance."
He said, "Nobody loves me."
I said, "God loves you, you silly ninny."
He said, "How do you know there's a God?"
I said, "Of course there's a God. Do you think that billions of years ago a bunch of molecules floating around at random could someday have had the sense of humor to make you look like that?"
He said, "I do believe in God."
I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?"
He said, "A Christian."
I said, "Me too. Protestant or Catholic?"
He said, "Protestant."
I said, "Me too! What franchise?"
He says, "Baptist."
I said, "Me too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?"
He says, "Northern Baptist."
I said, "Me too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"
He says, "Northern Conservative Baptist."
I say, "Me too! Northern Conservative Fundamentalist Baptist or Northern Conservative Reform Baptist?"
He says, "Northern Conservative Fundamentalist Baptist."
I say, "Me too! Northern Conservative Fundamentalist Baptist Great Lakes Region or Northern Conservative Fundamentalist Baptist Eastern Region?"
He says, "Northern Conservative Fundamentalist Baptist Great Lakes Region."
I say, "Me too! Northern Conservative Fundamentalist Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879 or Northern Conservative Fundamentalist Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?"
He says, "Northern Conservative Fundamentalist Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912."
I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over!

If only both Hitler and Stalin jumped off of bridges.

Assessment by Relatives and Absolute

Lately I have been challenged to look at my values and to consider how I assess whether something is good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable. The debate of what is good or bad will certainly not be settled here.

Even if one were to debate with a person who agreed to a standard of good and bad, I have found that there is still room for disagreement. That comes from whether the measure of good is done as an absolute measure or as a relative measure. Must the option that is chosen be good in the absolute or is the best possible just going to have to be good enough?

I write these to stimulate thought, and something just went click. In the above paragraph, I used the term “best possible” to illustrate the difference of absolute vs relative. I am starting to think that the essence of the conflict is when one decides that necessity dictates settling for the less than perfect. The course of deciding how to pursue my values is leading me to examine where I accede to necessity. Consistency has been hard to find.

I would like to be absolute in my votes for elected representatives. I want to have people who are in sync with my libertarian social and economic views while maintaining a proactive stance on national defense. While I am wishing, I want a Mustang, current or classic doesn’t matter, for my birthday. Since neither is going to happen, I’ll just pick my way through the candidates and keep my Kia tuned.

In this primary season, there is another route by which necessity sneaks in. It is all well and good that one candidate has your vote, but can he get enough votes to get where he can actually do any good? Do you back the long shot that is everything you want or should you support a more popular candidate that is two steps forward, one step back? Sometimes, if you are clinging to the Perfect Candidate, the only thing you will get is the satisfaction of having sent a message. Just hope that they listen. The flip side is having to swallow the less than perfect things your less than perfect candidate is doing in office. Remember, a pilot following the shallower dive is still going to put the plane in the ground.

Everyone has faced situations that had gone FUBAR through no fault of their own and the best they could do was minimize the damage. The boss from hell would still scream that he should fire you for the damage you failed to prevent. Now, if you were the cause of the FUBAR your ass deserves to get canned. Otherwise, I believe that one should be rewarded for achieving the best possible results. Let the best possible be decided by spirited debate, but I do think that one should avoid allowing class resentment color one’s opinion.

I’ve come the long way around to the idea of executive bonuses in companies that post losses. Provided the executive did not create the FUBAR, then I believe that he should be rewarded for achievements that approach the best possible results. This would have particular justification if the exec were brought into shore up a failing company.

Other judgments about the executive could be made. Everyone could admire the class of an executive who says, “Thanks, but I’ll pass,” when her company is really hurting or laying off workers. Another type of team player would say, “Thanks, but hold onto it until we’re in the black.” That would mean deferred compensation. Lastly would be the one who taker the money right off. She might be entitled by her contract, but it is still mercenary. Then again, the Board would have known she was mercenary.

I often think that a person is defined by then choices in priorities. I see now that the most reliable way to gauge what I value as a high priority is how much I am willing to settle for less than perfect. The more important to me, the less willing I am to compromise. The frictions in life come from dealing with those, namely everyone, whose willingness to compromise doesn’t correspond with mine. If we are individuals, then our priorities will differ.

And that’s just life.

In Defense of Stupid Studies

Last weekend I was hanging with friends when the topic got around to the government wasting money on stupid studies. Their gripe was about a study that showed that the rate of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is more common among troops who had done multiple tours in Iraq than those who had done fewer.

While I agree that the government should not be paying for these studies, I tried to argue that the studies themselves aren’t wastes. Even ones that show “well duh!” conclusions like proving that people watch TV to alleviate boredom are not a waste of time or money.

Over the past week I’ve come up with two arguments against what is fundamentally a failure to appreciate different qualities of knowledge.

First: What you might call obvious, I might call an assumption. It comes down to different requirements in what it takes to “know” something. My first retort to my friends’ questioning of doing this study is that conventional wisdom gets slammed quite frequently by someone rigorously examining the evidence. Unfortunately, I couldn’t come up with an answer to the retort “When have you ever heard of such a case?” At the best I could recall nothing better than how everyone “knew” that the sun revolved around a flat earth. It took a couple of days to remember reading about experiments showing that being physically chilled does not make one more likely to catch a cold, or that eating less than half an hour before swimming does not increase the rate of getting cramps. Imagine if either of these experiments had confirmed the conventional wisdom? Then the old hindsight bias kicks in and the money spent on is declared “wasted”.

Second: A stupid study tests not only the obvious conclusion but the concepts that go into the creation of the obvious conclusion. To butcher an old expression: Scientific discovery is not heralded by “Eureka” but by “What the (bleep), that doesn’t make any sense.” The result of a study is said to make sense if it fits with the previous conclusions that make up the dominant theory. If the data makes sense, then the paradigm is just hunky-dory. If not, one of those pesky paradigm shifts is in the offing, or at least will be once the parameters of the experiment have been verified down to the last measure. The tricky part is that one never knows just which conclusion is the one that will be the thread that unravels the whole conceptual sweater.

So next time you hear about a study that leaves you saying, “I could have told you that,” think instead that you have been given proof that you were right all along. That and future generations won't think you quaint for believing something just because it was superficially obvious.

Now That I Can Think …

Caffeine is proof that God doesn’t want human sacrifices first thing in the morning.

The Return of a Dirty Word

The word for today is Responsibility.

From Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: re·spon·si·bil·i·ty
Pronunciation: ri-"spän(t)-s&-'bi-l&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
1 : the quality or state of being responsible : as a : moral, legal, or mental accountability

One of the greatest pastimes in the world today is to stick others with it so that you don't have to. We have a real peach of an example in the car crash in Gary, Indiana. There is definitely some stink on this story for the police over the sloppy handling of the scene. But that does
not let the driver, Darius Moore, off the hook for his part of the event.

Too bad that he doesn't seem to agree.

"I'm angry at police because I thought they could have found my friends, and they probably would be alive today if [police] had just done their job," he said.

And here's the real winner:

"A lot of people tell me that it wasn't my fault, that there was nothing that I could do," said Moore, a senior at Gary's West Side High School. "I realize that it wasn't my fault, but sometimes I feel like it was -- it really wasn't -- but it's just how I feel sometimes."

Let us look at that first quote. "Probably would be alive." Aside from flat denying what the coroner reported that the injuries would have been fatal instantly, there is still the fundamental conditional in effect. "Probably would be alive" applies just as well to making sure your passengers were wearing their seatbelts (something that the passengers should have taken on themselves).

More to the point "Certainly would be alive" would apply if young Mr. Moore had not been drinking. The violence applied to the guardrail in one of the photos at CNN certainly doesn't look like 40 MPH after several rolls. Either alcohol impaired his ability to react to a 40 MPH blowout, or he was going the 80 MPH earlier reports indicated.

At the very least, Darius' friends put their lives in his hands when they got in his car. If he had shown more care, they would not have had their fates rest in the hands of sloppy cops in the first place.

As for the second quote , there might not have been anything he could have done after the accident, but there was plenty he should and shouldn't have done before.

Update: Speaking of responsibility, I neglected mine to link to Venomous Kate's Bite Me before sending my trackback . I apologize for the discourtesy and dread the thought that the bite will be harder than I can handle.

Did Tim Taylor Kill the Do-it-Yourselfer?

Let’s take as our starting point the Popular Mechanics article by Glenn Reynolds about the decline of manual skills in society. He ends the article with point that I had to admit came very close to the mark personally:

Most people can do more than they think they can, and it’s often fear of failure as much as lack of skill that keeps people from tackling hands-on tasks.

Speaking from experience, I know how easy it is to fall into the mindset of better to do nothing than do something wrong. Been there, done that, would have bought the T-Shirt but wasn’t sure it was the right thing to do.

Fortunately I have a job that allows me to start with the engineering I went to school for and expand my more manual skills in the course of setting up tests. Confidence in a great thing, I recommend it for everyone.

And there lies the rub. Many people fear being caught out in false confidence. The show “Home Improvement” rested entirely on the premise of the Do-it-Yourselfer who is totally clueless despite his self-professed competence. After that, a leaky faucet suddenly looks like a chance to be branded as a Doofus Dad for the rest of one’s life.

One other factor that plays into to hesitancy to practice manual skills is that when you make or repair something, you take the responsibility that you have done it right. Responsibility is a dirty word the days. I think that many people find a sort of comfort in the thought that if something goes wrong when someone else does it they can sue. That safety net is gone when you do it yourself. The cynic in me is waiting for the first lawsuit to come from someone botching a home repair after taking one of those classes at Home Depot.

And to end this post on a barely related thought: Who does the repairs at John Edwards’s estate? You would think that a contractor would have to be insane to risk the liability repairing any trial lawyer’s home.

Update: Greetings to all of you coming from Instapundit. I would invite you all to take a long look around, but this site is just now coming off hiatus.

What a Man Wants: Wedding Edition

Hey all,

Long time no write I know but I have been tied up figuratively for more than a couple of weeks.

What brings me out of hibernation is this post at Electric Venom about the perception of men that women want them to be able to read their minds. Like every guy, I have felt that way at one point or another. I'm not going to go there right now, but I would like to talk about how a guy, namely me would rather go about planning his wedding.

I am not going to say "Not at all". I can tough it out because it means a lot to Trish and I would like to have stuff that I like there as well. The big thing that gets to me is all of the small things that I really don't think of as important to me (such as centerpieces or favors) that she insists on having my input in. The moment I say, "OK, I like this one," she says, "Oh."

You guys know the tone that she uses. The one that says that this is not really a wedding favor catalog but a Cosmo quiz and your selection has just put you in the category of "Call animal control immediately" .

Suddenly, you get this feeling in your gut that your whole relationship is going down the drain because your incompatibility over place holder cards indicates a deeper rift. Let me tell you something ladies, few things make a guy uncomfortable like being judged on his taste.

I suggested the fix of going like this: Trish can look through magazines and catalogs to her heart's content. Once she feels like she has found her four or five favorites, she can come to me for my opinion of what I like best. Simple and to the point.

Because this is my nightmare scenario: I find something I really like, and she finds something that she really wants, and we fight about it. Or more insidiously, I don't fight and tell her to go with what she wants. Then she might come back with that she doesn't want me to only like it because she wants it. That way lies madness.

Like I said before, I really don't care about these incidentals, especially not enough to fight over them. She knows that my only request to her for our wedding day, the one irreducible thing that I must insist upon, is "Be there."

Hell Reconsidered (or How I Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Gift Registry Shopping)

Most any guy will tell you that shopping, outside of electronics or power tools, is a hell akin to that scene in Total Recall in which Arnold is pulling out the tracking device that had been placed deep in his sinus passage. Particularly if you are registered at a place like Bed, Bath, and Beyond.

That was my thought prior to actually going to BB&B for shopping for items on the registry. First off, they got knives. If anything can get a guy into a kitchen, it is the opportunity to lose a fingertip and a couple of pints of blood trying out their Benihana routines. Looking at the really quality knives just made me happy and wonder how we could put one of those island rangetops in our condo.

What has me looking forward to going back (seeing as how we only made it through half of the first floor before I had to run home to watch the finale of Heroes [note to self: add TiVo to the registry]) even though we have already covered the sharp, pointy objects, is the little gizmo they give you to scan the items onto your online gift registry. Let me tell you, nothing can get a guy into the shopping mood faster than a hand-held electronic doo-dad with a laser that goes "bleep". Without a time limit, Tricia might need some help prying it out of my fingers.

"A twelve-armed scented votive candle chandelier? Why not?"

The Vacation

Trish and I took a long weekend in the Napa Valley. We are very seriously considering having the wedding at Mont La Salle. We visited my uncle, a Christian Brother, who lives there, and the grounds just grabbed her.

Now we get to sell the invitees on a weekend in Napa as part of the wedding experience. Somehow that has not been a difficult sale.

Shouting From the Rooftop

You may recall that I ended the last post with a hint that more good news might be coming. It is the type of news that I felt I should share with my family before proclaiming it to the world at large. So now, without further ado:


Everyone, say hi to Trish. This the the beautiful lady that just a couple of weeks ago agreed to be my wife. When we first started dating, we wanted to keep our relationship on the down-low so that we wouldn't get talked about constantly at work. The whole time I wanted to shout from the rooftops how much I loved her. Well, the whole discrete thing didn't work out as most everybody was talking about if we were or were not an item. With that in mind, and Trish's blessing, I am announcing my love to the world.

(Please, no comparisons to Tom Cruise and Oprah's couch. I think I am being rather dignified here)

For some reason, the engagement seems to come as a surprise to practically no one. We have been dating just since November, yet everyone who knew we were dating seems to be completely unfazed by the announcement. Her best friend said she was not surprised, and her friend in Las Vegas, who has never met me, said she could tell it would happen just by the picture Trish sent her. Even my parents said that they had taken Christmas in the When-will-they-announce-an-engagement pool. My sister had chosen my birthday (April) so I think my parents still have the closest, but that's not the point. It just seems that everybody knew this was going to happen just a bit sooner than we did.

I'll keep you all filled in on details as they happen. In the meantime, Trish has always wanted a wedding on the beach. Anyone know of some good locations in the Southern California area?

Game the World - The Rematch

Hey folks, remember me? It is Winston, Ted, and Gamer, all at once. Game the World is back on the lively list. I'm calling this post the rematch because the world pretty well kicked my ass last time around. In this new incarnation of the site I might get into the personal type of stuff.

I didn't do that before because my life wasn't really anything to write home about. Things really hit bottom about a couple of years ago, and my interest in the political and philosophical just waned to zero around summer of last year. There might come a time where I will write about that dark shit, but I haven't decided for sure about that yet.

For now, I will stick with the good stuff. I started a new job back in August for a firm that does testing on materials for the construction industry. My work, in the vernacular, is to break stuff under controlled circumstances and write reports in egg-head speak. It isn't the aerospace industry that I had always wanted, but the culture of my new company doesn't have the constant deadline pressure that turns people on one another's throats. My boss, Jay, is the first one I have ever had that seems almost happy to answer my construction-neophyte questions.

Further good news, I broke one of the oft-cited rules of the workplace. I went fishing off the company pier, and I caught a beauty. Her name is Tricia and she does the accounting at the company. Somehow I have found someone who shares my significantly off-kilter sense of humor. I have never been with anyone with whom I have clicked so well with.

Things are looking up, and I hope to be back soon with more good news.

Why Geneva

Just had a conversation with a friend (one whom I have been encouraging to blog) who reminded me just what the Geneva Conventions were created for. The Conventions were created to keep war on a somewhat civilized basis.

Now here is the rub inherent in Geneva is that it applied only to uniformed soldiers. Since pretty much everyone we've taken from Afganistan and Iraq were out of uniform, they fall under a different definition in the Convention: spies. Spies are completely outside of the Convention's protection. Spies and saboteurs could be killed on discovery. In this light, Gitmo seems downright benevolent.

Pondering Vocabulary

I recall an old anti-war musing that went "What if they threw a war and nobody showed up?" That got me to thinking, and I realized that we need a word to describe what it is when one side showed up but not the other. Granted, it wouldn't be war, it does take two to tango. But it certainly would not be "Peace", despite whatever Western Anti-War protesters like to think. Go tell it to Al-Qaeda and get them to stop fighting. Maybe then we could get some peace.

My Thought on The New York Times

The New York Times does not have the best interest of the country in its corporate heart. In publishing the bank tracking story, despite pleas from both sides of the aisle, showed that it put its own interests ahead of all others. In effect, they have acted in the semblence of the worst of corporate governance. Something to remember for the progressive defenders of the Grey Lady.

The Problem in a Nutshell

One of the reasons that I took the lay-off from the site was that I was getting bored with the tone of debate. It is one thing to say that someone is wrong, a whole 'nother to say that someone is evil.

While this comment at Balloon Juice doesn't actually use the word evil, it does go to the personalization of political discourse. Please, can someone liberal please step up and debate in such a way that I can have a civil drink with them? Not too much to ask, is it?

Implications Not Thought Through

At least that's what I thought when I saw this new style of door flyers.

Sure, let's block the view of the peep holes for burglars. Also, can you imagine the damage that the glue might end up doing? Finally, it would seem to be rather labor intensive to get the folds and placement just right.

Link via Dave Barry

A Bad Day for Security

Someone's head had better roll in response to the case of three men dressed as clowns breaking into a Minuteman III missile facility in North Dakota. There must have been guards somewhere, but there certainly aren't any in that picture. The name of one of the men: Greg Boertje-Obed, makes me think that Jedi mind tricks may have been used. That fact will have to wait until trial to be determined.

A Bad Day for Security

Someone's head had better roll in response to the case of three men dressed as clowns breaking into a Minuteman III missile facility in North Dakota. There must have been guards somewhere, but there certainly aren't any in that picture. The name of one of the men: Greg Boertje-Obed, makes me think that Jedi mind tricks may have been used. That fact will have to wait until trial to be determined.

Too Unusual for Justice

Following on the heals of the child molester found too short for prison comes a case where the defendant is too old to get a jury of her peers:

A 79-year-old woman set to be tried on charges that she fatally shot her 85-year-old ex-beau is being deprived of her constitutional right to a fair trial, her attorney said.
[snip]
Driskell is nearly a decade older than the legal age for exemption as a juror in the state of Georgia, which is 70.

Call this one a loser. The idea in America is that every citizen is equal under the law. Therefore, there is only one status in America, and all are peers by definition. Her lawyer should be looking for jurors who have been jilted in relationships. Those folks would be the peers he should want on the jury.

Forget Vinegar and Baking Soda

Take a gander at the Extreme Diet Coke and Mentos Experiment. (Requires QuickTime). The video demonstrates not only the amazing combination of Diet Coke and Menthos but also that of two guys and way too much time on their hands. Makes me wonder how much they shelled out for all of the Coke and Mentos.

US/Italy Tie

Just finished watching the Italy vs United States Cup Game.
Count me in with everyone else, the referee sucked big time. Interesting thing about that guy, he had been suspended before after complaints from fellow referees. Let's hope it happens again.

Update to Saw This One Coming

Hooters pained by champagne report
Good to see that someone with at least peripheral responsibility in the Katrina aid mess stepping up to do the right thing. I'd like to see that lawyer who took $1,000 make the donation of such funds.

Insert lawyer joke here.

One Terrorist Game

Instapundit.com offers a multiply updated post that includes a commentary on how, as Glenn puts it, "Terrorism is an information war disguised as a military operation." He then quotes from an economist report on how terrorists and the media feed off each other:

It's a macabre example of win-win in what economists call a "common-interest game," say Bruno S. Frey of the University of Zurich and Dominic Rohner of Cambridge University.

"Both the media and terrorists benefit from terrorist incidents," their study contends. Terrorists get free publicity for themselves and their cause. The media, meanwhile, make money "as reports of terror attacks increase newspaper sales and the number of television viewers."

I think that there needs to be some responsibility on the part of the marginal increase of reader/viewership who seem only interested in carnage. Come on people, don't be such news vultures.

Saw This One Coming

I'm sure you can recall the hurry to get emergency funds to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. Well, time to reap what was sown, namely hundreds of cases of fraud.

The GAO uncovered records showing that $1,000 from a FEMA debit card went to a Houston divorce lawyer; $600 was spent in a strip club and $400 was spent on "adult erotica products," all of which auditors concluded were "not necessary to satisfy legitimate disaster needs."

You put out money on the honor of the populace in general, you're going to find the bad apples. Too bad it costs so much to bring them out.

Bust Your Diet in Style

Who wouldn't want haute fast food? Just be warned that while you are biting down on your food, you're going to be feeling another bite elsewhere:

A Kobe beef hot dog ($14) pairs well with fries topped with Asiago cheese and truffle oil ($4.50).

And who said that in the future there would only be McDonald's?

I Sincerely Apologize

For posting this. I liked that song, only to see it desecrated. Hell, I probably could have done better down at karaoke.

Forgive me for sharing the pain, but it was too much to bear on my own.

Color Me Confused

The premise behind this contest
is to prove

that a much-publicized prescription for defeating aging by biogerontologist Aubrey de Grey was "so wrong that it was unworthy of learned debate."

So some people are going to use learned debate to prove something is unworthy thereof? Sounds a bit self-defeating to me.

Link via Instapundit.

Who Feeds on Whom?

Perry de Haviland writes Libertarian Democrats? for Samizdata about the idea floated at the Daily Kos that one could be a libertarian on the left side of the American political aisle. The idea is that the corporation has to be counted with the government and the criminal as a threat to individual liberty. Perry points out that the problem with that is that corporate power only becomes corosive when coupled with governmental power. The Kelo immanent domain decision comes readily to mind.

In short, a corporation can only exert influence over and by what it owns. If you let the government have too much power, it becomes something worthwhile to buy. Check my last entry for a tongue in cheek take on that idea. But seriously, a corporation can only influence what it owns. People may have griped about Microsoft acting like a monopoly, but you certainly weren't looking over your shoulder for Bill Gates when you were last getting a physical. Nor would Wal-Mart have much to do with the cost of milk, what with the subsidies in effect. But in both cases, the government is right there, or threatens to be there. So why wouldn't corporations want to buy some of that?

Government influence is the ultimate contraband, and the only way to fight it is to cut off the production of it.

What They Can Do With Their Money

A quick thought on what the oil companies can do with their record profits. Kick a few bribes at the EPA to fast-track a few refineries. Hell, the agribusinesses should do the same to start up a bunch of stills for ethanol. I've heard that an ethanol distiller has purchased a brewery in the Northeast. How difficult would it be to push this more nationwide?

Was it Boredom?

Or perhaps it is simply a matter of having a sense of humor? A high court judge in England implanted a code in his ruling over the plagirism case regarding the DaVinci Code.

Evidently it is a lightly hidden ciphertext that in turn is a substitution code. At least one of the lawyers is promising to break the cypher.

Backhanded Insanity Defense

Let it be resolved that Zacarias Moussaoui is crazier than your average loon. First he undoes everything that his defense team had been working on for years by admitting he knew everything about 9/11 ahead of time, and then he claims that his defense team was out to get him,

Zerkin had asked Moussaoui whether he believes his defense team is in a conspiracy to kill him.

Moussaoui responded that the defense attorneys have engaged in "criminal non-assistance," the AP reported.

From my own point of view, I'd say give the guy life in prison. He wants martyrdom, and he'll use the state to get it. Kind of like the old joke that when the masochist says, "Hurt me," and the sadist says, "No."

Tech for Terrorism

In light of Iran's enrichment of power plant grade uranium, I will acknowledge that it is not the same as saying that Iran has the bomb.

That is, they don't have a nuclear device to pass on to those who would wish to do our country harm. What I am concerned about is the use of this material in dirty bombs. Is there some way of tracking where a given sample of uranium had been refined?

Political Tacking

There is a certain course a candidate for the Presidency has to take on the way to the Office. Name, hard to the wing in the primaries and hard again to the center for the general election. Captain's Quarters has compiled the signs of John McCain, infamous Maverick of the Republican Party, taking the turn right-ward.

One of the quotes cited has McCain on the Daily Show conceding that he is headed toward "crazy-base world" in preparation for a run. Agreed, not a great way to get in good with that base, but I think that it does prep the road back for him to the center should he pull in the nomination. The media might just be a bit more forgiving if he comes off as insincere in the first part rather than in the second. Granted, the media will never favor a Republican, no matter how unorthodox, or a Democrat.

That wink is going to keep him in relatively good stead through the primaries. At least for him, the media will cover him as if they didn't have their noses pinched shut.

The Patriotism of Crushing Dissent

From Instapundit.com we get to see what crushing of dissent really looks like. Thank Castro for this example.

The attacks intensified after a speech by Castro last July in which he denounced opposition activists as U.S. government lackeys and praised supporters who two weeks earlier disrupted a dissident protest in Havana.

"The people, angrier than before over such shameless acts of treason, intervened with patriotic fervor and didn't allow a single mercenary to move," Castro said. "This is what will happen however many times as necessary when traitors and mercenaries go a millimeter beyond the point that our revolutionary people ... are prepared to permit."

How about this: we don't question your patriotism for protesting if you don't question our patriotism should we decide to break up one of your little shindigs? One of your progressive heroes has just called that type of hooliganism patriotic.

How Was This Supposed to Work?

Here is a cautionary tale of a couple who earned attention from the Department of Homeland Security because they made a larger than usual payment on their credit card.

File this one under "Doesn't the DHS have better things to be doing?"

Link via Ciggy's Smokehouse

At Least They Aren't The Wiggy Ones

Despite there being some blowhards in the government over the Mohammed cartoons, I think that the UAE has been one of the more level headed of the Arab nations. No riots reported, no burning of embassies. Maybe we can trust these folks.

Sorta Liveblogging the Opening Ceremony

9:15 Western: That "beating heart" had some serious rhythm problems.

Were the cows really necessary?

I think I may start laughing any moment.

OK, the lady with the Italian flag is kind of hot.

Enter the figurehead president.

9:20 The kid singing the Italian anthem clearly doesn't have stage fright. Lord knows that having the whole world watching you could certainly cause it.

Things had better pick up, or this is going to lose out to Battlestar Galactica.

11:00 Battlestar Galactica won.

Somebody Had to Say It

Even if it is satire. Purportedly from the mouth of Simpsons creator Matt Groening:

The controversy over cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in a Danish newspaper has led the producers of The Simpsons to reconsider his appearance in a forthcoming episode. The offending cartoons included a picture of the founder of Islam wearing a turban, and have been slammed by Muslims for being blasphemous and Israelis as overly subtle.

“In light of the situation in Denmark, we have decided to withdraw our depiction of the Prophet out of sensitivity towards the Islamic community’s feelings,” creator Matt Groening said. “And also our sensitivity to our office being firebombed.”

All kidding aside, don't you get the sense that this is why so many media outlets are not publishing the cartoons, if only to provide their viewers the context of what is really causing the uproar. "Sensitivity to the Muslim community" is the face saving excuse, but I don't think that it is unfair to say that the bullying has been effective.

Shoulda Gotten a Haircut

EVELYN KRISTO/Valley Press

None of the volunteers at yesterday's med supply unloading knew that the newspaper was going to be there, with a camera. That's me in the back, not looking nearly as ratty as I did.

My Good Deed for the Week

Just got back from helping to unload medical supplies for the local Red Cross chapter. A local supply company made a donation of $110,000 worth of products just before the end of the year. Let me tell you, that it a lot of latex gloves, bandages, and blood pressure cuffs. Especially when you don't have a forklift or a convenient loading dock.

Compare and Contrast

Observe the difference in reactions and protests in response to the Danish Mohammed cartoons as opposed to Christian affrontery. Death threats and boycotts of entire nations vs. a few pickets and media talk.

Compare that with the (putatively artistic) provocation with what can no longer be considered an uproar. The Western World at least has a sense of humor (make sure you have one when you click here) when humor is intended.

Trackbacked to Castle Argghhh!

Definintely Not the Hands-Free Model

Check out the latest and greatest in cell phone development: bone induction speakers. The idea is that the bones of your head carry the sound to your eardrums rather than through the air. Just be sure to remember to hang up after the conversation, or else you really will be hearing voices in your head.

Personally, I have enough issues with voices without inviting anyone else, thank you very much.

Link via Electric Venom

So I'm Not the Only One

Citizen Smash has his reaction to the State of the Union. I'll cut to the chase:

*yawn*

I agree. Politics these days is boring. Both sides are out for party gain, and there is no philosophy being debated. I've heard all of the names being thrown around, and let me tell you, the bloom is off the rose.

Wake me up when Individualism vs. Statism starts up again.

My (Sorta) Liveblog of the SOTU

Damn I wish Bush was a conservative. Much as I like the emphasis on new power technologies, I still cringe when he talks about federal funding for it. Nothing like involving the federal government in a project to slow it down.

6:50 (Pacific) Like we can hold off the impending crisis in the Middle East until 2025, Bush's proposed date of energy independence.

6:53 Uh oh, there's the "compassionate" word. He's listing off a lot of things that he claims is the result of positive impact on private character by government policy. Like I said, I wish he were conservative.

6:57 Evidently the President has his limits on the American advancement in science. Turns out that the pressure is encouraging adult stem cell research. Still, if the government were not involved, I think that social-con Bush would still seek to hamstring the work being done.

7:03 Platitude, platitude, blah, blah, blah

Pretty much what I thought, Bush is a politician.

Condescension At Work

That is just about the only way to describe it. Via this editorial, we get this wonderful little exchange:

In response, I began to read verbatim quotes form Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other Iranian rulers about their lethal intentions toward the U.S., their genocidal plans for Israel, their hostility toward “Anglo-Saxon civilization.”

Professor Amirahmadi objected that scholars and journalists must not take such remarks seriously. He suggested it was either unsophisticated or unfair of me (maybe both) to repeat such statements on the air.

By what measure does one use to judge whether a political leader can be judged by their words? This is saying that someone may not be taken seriously merely because... what? They use rhetoric that does not fit into the journalistic or academic paradigm? The decision to give credibility shows more of a high and mighty attitude on the part of the listener than any statement about the quality of the speaker..

If they can't be trusted to use words properly, then how can we trust them to have nuclear power? Even more, if they can not be trusted use words properly, how can we rely on the words they use in any negotiation?

Link via Castle Argghhh!

Gaming Hurricanes

Hurricane Pam was a storm that never hit land, yet should have taught lessons in preparation for Hurricane Katrina. Its projections included extensive flooding and massive casualties in New Orleans in as little as a Category 3 storm.

This part struck me:

A month before Katrina hit, state and federal officials working on the Pam exercise estimated that government plans to evacuate people from New Orleans were only 10 percent complete.

"If you think soup lines in the Depression were long, wait till you see lines" at collection points in New Orleans, Transportation Department regional emergency officer Don Day said at a July 29 briefing with federal and state authorities.

I assume that means that evacuation plans could only move ten percent of the people who need moving. One problem that I did not hear about was the lines at evacuation points prior to the storm hitting. What I want to know is to what degree the gamed evacuation plans were actually put into effect. For that matter, just how involved and aware of the results were the governments of New Orleans and Louisiana?

Don't Ask Where He Got His Numbers

How does one go about quantifying a bad day? Evidently, if you are an english health psychologist, you make up a laughable formula and try to pass it off as scientific.

On paper, the formula looks like this:

W + (D-d) x TQ
———————————
M x NA

The variables are (W)eather, (D)ebt, (d) monthly salary, (T)ime since Christmas, time since failure to (Q)uit a bad habit, low (M)otivational levels and (NA), the need to take action.

I know that time is money, but just what units do you use to measure Motivational levels and Need to take Action? Somehow, he determined that today was the worst day of the year. I might have been happier had I not read this article. Then I might have had some hope left for humanity.

This guy pulled the numbers either out of thin air, or out of someplace else less sanitary. Be sure to go wash your hands after reading the article.

Link via Dave Barry

Battlestar WTF

Did anybody else detect something of a real world political bent to tonights episode of Battlestar Galactica? The peace-with-the-Cylons movement, with the overtones that humanity deserved what they got, seems to be begging comparisons. The writers wouldn't be playing around like that, would they?

Non-Violence vs. the Shameless

From Winds of Change.NET: Our Darkening Sky: Iran and the War, we get this thought regarding nonviolent protest in Iran:

Let's get real. Whatever they may think of the mullahs, the Iranian people, and such civil society as they have built in the shadows, have no stomach to seriously oppose them. The mullahs have proven that they are quite willing to kill, with their Basij hitler youth corps and al-Qaeda mercenaries, as many Iranians as necessary. Nonviolent measures like the commendable struggle of decent people like Akbar Ganji or even Ayatollah Montazeri are, in this situation, useless.

The idea of Ghandi-like passive resistance makes a major assumption regarding those who are being protested against. Namely, that the protested possess a sense of shame. The British colonials put great store on honor, an honor that was shaken by attacking unarmed people. The people of the United States were moved to revulsion by the images of non-violent protesters having dogs sicced upon them and water cannons blasting them.

As near as anyone can tell, the Mullahs of Iran have no such shame. They answer to a 'higher' power, and any means to that end is good. Clearly, we are talking more about nails that stand up rather than squeaky wheels.

On the Right Course

During the whole Terri Schiavo mess, I came down on the side of spousal rights. That is why the case of Haleigh Poutre, the eleven year-old abuse victim who was diagnosed as being in a vegetative state. Lacking any responsible care giver, Haleigh has become a ward of the state, and the state had decided to discontinue life support.

Suddenly, it was looking like Terri Schiavo all over again. What various conservative voices are missing in their rush to characterize the other side as ghouls is that when Haleigh has shown signs of recovery, the Department of Social Services has changed its plans and will continue life support.

The likelihood that the doctors are mistaken about the persistence of the vegetative state is much greater for a child than a similar diagnosis in an adult. At this point, everyone seems to be acting out of a position of hope. What more can anyone be asking for?    

I Gotta Try This

You can guess that I am up for just about any type of game, particularly the potable variety. That's why I'd have to try The 24 Drinking Game.

• Jack says “You have got to trust me”, take 1 shot– if the emphasis is on “got”, i.e. “You have GOT to trust me”, take an extra shot
• Jack doesn’t have time to explain, take 1 shot
• Jack doesn’t have time for this, take 1 shot
• Jack says “You’ve got to do it”, take 1 shot– if this is followed by “and you’ve got to do it now,” take 2 more
• Anyone points out something that is “against regulations”, take 1 shot
• Anyone has got to understand what is at stake here, take 1 shot
• Satellite coordinates are requested, take 1 shot– if they can’t get the coordinates, take another

The great thing about this game is the real time theme of the show. You would know exactly when you hit the floor. I'd give myself 10 minutes.

Wal-Mart Vineyards

Link via Balloon Juice.

I can just picture the racks of Wal-Mart Wine™ under the smiley face logo. I wonder: screw top or box? Gay Orbit offers a list of possible names, although I would add Pinot Greasyo.

Prison isn't Enough

I have to agree with John Cole on the matter of Clarence Ray Allen not being the case that anti death penalty activists wish to rally around. The man organized murders from behind bars. The man is an argument for the death penalty, no matter how old he is.

Yet More for the Storage Locker

Coverage of NSA's Echelon Program from the 1990's

More on Iran and the UN Security Council

Jeff Goldstein links to other posts regarding the politics of the UN taking action against the Iranian nuclear program. The big issues seem to be the threats of vetoes from Russia and China, both of whom are deeply invested in the Mullah regime.I would think that Russia might have a great deal to lose, perhaps as much as the US does, if Iran gets the bomb. IIRC, the Chechan Muslim separatists have been getting a good deal of support from Tehran. Certainly Moscow does not want those groups receiving a clandestine warhead. Remember, these are the same people that took an entire school hostage, a scene that resulted in the deaths of many children. Certainly someone could appeal to Russia's self interest.

Gross Chic

I'd think that there are better uses for latex than to make clothing and accessories that look like human skin.

As one of the commenters said:

I think I saw this in Silence of the Lambs.

Definition of an Empty Threat

Old Europe is finally showing some life in response to Iran's nuclear provocations. Sadly, all they are promising to do is to take the matter to the UN Security Council.

Color me not impressed. The path that is being proposed here is one that will give the mullahs years to perfect their processes and products. Even if the UN is able to shut down Iran's nuclear ambitions, there will still be more technical information floating around, adding to the library left by AQ Kahn.

Just another little bit to disturb one's sleep at night.

Philosophy is Where ID Belongs

Take a look at my blog and you can tell that I have no respect for Intelligent Design as a scientific theory. I do believe, however, that it makes for some very interesting philosophical discussion. Therefore, I am coming out against the latest ACLU action to remove ID from public school philosophy classes. Evidently the ACLU would have problems with any type of comparitive religion being taught in a public school. So much for not having an agenda beyond civil liberties.

Link via Castle Arrrgh!!

An ID Shot at Legitimacy

I went looking for answers to a question that occurred to me while I was outside smoking a cigar. Namely: What purpose do mass extinction events serve in an intelligently designed world?

Googling for answers proved fruitless. If any of you out there know of any, please leave a link in the comments.

What I did find was a site proposing that there are testable predictions in Intelligent Design that indicate that ID is standing up better than evolution. I’ll re-format the questions, predictions and observations here for easier reading.

Single transcendent beginning: Anti-Supernatural - will be refuted; Christian ID - evidence will increase; Observation - There is no evidence for more than one universe or one creation event.

This argument is characterizing the naturalistic position as presupposing the theory of a multitude of universes each of which possessing a unique beginning. Some cosmological theories propose that a new universe is created in a Big Bang with the collapse of a black hole. By definition, however, no information about the new universe can reach us because of the gravity of the black hole. Most scientists just give up when this theoretical limitation is reached, so this is debate in theory only.

Fine tuning: Anti-Supernatural - "design" will be shown to be an artifact, due to incomplete knowledge; Christian ID - more examples of extreme fine tuning will be found, indicating true design; Observation - Examples of fine tuning continue to increase. Some parameters designed to within a part in 10^120.

This is the classic argument between the Weak Anthropic Principle (If things weren’t so fine tuned we wouldn’t be here to wonder at the fine tuning) and the Strong Anthropic Principle (Things were fine tuned so that we could marvel at the fine tuning). Even if String Theory manages to show how higher dimensions of space result in the state of the physical constants, it would only change the stage for the debate. That debate would be about whether a designer designed the shape of the higher dimensions so that life as we know it could come to be.

Additionally, the physical constants have to be the way they are for life as we know it to occur. Perhaps life as we don’t know it exists under other constants, but that type of thinking is just pure philosophy.

Uniqueness of earth: Anti-Supernatural - many rocky planets with oceans and continents will be found; Christian ID - earth-like planets will be found to be rare or non-existent; Observation - No other rocky planets have been found. Most planets found are large gas giants orbiting very close to their stars.

Uh oh, science hasn’t found any other rocky planets, and therefore, they don’t exist. The most prolific method of finding planets has been to measure the wobble of a star under its planet’s gravity. That method only detects large planets orbiting close by the star. To make an analogy: we only have a net that catches fish larger than two feet long. Since no fish smaller than two feet are caught, it follows that no fish smaller than two feet exist. Science is limited to its tools for collecting information. To hold it to higher standards of information is arguing disingenuously.

Existence of life in the universe: Anti-Supernatural - life will be found to be abundant in our galaxy, since it is simply the properties of chemistry and physics; Christian ID - extraterrestrial life will be rare or non-existent and advanced life will be found only on earth; Observation - No other life found. SETI has been completely unsuccessful.

The plentitude of life off of earth is a wide-open debate in science, so the above characterization is a massive simplification. As for not finding life elsewhere, we haven’t had the capability of looking for life. To conflate all searches for life down to SETI is to limit the definition life solely to intelligent life capable of sending radio signals. Even then, and giving SETI a generous fifty years of operation, we have only listened to a fifty light year sphere around the earth. That is a mere pittance of the whole of the galaxy, much less the whole of the universe.

Prebiotic chemistry: Anti-Supernatural - a naturalistic scenario for the origin of all biochemical pathways and replicative molecules will be found; Christian ID - the universe was designed to support living systems, but their creation required ID by God; Observation - It is impossible to chemically produce many basic molecules required for any living system.

Note the change in tense between the prediction and the observation: will be found/is impossible. Seems like the goal posts are set to move into the parking lot.

Origin of Life: Anti-Supernatural - Life emerged late, during ideal environmental conditions. Life began as simple systems (pre-bacteria); Christian ID - Life emerged early under adverse conditions. Life has always been complex; Observation - Neither the biochemical nor replicative pathways have been described. In fact, many scientists think that they could not have arisen by any naturalistic means.

See above. Once again we have the “Science can’t, therefore science shall never” fallacy. Add in the “Many Scientists” believe something fallacy.

New designs in nature: Anti-Supernatural - Complex new designs would be rare and develop slowly whereas simple transitions would be common; Christian ID - No restriction on designs with the possibility that new designs would be created "overnight"; Observation - Contrary to the expectations of evolutionary theory, the fossil record is replete with complex transitions and new designs whereas simple transitions (intermediates) are rare.

Evolutionary theory would expect the opposite to be true and to be reflected in the fossil record.
Evidently there’s no love for the punctuated equilibrium theory of Stephen Jay Gould. Additionally, the prevalence of simple transitions has been grossly mischaracterized. As for emergence of complex new species appearing, see below.

Mass extinction events: Anti-Supernatural - Slow recovery; Christian ID - No restrictions on "recovery" period as new species are created; Observation - Evolution predicts slow recovery following extinctions and that those recoveries will be filled by the species surviving the extinction event. However, the fossil record indicates rapid recovery with completely different designs and species appearing within a period of tens of thousands of years or less.

Evolution would hardly predict slow recovery. Immediately after a mass extinction event would be a great time to be a mutant. When the playing field is wide open is when natural selection is at its weakest. Vast variation from small sets of species is to be expected, even in a time frame as short as ten thousand years.

In short, nothing but mischaracterizations and expectations that science either knows now or never shall know.

Very Good News from Sago

The extent to which Randy McCloy Jr., the sole survivor pulled from the Sago Mine explosion, had suffered brain damage due to his ordeal seems to be lessening with each day. He is moving extremities in response to pain and his brain stem appears intact.

Hopefully, his forebrain also remained in good health. If it has, then there is a good chance that it will be Randy that awakens, as opposed to a diminished version. His wife deserves that for her dedication through this ordeal.

A Bit of Humor for Your Day

Easily one of the best Blonde Jokes that I have ever come across. Enjoy.

5 Days Must Be Some Sort of Record

If Pat Robertson had a New Year's Resolution not to say stupid things, then he has certainly blown it already.

On today's 700 Club, Rev. Pat Robertson blamed Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharons recent stroke on God's "enmity against those who 'divide my land,'" an implicit reference to recent steps the Prime Minister has taken to advance the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the return of the Jews to the Promised Land a sign of the coming Apocalypse? So if Israel is giving up land, doesn't that imply the Army of God is taking a slight stand down?

Just a thought: Since both Jews and Muslims worship the same God, granted in different ways, the land, from God's point of view, is not divided. It all belongs to his followers who are working toward His glory. At least, in theory.

Some Questions Are Better Than Others

I have always liked the saying that "Science is defined more by its questions and less by its answers." I have come to realize that that almost plays into the ID "Teach the Debate" argument. What is necessary is a way to determine what is a scientific question.

Skeptico, via the Skeptics Circle, answers the appeal to “science doesn’t know everything” with a call for evidence. A question needs a basis in what is already known. Much like you need to know the starting point of a journey to make decent directions, you need to start with knowledge so that any new discovery is of a piece with the rest of science. I don't see how that is so difficult.

Talk About an Irrational Player

The usual assumption when any type of game theory consideration occurs is that all of the players are acting rationally in their own best interests. That assumption seems to be falling apart when dealing with Iran and its President.

Scientists in Tehran are also shopping for parts for a ballistic missile capable of reaching Europe, with "import requests and acquisitions ... registered almost daily", the report seen by the Guardian concludes.

If these guys are looking for parts for balistic missiles, then they are clearly off their chump. The downside to a nuclear missile is that it leaves a clear return address. Tehran would be an irradiated parking lot shortly after launch.

There is no playing with people like this.

One more thing: I wonder where Ahmadinejad picked up this rhetoric:

Governments in the west and elsewhere have also been dismayed by recent pronouncements from the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has said that Holocaust denial is a "scientific debate" and that Israel should be "wiped off the map".

Teach the debate, y'all.

Via Protein Wisdom

I Am Not Alone!

Via Pajamas Media, I have found that I am not alone in my dislike of the phrase "person of interest". For the love of God, just call them a suspect, you're not fooling anyone.

Happy New Year, Everybody

I'm heading out for the evening. Everyone, stay safe, designate drivers, etc. etc.
See you in the new year.

Complexity and Memetic Illness

Michael Chrichton gave a lecture last month entitled Fear, Complexity, Environmental Management in the 21st Century. He mostly decries the concept that the world is linear rather than complex. The illusion that the world is linearly predictable has given rise to many doomsaying predictions over the years.

The part of the lecture that I want to look at describes the impact on people's health that dire predictions can cause. From UN data regarding the Chenobyl disaster:

But most troubling of all, according to the UN report in 2005, is that "the largest public health problem created by the accident" is the "damaging psychological impact [due] to a lack of accurate information…[manifesting] as negative self-assessments of health, belief in a shortened life expectancy, lack of initiative, and dependency on assistance from the state."

In other words, the greatest damage to the people of Chernobyl was caused by bad information. These people weren’t blighted by radiation so much as by terrifying but false information. We ought to ponder, for a minute, exactly what that implies. We demand strict controls on radiation because it is such a health hazard. But Chernobyl suggests that false information can be a health hazard as damaging as radiation. I am not saying radiation is not a threat. I am not saying Chernobyl was not a genuinely serious event.

Chrichton draws a parallel, potentially identical, mechanism with ancient beliefs in curses:

In fact, we need to recognize that this kind of human response is well-documented. Authoritatively telling people they are going to die can in itself be fatal.

You may know that Australian aborigines fear a curse called “pointing the bone.” A shaman shakes a bone at a person, and sings a song, and soon after, the person dies. This is a specific example of a phenomenon generally referred to as “hex death”—a person is cursed by an authority figure, and then dies. According to medical studies, the person generally dies of dehydration, implying they just give up. But the progression is very erratic, and shock symptoms may play a part, suggesting adrenal effects of fright and hopelessness.

Yet this deadly curse is nothing but information. And it can be undone with information.

A person's mind and body are far from distinct. They share a deep system of positive and negative feedback systems. Doctors tell of patients who just give up and die, while others never seem to give up. It is as if the mind provides the thumb to the scales, or sometimes even a fist to one of the plates. What I find interesting is the idea that the mind can be a pathway for ideas to alter body function. Maybe the holistic medicine movement may be on to something in theory. Get some rigor in the process, and we may start to see real effects.

Watching Evolution Happen

Science Magazine has announced its BREAKTHROUGH OF THE YEAR, studies of short generation species undergoing evolutionary speciation. The cases described are fascinating.

Stick this in your ID pipe and smoke it. [/gloat]

Light Blogging Ahead

Over the next couple of weeks, I intend to be going out of my mind for a while. In addition to writing for Two Fisted Tales of Magic and my regular role-playing game group, I was gifted with Myst V. I anticipate the insanity to be enjoyable.

Hung Up on Randomness

Via Orack Knows, we have a link to La Shawn Barber’s Corner where La Shawn bemoans the court ruling that Intelligent Design does not belong in a science classroom. La Shawn posts the following:

“[C]omplex design is random—didn’t you know that?” — James White

Just took a look at the site linked to in the above quote, and it is clear that Mr. White is hardly a neutral commenter on the concept of evolution. Where he goes wrong in this one statement is that evolution is only half-random. Mutations happen when they happen, but natural selection is no more random than a football game, the best team wins. In fact, if you go with Robert Wright's view from Non-Zero then you can see that complexity is a highly successful method of survival in and of itself. From that point of view, not only is complexity not extraordinary, it would take a miracle for it not to happen.

“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.” — Charles Darwin

When natural selection selects, it isn't looking for perfection. All that is necessary is that it is better. And that definition of better is not very picky. To use the football analogy, natural selection only cares about who wins. Blowout or squeaker matters not, there is no point spread in evolution. So if a proto-eye can only tell what direction light is coming from, it is still better off than those eyes that can't. When it comes to the evolution of the eye, the half-eyed man still rules the blind.

As I’m sure you’ve heard, a federal court has decided that it is unconstitutional to teach Intelligent Design, the audacious claim that precious life didn’t emerge by chance — out of some primordial muck, randomly evolving from single-celled organisms, which are themselves astoundingly complex beyond our meager understanding, into thinking human beings — but from an Intelligent Being who designed it all, from the entire universe, including planet Earth, which happens to be PERFECTLY suited for life, down to the irreducibly complex eye, breathtakingly stupendous in its design and function.

I won't belabor the chance/randomness misunderstanding any further. The first point I will belabor is that La Shawn is very precisely stating the Strong Anthropic Principle, much as I had pointed out below. The problem with teaching it in science class is that it is a why question, whereas science is about the how. And even then, science is not certain about all the how's. That does not mean that those who wish for the deity to be involved should rush in. That leads to the trap of the God-of-the-gaps.

She also says something that I think is very enlightening about the entire debate. The idea that the world is perfectly designed for our life is precisely the opposite view taken by evolutionists. For evolutionists, life is perfectly adapted for our world. I'll leave it here for now to come back later for this idea in more detail.

Old Power, New Purpose

One thing I like to say is that one should not give power to the government that you wouldn't want the next president to have. Don't know who that next president is and don't know if you can trust him? Well, too bad.

That is the case with the NSA wiretap story. Evidently, this power had been recognized as Constitutional for the executive to monitor non-purely domestic communications:

In the Supreme Court's 1972 Keith decision holding that the president does not have inherent authority to order wiretapping without warrants to combat domestic threats, the court said explicitly that it was not questioning the president's authority to take such action in response to threats from abroad.

Four federal courts of appeal subsequently faced the issue squarely and held that the president has inherent authority to authorize wiretapping for foreign intelligence purposes without judicial warrant.

The only thing that really seems all that different in this case is that we know that this particular administration was using that authority. I leave it to your particular sense of cynicism as to whether you think that previous presidents did the same. I also leave it to you to decide if more of this might have helped prevent previous attacks, or if there were potential attacks that never happened because of this.

Link via Instapundit.

Dover ID Requirement Struck Down/A Way Out for ID

Judge rules against 'intelligent design' in science class

Something I did not know about this school board (in that this is the one that had almost complete turnover of 8 of 9 members in the last election): the original vote to require teaching intelligent design was 6-3 in favor. Sounds like at least 2 board members who didn't deserve the bounce got it anyway.

There is a curious theory regarding intelligent design, and that is that it would be better as a religious theory if it did not confine itself to the study of life. If life is studied as part of the physical science whole, then one could argue that the whole, including the process of evolution, was intelligently designed. It would then be part of the Strong Anthropic Principle, which holds that the physical constants of the world are as they are so that intelligent life could come about. Follow that up with infinite control of the initial conditions, and a sufficient intelligence could guarantee human kind coming about. Such control would be the miracle of miracles, but then, what would a God be for?

Objectivity can get ugly

Coming off of that last post, I got hit by an idea. Snide references aside, it has been some time since the divine ahah settled upon me.

Someone might say that the majority of people in America are Christian, and therefore we should eschew Happy Holidays in favor of Merry Christmas. I thought next, just because the majority favors calling the accoutrements of the season “Christmas” X, it doesn’t mean that the primacy of old pagan claims to the symbolism can be ignored.

The thought carried on to Intelligent Design and the scientific method, particularly when pro-ID’ers use the issue to run for school boards. And without further ado, here’s the thought:

Just because a majority wants an idea to be true, that does not mean that idea is a fact. Popular opinion has no role in the scientific method.

This applies equally well to any findings that there may be racial differences in physiology, or any other finding that might violate the sacred precepts of political correctness.

Just Be Merry, Dammit

Too bad the War on Christmas seems to be petering out, or never really started.

Anyway, if you are still looking for a side to take, try this one: start calling it a Yule Tree, or wish people a Happy Solstice (Dec. 22). Just be sure to remind folks that if there is a war on Christmas that Christmas is really an occupier of this particular patch of calendar territory.

This post brought to you by the Holiday Agent Provocateur.

Score One for Doonesbury

Today's comic.

Link via Balloon Juice

2nd Blogiversary

Today is two years since I started this thing. I certainly hope to keep going so long as interesting topics in the areas of science, philosophy, and politics keep up. Thanks for reading.

Patriot Act Shot Down

While I am not entirely happy with the methodology (inability to overcome a threatened filibuster), I certainly am glad that the Patriot Act reauthorization failed to pass the Senate. Mission creep was starting to set in. Call this one a victory for the concept of sunset clauses.

Talk About High on Life

I didn't know there was such a thing as the 'brain's own cannabis'. The subject of the story is an experimental anti-depressant that increased levels of endocannabinoids by blocking their decomposition. This definitely gets filed under "more please". Now if science can come up with the 'brains own Twinkies', we'd be all set.

Any Landing You Can Walk Away From

Via Castle Argghhh!

Good on this pilot for getting himself and passengers down safely. In the meantime of the getting down, I would not have wanted to have been on that chopper.

The Blind Watchmaker's Revenge

Does God have backaches? Did Jesus ever need to have his wisdom teeth pulled? If you do believe that God made us in His image, then one would think that he would have the same physical maladies that we do. Particularly the ones that could be described as fundamental design flaws, as described in Incompetent Design Theory. The article discusses the skeletal system primarily, but the interviewee, Prof. Don Wise, makes a very salient point about the eye:

Intelligent designers and, in fact, everybody from the creationists and so on back to the beginning of the last century used to talk about the wonderful design of the eye—which somehow has all your receptor cells behind a membrane curtain!

The following ditty sums up the theory quite succinctly:

Sung to the tune of "The Battle Hymn of the Republic")
My bones proclaim a story of incompetent design.
My back still hurts, my sinus clogs, my teeth just won’t align.
If I had drawn the blueprint, I would cer-tain-ly resign.
Incompetent Design!
Evo-Evo-Evo-lution! Design is but a mere illusion.
Darwin sparked our revolution. Science SHALL prevail!

Just How Curious is George?

Epidemiologists have identified a potential path for interspecies communication of disease via performing monkeys. Just remember, that the limelights of showbiz can blind even the most serious minded primate over into unsafe behavior. And who knows who that monkey had been climbing on previously.

What He Said

From Samizdata.net:

"Society is something emergent that occurs when people interact with each other, you cannot point at it and you cannot owe it anything. When any politician says the word 'society', you can be damn sure what he really means is 'the state'.
- Perry de Havilland"

I've been having a running discussion with a friend about whether society really exists or not. He claims there is, and I say that it is nothing more than an aggragate of individuals. I hold that my view is actually stricter than his. If so much as one individual has his personal rights violated, then one's action should be curtailed. Drive recklessly? No go, as you don't know if you will run into (figurative or literal) someone on the street.

My friend then says that what I am talking about, the unknown other, is society. My response is that when one invokes "society", it carries the implication of everyone else. It is fundamentally impossible then to effect society, and hence it becomes a non-entity, at least on the first order of interaction. Beyond the first order, the responsibility an individual has decreases rapidly as predictability becomes more and more tenuous. Someone, somewhere, is driving recklessly. Is that person harming you as you read this? If not, then the society that person is threatening does not include you. If yes, then I hope you're the passenger because you shouldn't be reading blogs while driving.

A Moment of Unabashed Partisanship

Go Bruins! Beat $C.

A Short Lesson in Natural Selection

The Intelligent Design Debate is still going strong, darn it. One of the big points of distate in evolution is the nature of random mutation. What the randomness qualm misses is the non-random nature of natural selection.

Case in point: my hunting ground has rabbits that are slow enough for me to run down and catch, and when I catch them I eat them, killing the rabbit in the process. Now suppose that one of the rabbits has developed a random tick that makes it faster, be it longer legs, faster reflexes, or even sharper senses to see me coming from farther away. Either way, I won't catch that one, but I will still be dining on slow rabbit. My "selection" is not random, and after several generations, the local breed of rabbit is going to have the "faster than an out of shape human" quality. Once that happens, my progeny are going to have to develop the in shape quality or the hunting tool quality to keep up.

In the first instance, I have had a hand in the evolution of the rabbit. In the second, the rabbit has had a paw in the evolution of humans. Yet another idea for ID'ers to choke on.