August 31, 2008
Praying for Rain
Before Obama's speech, some of James Dobson's wingnut followers were praying for the event to be rained out:
"But if God decides -- and it's always up to God to decide -- that rain of Biblical proportions would be a good and proper meteorological condition for that evening, we'll see it, and we'll say that it is good. And if He decides it's not really necessary, I'm OK with that. I'll still trust in His wisdom and I'll rest peacefully knowing that lots of us offered up a humble prayer request. Would it be so wrong if we asked people to pray for rain?"
No word from God (whom we can presume has better things to do), but it does look like Mother Nature has readied a statement on Republican policy and may upstage the convention. (It could be good, bad, or both for them.)
I really shouldn't approach this issue so facetiously, so let's be completely serious for a moment. It's eerie to look back at the post I made here right before Katrina hit. Like everyone else, I dearly hope Gustav ends up being far less destructive. If you're into praying about the weather, this is something you should pray about. By the way, the offer of a free place to stay still stands. And this time I'm in Austin, Texas - where we already have evacuees - so it's actually a reasonable offer: You are welcome to crash in my shoebox apartment for as long as you need.
31 Aug 17:04 | Link | Category: Current Events, Politics
August 25, 2008
Jamaican athletes and the 'sprinting gene'
In my new apartment, I've opted to go with a handful of fuzzy over-the-air TV channels. (Cable is both expensive and distracting, but oh, how I will miss it!) So I actually spent quite a bit of time watching NBC's coverage of the Beijing Olympics. I can't remember why I missed most of the '04 and '06 games, but it was somehow comforting to watch Bob Costas and the NBC crew covering the events in their usual, distorted way.
In sprinting, the Jamaicans were simply unbelievable. Usain Bolt's performances were superhuman and his teammates racked up a number of medals, too. Assuming they're not doping (a reasonably safe bet since they've apparently been tested frequently), why is it that Jamaicans are such great sprinters? Further, why do New Worlders of West African ancestry make up such a disproportionate number of champions in short-track events? Is it genetic?
Clearly, genes are a very significant factor in creating an Olympian. Olympic champions are probably all at the very far end of the bell curve for some trait or combination of traits. (Michael Phelps, for example, has disproportionately large hands, feet, and torso.) But of course there's much more to it. We all know phenotype isn't determined entirely by genotype, yet we hear about a "sprinting gene" and immediately forget about countless environmental factors (like culture, nutrition, scouts, trainers, etc. -- it's quite belittling to Jamaica's culture and running programs).
The popular press, in particular, loves to latch on to some piece of data from the very complicated and nonintuitive field of genetics and run with it. A number of simplistic stories have been circulating in the press declaring ACTN3 as the Jamaican sprinting gene. Some articles (like Slate's 'Jamaican Me Speedy'), to their credit, did try to point out that it's rather more complicated than figuring out who does or doesn't have one or two copies of a particular gene variant (allele) in their genome. There are, of course, countless interacting genes involved as well as countless environmental & cultural factors. (Read this article to learn about some of the social reasons Jamaica has such a great track program.)
The best explanation I've seen is over at the Genetic Future blog. Take a minute to read The gene for Jamaican sprinting success? No, not really. Some highlights:
So, how good is this scientific evidence? Does the "Actinen A" gene (whatever that is) actually influence sprinting performance? And if so, does it explain the difference in explosive power between Jamaicans and the rest of the world? The answers, as it turns out, are "probably" and "not really."
...
So the absence of α-actinin-3 means very little to most of us, but to a young athlete craving 100 metre Olympic superstardom it could make all the difference in the world. The same could be said of many other genetic variants, of course; Olympic sprinters, essentially, are those unlikely individuals at the vanishing edge of the probability distribution for whom nearly every genetic coin has come up heads.
...
It is almost certainly true that Usain Bolt carries at least one of the "sprint" variants of the ACTN3 gene, but then so do I (along with around five billion other humans worldwide). Indeed, I'm fortunate enough to be lugging around two "sprint" copies - but that doesn't mean you'll see me in the 100 metre final in London in 2012. Unfortunately for me, it takes a lot more than one lucky gene to create an Olympian.
None of this rules out the possibility that some genetic edge does play a significant role in Jamaican sprinting success. Maybe there really is a difference in the Jamaican gene pool (and it wouldn't have to be much because it would be magnified when you're looking at Olympics-level athletes). It could be stochastic, or it could be the result of something like artificial selection resulting from the slave trade. (I doubt this, but you never know...) More explanation can be found at Weird lands of the tails from the Gene Expression blog.
The bottom line is that we simply don't know. It's complicated and there are probably multiple explanations for the trends we see. It would behoove the press (and us, as individuals) to stop speculating and making simplified assumptions. (In this wild new 'genetic world' we're living in, I'm not sure that's going to happen. Frankly, I'm a little worried. But we'll see...)
25 Aug 13:31 | Link | Category: Current Events, Human/Primate Evolution & Behavior, Science
June 27, 2008
I just calculated fuel costs for my upcoming move, so here's a rambling post about OIL.
Everyone wants to blame someone for the latest oil crisis. I think it has more to do with geopolitics, the U.S. political establishment, and the oil industry than it does with environmentalists or socialists or whoever else. But it doesn't really matter who you choose for your whipping boy. We've all wasted more than thirty years during which we could've started working our way out of the inevitable end of cheap oil. Things will keep getting uglier; it's just a matter of how quickly that happens.
Lifting the ban on drilling off the coasts (and in places like ANWR) seems like a decent short-term solution, right? 60% of Americans think so. Unfortunately, the impact on gasoline prices would be negligible and it would take quite a while to ramp up drilling anyway.
Even if you feel the (dubious) short-term benefits of drilling in these places outweighs the potentially severe long-term environmental costs, I think it's worth pointing out the fact that the oil industry already has access to millions of leases to existing areas but has not tapped them yet. Instead, they're pushing to open areas in which drilling may be easier. Why? Oil may hit $150 / barrel any day now -- but much of this has to do with speculation, the weak dollar, and other economic factors. (And maybe one or two of those crazy conspiracy theories you've heard.) The oil companies are afraid the price will come down and investments in costlier areas won't pay off. (Wait... I thought they were reinvesting every penny of their record profits?)
President Bush, Senator McCain, and others are suggesting a knee-jerk reaction with questionable short-term benefits and potentially serious long-term costs. Even regardless of environmental damage, the amount of oil produced if we opened all of these areas will not solve our energy problems, especially if world oil consumption continues to rise as predicted (from 85 million barrels a day to 100 million barrels a day by 2025).
We need a focused, long-term strategy for dealing with this mess. But it's a very complicated mess and it seems like none of our policymakers have the slightest idea how to deal with it. As for the presidential candidates, John McCain's proposals amount to basically nothing. Barack Obama's proposals are better for the most part (aside from a few boneheaded ones), but even if all the better ones were implemented, I'm still not sure they would be enough.
I remember hand-wringing about oil on this blog three years ago. The politicians have done nothing in those three years. And while I would love to believe it's all George W. Bush's fault, I know it's not. I don't think policymakers are going to find a way to really grapple with this issue, so get ready for some interesting times and figure out ways to deal with it on your own.
27 Jun 23:32 | Link | Category: Current Events, Politics
June 2, 2008
Links 19 (The Cost of War)
I'm starting to go crazy (and the shit hasn't even hit the fan yet -- that'll probably happen later this week). I won't be doing any online whining or venting here like I used to do, but posts may continue to be sporadic. (I have thought about starting an anonymous blogspot or livejournal blog as an outlet, though. If I do, I'll post notice here and I'll give the address to a select few of you.)
Anyway, let's soldier on with the link dump... Today's topic is the Cost of War. Specifically, the cost of U.S. misadventures in Iraq. "Cost" here is in the economic sense -- this is, needless to say, a fairly narrow view of the costs of war, but it has the virtue of being easy to quantify ...relatively easy, at least. There are plenty of estimates, but the general consensus is something like, um, a lot.
1. Last year, when the Bush Administration was requesting more funding for the war, the total official cost - just up to that point - came to $611.5 billion. This led many people to ask What can $611 billion buy? The answers were sobering.
2. Later, the Joint Economic Committee concluded that the Iraq war would cost $1.3 trillion - that's $1,300,000,000,000 - by 2009, and the combined cost of Iraq & Afghanistan could reach $3.5 trillion by 2017. They factored in the cost of borrowing money to pay for the war, lost productivity, higher oil prices, cost of healthcare for veterans, etc. At that price, the cost to a family of four would be more than $20,000 between 2002 and 2008.
3. But the cost is actually higher than that, pointed out economics professor Tyler Cowen in the Washington Post. One needs to factor in opportunity cost (more about opportunity cost). His article points out wasted opportunities, hidden costs, and the 'fruitless investment' Iraq has been. (Not to mention the human cost, which is of course incalculable.)
4. Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz arrived at a conservative figure of $3 trillion to the U.S. and another $3 trillion to the rest of the world. Can you even imagine what else we could have done with that money? Some could have been applied to actually protecting the U.S., and the rest could have been spent on energy independence, environmental and social issues, etc. The list is huge. Even those who argue that manned space exploration is a boondoggle would probably agree it would've been a better use of the money - and for that much money, we could have embarked not just on an exploration program of Mars, but we could've practically colonized the place.
5. So. An enormous economic cost for a war that, according to the National Intelligence Estimate, has fueled the terror threat.
None of this is terribly new or surprising, though. In many ways, the current terror threat stems directly from the Cold War, another simply incredible waste of resources. I recall a speech delivered by Carl Sagan twenty years ago for the rededication of the Gettysburg memorial. (A copy can be found on the History Channel site or in the book Lend Me Your Ears: Great Speeches in History; a copy updated by co-author Ann Druyan is in Sagan's posthumous publication Billions & Billions.)
In the speech, Sagan pointed out the $10 trillion spent by the U.S. waging the Cold War, more than a third of which was spent during the Reagan years. (And it never really stopped... Druyan notes in the update in "Billions & Billions" that the Clinton defense budget in post-Cold War 1995 was $30 billion higher than Nixon's defense budget in the height of the Cold War.) Sagan wondered what else we could have done with, say, half of that $10 trillion:
What else could the United States have done with that money (not all of it, because prudent defense is, of course, necessary — but, say, half of it)? For a little over $5 trillion, skillfully applied, we could have made major progress toward eliminating hunger, homelessness, infectious disease, illiteracy, ignorance, poverty, and safeguarding the environment—not just in the United States but worldwide. We could have helped make the planet agriculturally self-sufficient and removed many of the causes of violence and war. And this could have been done with enormous benefit to the American economy. We could have made deep inroads into the national debt. For less than a percent of that money, we could have mustered a long-term international program of manned exploration to Mars. Prodigies of human inventiveness in art, architecture, medicine, and science could be supported for decades with a tiny fraction of that money. The technological and entrepreneurial opportunities would have been prodigious.
02 Jun 8:01 | Link | Category: Current Events, Link Dump '08, Politics, Site/Life News
April 23, 2008
Links 3 (Biofuels)
1. How the rich starved the world - an article about grain shortages and the role of biofuels.
2. (Some) biofuels aren't very environmentally friendly, either. From last year: Corn biofuel 'dangerously oversold' as green energy. A couple of excerpts:
The report concludes that the rapidly growing and heavily subsidised corn ethanol industry in the US will cause significant environmental damage without significantly reducing the country's dependence on fossil fuels.
Even if all corn grown in the US was used for fuel, it would only offset 15% of the country's gasoline use, according to the study. The same reduction could be achieved by a 3.5-mile-per-gallon increase in fuel efficiency standards for all cars and light trucks, according to federal figures cited in the report.
3. Forget biofuels - burn oil and plant forests instead. Planting forests doesn't necessarily compensate for burning oil, and not all biofuels are bad, but this link does a nice job of briefly explaining why biofuels can be bad for the environment. An excerpt:
Burning oil and planting forests to compensate is more environmentally friendly than burning biofuel. So say scientists who have calculated the difference in net emissions between using land to produce biofuel and the alternative: fuelling cars with gasoline and replanting forests on the land instead.
They recommend governments steer away from biofuel and focus on reforestation and maximising the efficiency of fossil fuels instead.
The reason is that producing biofuel is not a "green process". It requires tractors and fertilisers and land, all of which means burning fossil fuels to make "green" fuel. In the case of bioethanol produced from corn - an alternative to oil - "it's essentially a zero-sums game," says Ghislaine Kieffer.
What is more, environmentalists have expressed concerns that the growing political backing that biofuel is enjoying will mean forests will be chopped down to make room for biofuel crops such as maize and sugarcane. "When you do this, you immediately release between 100 and 200 tonnes of carbon [per hectare]," says Renton Righelato of the World Land Trust, UK, a conservation agency that seeks to preserve rainforests.
23 Apr 21:11 | Link | Category: Current Events, Link Dump '08, Science
March 26, 2008
The Big Thaw (continues)
From National Geographic (and nearly every other news source) via the Associated Press:
Satellite images show the runaway disintegration of a 160-square-mile chunk in western Antarctica, which started February 28.
You can see the photos & video footage at the British Antarctic Survey site and this Nat. Geographic page.
Perhaps not as momentous as the breakup of Larsen B, but still unsettling.
(Which reminds me... if British Sea Power's song about Larsen B is not in your collection, it should be. As love songs / laments about ice shelves go, it's the tops.)
26 Mar 17:09 | Link | Category: Current Events, Science
March 19, 2008
Wacky Wabbit
It seems like I've mentioned Assud the Hamas bunny before, but here's another fun clip in which he says that if the Danes have the audacity to affront Muhammad again, they will be killed. Specifically, he will "bite them and eat them up," like he wants to do to Jews. (I'm thinking the bunny should look more like Frank the Rabbit from Donnie Darko.)
The part I'm talking about is at ~ 3:34, but the whole thing makes for surreal viewing:
A fine (if bizarre) example of the variety of mind virus that is very pernicious indeed.
19 Mar 23:54 | Link | Category: Current Events, Video
January 23, 2008
Panic! At the Trading Floor
Robert Reich in a Salon.com article titled The politics of an economic nightmare:
In reality, the crisis is both a credit crunch and the bursting of the housing bubble. Wall Street is in terrible shape and Main Street is about to be in terrible shape. And there's not a whole lot that can be done about either of these problems -- because they are the results of years of lax credit standards, get-rich-quick schemes, wild speculation on Wall Street and in the housing market, and gross irresponsibility by the Fed, the Treasury and the Comptroller of the Currency.
23 Jan 21:24 | Link | Category: Current Events, Politics
November 8, 2007
'Waterboarding'
Waterboarding is back in the headlines (and you've gotta love that term - 'waterboarding' almost sounds fun, like wakeboarding or something). Since Mukasey's lame dodging of the question, the issue is back on peoples' minds and a couple of videos are floating around the web with renewed momentum. One is a segment from FOX News that reminds me of a clip from The Daily Show (but nevertheless does demonstrate waterboarding). The other is a clip from Current (with annoying dramatic music but minus the stupid FOX talking heads), embedded below.
The issue is, of course, larger than waterboarding. There are plenty of other 'coercive interrogation techniques' that are just as - or more - questionable (e.g., sensory deprivation).
08 Nov 16:30 | Link | Category: Current Events, Politics, Video
October 1, 2007
"I'm trippin' too"
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. (Or as I call him, The Iranian W.) Plenty of his statements indicate that he, like so many other world leaders, is blinded by ideology - or just batshit insane. The Holocaust denials, the claim of being "surrounded by light" during a speech, and so much more. Like this:
The most remarkable aspect of Mr Ahmadinejad's piety is his devotion to the Hidden Imam, the Messiah-like figure of Shia Islam, and the president's belief that his government must prepare the country for his return.
But I'll admit that he occasionally makes a good point (rhetorically, at least). And sometimes he can even be funny (albeit inadvertently). Like last week at Columbia University when he claimed there are no gays in Iran. Which prompted Andy Samberg's Mahmoud love song, "Iran So Far" (which was the whole reason I posted anything about Ahmadinejad's visit since it's been hashed and rehashed by everyone). The official clip at nbc.com doesn't work for some reason (typical), so enjoy it on YouTube. (If the clip below doesn't work, try searching for other copies.)
01 Oct 19:33 | Link | Category: Art & Entertainment, Current Events, Humor, Politics, Video
September 30, 2007
Replaced with a look-alike
We all know that Paul McCartney died and was replaced with a look-alike. (Here's undeniable proof! Heh.)
Less well-known, however, is the fact that Richard B. Cheney died and was replaced with a look-alike. This video from 15 years ago, in which the real Dick Cheney explains why the George H.W. Bush administration stopped military action in Iraq in 1991, is undeniable proof:
30 Sep 15:12 | Link | Category: Current Events, Politics, Video
September 18, 2007
Leave General Petraeus Alone
I wasn't gonna post this, but since it seems that everyone has seen that Leave Britney Alone video on YouTube (thanks to reputable news organizations like CNN and ABC), you should get the joke.
(via Cynical-C)
18 Sep 17:10 | Link | Category: Current Events, Humor, Video
September 8, 2006
Katherine Harris, part of today's American revolution
One of my favorite topics for blog posts is the idiocy of individuals running for or holding public office. This is obviously a topic for which there is no shortage of subjects. But one person who keeps popping up on the radar again and again is Katherine Harris. (You may remember her as the Florida Secretary of State - and co-chair of W's Florida election campaign - during the Bush vs. Gore fiasco.)
Last year, I mentioned how she supported spending the state's money on investigating how something akin to Kabbalah Water could help prevent citrus canker from destroying trees. It didn't work. (Incidentally, Madonna is lobbying to save the world through the use of Kabbalah Water as a treatment for nuclear waste. You never know... maybe it works better on nuclear waste than citrus canker?)
Anyway, Harris continues to amuse. She's been in the news quite a bit lately (mostly for her mismanaged, fiasco-ridden campaign). What I most enjoyed were the nuggets of wisdom found in her interview with the Florida Baptist Witness. Like this:
The Bible says we are to be salt and light. And salt and light means not just in the church and not just as a teacher or as a pastor or a banker or a lawyer, but in government and we have to have elected officials in government and we have to have the faithful in government and over time, that lie we have been told, the separation of church and state, people have internalized, thinking that they needed to avoid politics and that is so wrong because God is the one who chooses our rulers.
Hmmm... Lots to say about that, but mostly I'm just dying to know how God is choosing our rulers. And if He is, why are our rulers doing such a terrible job? And is He choosing rulers of other countries? Anyway, moving on... let's look at some of her other comments from that interview...
On rights for homosexuals:
Civil rights have to do with individual rights and I don’t think they apply to the gay issues. I have not supported gay marriage and I do not support any civil rights actions with regard to homosexuality.
Gays are not individuals. Duh. Are they even humans? (Sarcasm aside, check out this clip of Jon Stewart and Bill "The Gambler" Bennett. I could quibble with a couple of Stewart's arguments, but I love the parts where he explains to Bill that gay people are 'part of the human condition' and that divorce is not caused because 50% end in 'gayness'.)
When asked if abortion is "a moral evil":
Yes. Because it’s a life, it’s a life. Life begins at conception.
Of all the good and bad arguments against abortion, "life begins at conception" is possibly the worst. What about the countless numbers of human zygotes and embryos (and fetuses) that are spontaneously aborted every day by women's bodies? Is that a moral evil? Think of all the lost souls! (Also, I suspect Katherine eats meat, as I do. What does she think of the 'morality' of killing and devouring a fully-developed, sentient mammal?) I don't want to delve into the issue of abortion because there's so much to say. But it's just worth pointing out that her particular argument is one of the silliest.
Since she has already told us that church-state separation is a "lie," and that our rule of law derives from the 10 Commandments, her views on electing Christian candidates should come as no surprise:
If you're not electing Christians, then in essence you are going to legislate sin.
Wow. Perhaps it should be added that if you are electing her, then in essence you don't give a shit about the long-forgotten notion that U.S. senators should have some ability to think. And apparently Republican voters in Florida don't give a shit (or the competition was even worse): Harris easily wins GOP Senate primary in Florida.
Interestingly, "state GOP leaders tried to talk Harris out of running for the Senate, citing fears she would lose to Nelson while spurring a large November turnout by Democrats, which would hurt the entire Republican ticket."
An interesting article about her is up at Salon.com.
Katherine Harris, thank you for amusing (and enraging) me today.
08 Sep 0:20 | Link | Category: Current Events, Opinion & Thoughts
August 3, 2006
The Middle East Buddy List
This is actually pretty handy:
Confused? We are too. Slate's Middle East Buddy List breaks down the relationships between the countries, terrorist organizations, and political factions who are fighting it out in the current conflict. Who likes whom? Who are the bitterest of enemies? And which groups don't really know where they stand? Click here to open an interactive chart that tells you everything you need to know.
03 Aug 1:58 | Link | Category: Current Events
Your United States Senators in Action
Aside from lamenting Bush's impending use of his first-ever veto on a stem cell bill a few weeks ago, I've been silent on the issue. So much has been said since then that I don't really think I can add anything. But I do feel the need to share a short video clip with you.
To see how low political discourse has fallen (and the depths to which intelligence and common sense have dropped) in the U.S. Senate, watch this utterly depressing video of Senator Sam Brownback discussing the issue. The video speaks for itself, so I'll keep most of my comments to myself. I'll just say that while I might excuse his astounding ignorance of biology (he's from Kansas, after all), I can't excuse what I consider his insulting, tasteless sensationalism.
(via Cynical-C)
03 Aug 1:15 | Link | Category: Current Events, Science, Video
Hope, maybe
I noticed this news item earlier today:
Conservative Republicans who pushed anti-evolution standards back into Kansas schools last year have lost control of the state Board of Education once again.
03 Aug 0:39 | Link | Category: Current Events, Science
August 2, 2006
Are you happy?
Back in December of '04, I mentioned an article from Wired in which Daniel H. Pink argued that along with metrics such as GDP, happiness should be considered an economic indicator. It was an interesting argument. (Read it if you haven't.)
Recently, I've noticed a couple of related stories. One was from last week, about research that created the "first world map of happiness." According to this study, Denmark is the happiest country in the world. The U.S. came in 23rd, Britain 41st, and France 62nd. The D.R. of Congo, Zimbabwe, and Burundi were at the bottom of the list.
However, according to another national happiness index (by Nef), Denmark is 99 and the U.S. is 150th. The tiny south Pacific island nation of Vanuatu rates highest in that list. (The Nef study is interesting because it takes consumption of planetary resources into account and shows that "well-being [does] not have to be linked to high levels of consumption.")
It's not really surprising that there are such widely divergent views of how to calculate so-called 'gross national happiness'. (This quote is telling: "He admitted collecting data based on well-being was not an exact science, but said the measures used were very reliable in predicting health and welfare outcomes.")
How do you define happiness? (Or worse, quantify it?) Ask anyone what happiness is, and you'll usually find that they don't have a very simple answer. Plus, answers will vary from person to person and culture to culture. (It usually involves comfort, health, love, family, environment, etc., but the relative importance of each seems to vary quite a bit.)
Despite the difficulty (or impossibility?) of measuring happiness, I think "how happy are we?" is a crucial question for humanity, and this sort of inquiry seems useful and important. When you look around at.... well, everything we do, all the frenetic economic activity, all the resource extraction and energy consumption, all the airplanes and barbie dolls and newspapers and pets and electronics and grocery stores and pipelines and multinational corporate mergers and media conglomerates and refrigerators and junk mail... it only makes sense to ask what the end purpose is or should be (or if indeed there should even be an end purpose in mind, but that's a topic for another day).
Humans are in the interesting position of feeling like we should be driving for something more than mere survival & reproduction. Much like the answer to what happiness is, I'm sure the answer to what the end purpose of our activities should be varies greatly from individual to individual, culture to culture. But I think most people would say that part of the purpose for all of this hectic high-energy human activity should be happiness... whatever it is. My general view is that humanity should have at least three major long-term ambitions and goals. The primary one should still be simple survival, which is far trickier than it sounds. If we can manage to stick around, we should aim for increased happiness and increased understanding of ourselves and our universe. Survival, happiness, knowledge, wisdom. No doubt it's difficult to balance all those things and find an equation in which they all fit correctly. With some care, and perhaps some thoughtful tradeoffs, the hope is that ultimately they can all go hand in hand.
02 Aug 0:45 | Link | Category: Current Events, Opinion & Thoughts, Science
July 14, 2006
"Two neighbors who are proud of their massacres"
As the situation in Israel, Lebanon, and elsewhere in the Middle East spirals into ever-greater conflict, I'm reminded of something I wrote on this site over four years ago. I don't even recall the exact events, but it was some sort of conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians. The situation today is somewhat different, but most of what I wrote applies equally well. Besides, I'm not in the mood to write about what's happening now. Easier to cut & paste from years past:
Every day there's something new (yet somehow old) from the 'Land of the Canaanites.' I tried to take sides until I realized I could never figure it out... not enough objective information, too much history, too much complexity. At some level I just start looking at both sides as being wrong - or if not wrong, just a little stupid. I want to be back in third grade so i can say "why can't they realize this will lead nowhere, and simply put their differences and history aside, just living harmoniously together looking to the future?" and say it without a trace of irony.
If someone had wanted to create an 'ideal' human conflict, they couldn't have done too much better than this. It has everything: tribal hatred, religious conflict, culture clash, bad history going back generations, economic/resource struggles, and on and on... how it will all turn out is anyone's guess.
What really gets me -- and this is true of most conflicts, obviously -- is that beneath the leaders and militants (and a heap of obviously useless ideology) lie two large populations of humans who simply want to live happy lives, watch their children grow up, work, listen to music, grow old, take vacations, fall in love, be creative, eat delicious meals, laugh and smile.
CNN's Jeff Greenfield wrote a short, thoughtful piece about why it's so tough to be optimistic:
Sometimes I think we ought to keep some headlines in a "most active" file, because we know they will be appropriate time, after time, after time.
Consider, for example: "Violence, tensions rise in the Middle East."
In the wake of the latest explosions -- literal and geopolitical -- it may be time for an airing of unblinkered, full-throttle pessimism.
...
There may be a logical, rational way to resolve a conflict when both sides believe God gave them the same piece of land.
But right now it's a little hard to glimpse through the smoke and fire and blood.
In the case of all-out war (which is not at all unlikely), we will be affected acutely. Even just in the economic realm, oil finished the day at a record of over $77 based just on fear of what might happen. One analyst says "if another major event takes place, it's not at all unrealistic for oil to spike to $100."
Given the current U.S. leadership's track record, I don't have reason to expect a thoughtful reaction in any sphere (whether economic, foreign policy, or anything else). Slate's Fred Kaplan writes:
It's a perfect storm out there, each crisis feeding into the others yet at the same time laden with unique origins and features, demanding unique approaches and solutions. George Marshall himself would have a hard time keeping his grip.
...
Still, it's horrifying to scan the full horizon of disasters—in the Middle East, the Persian Gulf, East Asia, South Asia, all the simmering hot spots on the verge of boiling over—and to realize that no one in charge knows what to do.
The house is still on fire and the prospects ain't looking so good. Well... as Bob Dylan remarks, "If the Bible is right, the world will explode." I often wonder if that's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
(The title of the post comes from The Gulf of Araby, a song by Katell Keineg. Natalie Merchant has often performed the song powerfully at live concerts. Here's a copy (MP3, 8 MB) of one performance, though others I've heard were actually far more powerful and moving. I don't know exactly what the song is about, but some of the lyrics seem appropriate.)
14 Jul 19:50 | Link | Category: Current Events
July 13, 2006
The stem cell madness continues
Just when I was about to praise the Bush administration for creating an enormous marine sanctuary (see also), they do something boneheaded.
According to Karl Rove, President Bush would veto a bill to expand federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research if it passes the Senate. His first veto. Ever. I've long found it odd that he's never felt the need to veto anything (even considering his party controls the legislative branch). But it's quite outrageous he would use his first veto on this bill.
Meanwhile, the Vatican is saying that researchers who work on embryonic stem cell research should be subject to excommunication.
Oh... and in semi-related news of crazy Catholics, Rev. Thomas Euteneuer called Warren Buffett "the Dr. Mengele of philanthropists" because of Buffett's very sizable donation to the Gates Foundation. See, among many other commendable programs, the Gates Foundation promotes reproductive health, helping fund research on new contraceptive technologies and initiatives to improve access to birth control. You know, exactly like Josef Mengele.
Sheesh.
13 Jul 2:02 | Link | Category: Current Events, Science
July 12, 2006
Ken Lay crucified 'like Jesus'? (Even though he died of natural causes?)
The memorial service for Kenneth Lay (or 'Kenny Boy', if you're George W.) was today:
Houston's political and business leaders, including former President George H.W. Bush, turned out for Kenneth Lay's memorial service Wednesday, less than a week after the Enron founder's sudden death. ... Among the other luminaries at the service were former Secretary of State James Baker, former Secretary of Commerce Robert Mosbacher Sr., several corporate heads such as Reliant Energy Inc.'s Joel Staff, and baseball team owner Drayton McLane.
Below are some quotes from the service:
Reverend Dr. William Lawson: "(Like Jesus Christ) he was crucified by a government that mistreated him."
Reverend Steve Wende: "At the height of his power and position ... he used the position to lift others up."
David Herrold, Lay's stepson: "He did have a strong faith in God, and I know he's in heaven. And I'm glad he's not in a position any more to be whipped by his enemy."
I'm a little verklempt. Talk amongst yourselves. I'll give you a topic: What a weird (and perhaps uniquely American) confluence of political power / business clout / religion. Draw historical parallels as you wish.
(I don't claim exhaustive knowledge of Lay's actions, but as this article points out, "nothing will ever change the fact that after a long, fair trial, 12 people found Ken Lay guilty of fraud and conspiracy.")
12 Jul 20:05 | Link | Category: Current Events
July 6, 2006
Creationism and evolution tackled on 'The Simpsons'
I came across a brilliant clip from an episode of 'The Simpsons' that ran a few months ago. Sadly, only about 13 minutes of the show are included in the clip... but there are still some classic moments:
- Lisa's clandestine meeting in the school's "Single Purpose Room" where she has written 'Viva La Evolución' on the blackboard
- Homer, upon hearing that according to creationism, there were no cavemen: "Good riddance! Their drawings suck and they look like hippies."
- Ned Flanders declaring under oath that he is as sure that man and ape are not related as he is that "Jesus hates hip-hop"
- Ralph Wiggum saying "The George Will?!"
My favorite moment of all, though, is when Reverend Lovejoy and Ned Flanders tell Principal Skinner they want the school to teach alternatives to Darwinian evolution. Skinner replies, "You mean, Lamarckian evolution?" Classic.
[The biology geek in me would like to note that Darwin himself never ruled out Lamarckism since he was unaware of Mendel's work (or was he?) and its significance... but when most people talk about "Darwinian evolution", they're referring to the modern synthesis.] Just as a sidenote while I'm talking about Lamarckian evolution (something I never thought I'd be doing on this blog), some scientists feel that cultural evolution is very Lamarckian... that is, in species with culture (a group whose size is heavily debated), cultural changes are acquired during an organism's lifetime and passed on to offspring -- Lamarckism (of a sort)! In fact, I just finished reading a recent book by Eric Chaisson ("Epic of Evolution") in which he writes:
. . . in the recent history of humankind, Lamarckian evolution has clearly dominated Darwinian evolution. Cultural acquisitions spread much faster than genetic modifications. Our gene pool differs little from that of the Cro-Magnons some twenty thousand years ago, yet our cultural heritage is a good deal more robust in the knowledge, arts, traditions, beliefs, and technologies acquired and transmitted during the past thousand or so generations.
If you have trouble getting the Simpsons video from the site I linked to, try here (11.3 MB QuickTime).
For another very cool Simpsons video, check out the best Simpsons couch gag ever (10.3 MB QuickTime).
06 Jul 23:44 | Link | Category: Art & Entertainment, Current Events, Human/Primate Evolution & Behavior, Humor, Science, Video
June 16, 2006
Lynn A. Westmoreland
Congressman Lynn Westmoreland, a bold and visionary leader from Georgia, has worked hard for his constituents. While he apparently has yet to introduce any original legislation during his term, the press releases on his web site show he has been busy... for example, voting for ANWR drilling and opposing legislation to designate Bill Clinton's birthplace a national historic site.
Before entering the U.S. Congress (in January '05), he introduced "common sense" legislation in Georgia to place the Ten Commandments in government buildings in the state. If you use the search feature on his web site, you will see that he has continued to co-sponsor and support various related bills in the U.S. House.
Stephen Colbert recently interviewed Mr. Westmoreland for his compelling 'Better Know a District' series. Westmoreland, a self-professed devout Christian, eloquently defended his case.... oh, wait.... actually, he could not even cite the Ten Commandments, instead stumbling around and badly paraphrasing three of the easiest ones.
Check out the very funny interview here: QuickTime (9 MB) or Windows Media (12.3 MB).
All I can say is... this is why I love Stephen Colbert. We all know that plenty of members of Congress (from both sides of the aisle) are incompetent and boneheaded. But at least when Colbert exposes it, he diverts me from anger and depression by making me laugh a bit.
Update: John points out that Westmoreland co-sponsored a bill in Georgia calling on the state assembly to commend Mel Gibson on 'The Passion of the Christ'.
It's nice to know our wise legislators are hard at work solving the serious and vexing problems facing our nation.
16 Jun 22:18 | Link | Category: Current Events, Humor, Opinion & Thoughts, Video
June 8, 2006
Bomb kills al-Zarqawi
Finally, some good news from Iraq. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, thought even by many insurgents and other terrorists to be a madman, died in a bombing raid.
This is definitely a positive development, though just exactly how it will or will not affect the situation in Iraq (and Islamic terrorism around the world) remains to be seen. CNN's Jeff Greenfield offers a cautionary note:
Will the death of al-Zarqawi lessen the level of violence against Americans and against Iraqis of different religious beliefs?
And here, the words of a high ranking Jordanian intelligence official, quoted in the forthcoming Atlantic magazine, are worth noting: After arguing that the U.S. had vastly exaggerated the role of Zarqawi, the official said, "If Zarqawi is captured or killed tomorrow, the Iraqi insurgency will go on."
Spencer Ackerman of The New Republic even suggests that the biggest beneficiary of al-Zarqawi's death could actually be al Qaeda. He notes that Zarqawi's strategies, which included condemnation and killing of Muslims, "allowed Iraqi Sunnis a face-saving way to distance themselves from murderous jihadis." His death might "allow Al Qaeda to mend fences with Muslims and perhaps even other terrorist groups that his 'excesses' have alienated." Ackerman's final word is essentially the same as Greenfield's: "what no one--in the United States, in Iraq, and beyond--should do is confuse Zarqawi's death with a strategic success."
No decent human being could be sorry al-Zarqawi is dead, but the point both writers make is that the ultimate impact of this development - positive or negative - remains to be seen. Any celebration would be hasty. I've been reading Madeleine Albright's latest book (more on that when I finish it), and just last night I was reading the following selection in which she writes about watching the celebration in Prague's Wenceslas Square at the end of the cold war:
"This is it," I said to myself at the time. "Thank God."
How will our confrontation with terror end? Quite differently, one presumes. There may be spectacular events. Perhaps in the time it takes for this book to be published, we will have finally seen bin Laden's capture or demise. In Iraq, al-Zarqawi may already be yesterday's news. Certainly there will continue to be attacks, arrests, and takedowns. It seems unlikely, however, that we will ever see the equivalent of the celebration in Wenceslas Square. I doubt that we will be able to turn on our televisions one day and say, "This is it." In the worst case, we will see a constant drumbeat of attacks (some possibly involving biological or even nuclear weapons) against an expanding list of targets. We may see more areas, conceivably entire countries, become havens for violent extremism. We could see Islam further divided between the followers of a peaceful faith and those whose minds have been poisoned by hate.
In the best case, we will see the opposite: a reduction in the number of attacks, a shrinkage of areas where terrorists have support, a closing of the ranks within Islam. If that should happen, our confrontation will end with a nonevent - bin Laden, or his successor, will videotape a threat to incinerate us, and nobody will broadcast it, because the terrorists lack even a smidgen of public backing.
08 Jun 18:50 | Link | Category: Current Events
April 24, 2006
No more Biosphere 2
It sounds like Biosphere 2 will be torn down soon. According to the Tucson Weekly:
Looks like Biosphere 2, the world's largest terrarium, may soon be history. Reporter Joseph Barrios of the morning daily broke the news last week that Fairfield Homes is making a deal to buy the Biosphere's spectacular 1,600 acres to develop a master-planned community. Evidently, a three-acre simulation of the planet isn't a selling point for buyers of luxury homes these days.
It'd be a shame if they tore it down. I visited Biosphere 2 a few years back, and not only was it in a beautiful spot, but the building itself seemed like quite an engineering marvel. Much more interesting than a master-planned community.
Such is life in the sprawling West.
(via J-Walk)
24 Apr 19:37 | Link | Category: Current Events, Science
April 7, 2006
Should we talk about the government? (Hi... hi, hi... hi)
Ah... politics. So much to talk about. I thought about writing a long series of paragraphs on Tom DeLay, but I think Studs Terkel summed it up pretty well the other night when he said that DeLay had "made the best career move of his life -- quit public life and became a private servant, which he's been all his life."
There was also the UAE ports fiasco, but I think Jeff Greenfield summed it up pretty well by pointing to the fact that it had more to do with xenophobia than safety. Read With port deal dead, do you feel safer?
So maybe I'll move on to George W. Bush. Where to begin... The recent developments in the Plame/Libby case are pretty amusing. I doubt it will lead to anything (Salon.com's Tim Grieve writes more about what the documents do and do not prove), but it's yet another item to add to the steaming pile of all things rotten with this administration. (Maybe we should limit presidents to one term to avoid the second-term scandals that inevitably pop up.) It's amazing that this administration has been able to get away with so much corrupt, negligent, and potentially criminal behavior without anyone (except Russ Feingold) calling for any sort of acknowledgement or accountability. People were (rightfully) upset when the Clinton administration got away with things, but this administration makes the Clinton folks look like a bunch of silly lightweights.
Last month, I remember looking at a blog where the author asked readers to come up with a list of every 'idiotic' thing President Bush has done in the last five years. I've lost the link, but a good example is an outdated list of 100 mistakes from May 2004. Needless to say, there's now much more to add to the list.
Ah well. At least people seem to be reaching the breaking point with Bush & Co. If you missed the guy at the town hall meeting the other day, here's part of the transcript (you can see a QuickTime video clip here):
Q: You never stop talking about freedom, and I appreciate that. But while I listen to you talk about freedom, I see you assert your right to tap my telephone, to arrest me and hold me without charges, to try to preclude me from breathing clean air and drinking clean water and eating safe food. If I were a woman, you'd like to restrict my opportunity to make a choice and decision about whether I can abort a pregnancy on my own behalf. You are --
THE PRESIDENT: I'm not your favorite guy. Go ahead. (Laughter and applause.) Go on, what's your question?
Q: Okay, I don't have a question. What I wanted to say to you is that I -- in my lifetime, I have never felt more ashamed of, nor more frightened by my leadership in Washington, including the presidency, by the Senate, and --
AUDIENCE MEMBERS: Booo!
THE PRESIDENT: No, wait a sec -- let him speak.
Q And I would hope -- I feel like despite your rhetoric, that compassion and common sense have been left far behind during your administration, and I would hope from time to time that you have the humility and the grace to be ashamed of yourself inside yourself. And I also want to say I really appreciate the courtesy of allowing me to speak what I'm saying to you right now. That is part of what this country is about.
THE PRESIDENT: It is, yes. (Applause.)
Q And I know that this doesn't come welcome to most of the people in this room, but I do appreciate that.
Helen Thomas was sent thousands of flowers after grilling the president at a press conference a few weeks ago. (Oddly, the campaign to send the flowers was started by a woman who lives in a suburb of Salt Lake City. Go, red states!) I think I've mentioned Helen Thomas before... back in 2002 I wrote about her statement that Bush was the "worst president ever". I agreed somewhat, but wondered how he really compared to others traditionally considered poor presidents (Warren Harding, Andrew Johnson, James Buchanan, Ulysses Grant, etc.). But the more time George W. Bush spends in office, the more I start to think she might've been on to something back then.
But fear not. The Bush dynasty will roll on. Check out George W.'s nephew, Pierce, being interviewed on the Today Show. I actually agree with him somewhat, but... wow. Georgetown has (or rather, had) some really sharp students. I'm sure he got in based on his academic merits. (Please please please don't follow in your uncle's footsteps, Pierce. Y'knowhatI'msayin?)
And finally, a page to supplement the always entertaining Complete Bushisms: Keep up-to-date on your Bushisms with Fresh Dubya from DubyaSpeak.com.
Now that I've surely pissed off at least a few of you, my job is done so I think I'll go see a movie.
07 Apr 18:18 | Link | Category: Current Events, Opinion & Thoughts
January 24, 2006
Falwell, Robertson, or Bin Laden?
I found this cool little quiz through The J-Walk Blog:
Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Usama Bin Ladin have a lot in common. Take the quiz and see if you can identify statements by each of these "leaders."
I scored 10 out of 20.
24 Jan 9:11 | Link | Category: Current Events, Interactive, Opinion & Thoughts
December 20, 2005
'Breathtaking inanity'
Finally some good news showing that, occasionally, reason and common sense prevail. A judge today ruled against a requirement for high school science teachers to teach "intelligent design" as an alternative to the theory of evolution.
Earlier today, I was watching that CNN show where Wolf Blitzer stands in front of a distracting wall of televisions and sensationalizes things, and I heard him say that the decision is "inflaming the culture wars," or something along those lines. I guess it's easy to describe it that way, but I'm not sure it's accurate. I guess I'll pontificate on that another time.
All I know is that "intelligent design" might be an interesting philosophical argument (and very reasonable pre-Darwin)... but it isn't science. Those who advocate teaching ID in science classes apparently believe that 'science' includes natural and supernatural explanations of phenomena. But how can views of a supernatural role in the origin (and/or expansion) of life be science (unless you redefine science like the folks in Kansas)? ID can't be tested through the scientific method. Even the claims of folks like Behe and Dembski offer few details, have no testable consequences, and make no predictions. With all apologies to fundamentalist Christians, Pastafarians, and others, such views should be taught in subjects like theology, philosophy, history, cultural anthropology, and the like. Not biology. It's a relief to see the courts upholding that.
Of course, critics are already decrying the decision and probably planning to appeal. They're calling the judge an "activist judge" (see this ridiculous Discovery Institute press release). To refute that, I'll just cut and paste part of the CNN story:
Jones -- an appointee of President Bush, who backs the teaching of intelligent design -- defended his decision in personal terms.
"Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist court," Jones writes.
"Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on intelligent design, who in combination drove the board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy," he said.
Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said, "Children in public schools deserve top quality science education and freedom from religious indoctrination and today they were granted both."
You can read the judge's opinion online (or here). It's lengthy (139 pages), but pretty interesting to read. It's well-reasoned, and he's not shy about saying what he thinks (calling the school board's decision "breathtaking inanity," for example).
For more, see John Hawks, PZ Myers, and The Panda's Thumb.
20 Dec 23:36 | Link | Category: Current Events, Science
November 14, 2005
Report Card for the USA
A few weeks ago, I caught a segment on CNN called "America By The Numbers". Although I was aware of most of these dismal figures, seeing them collected in a two minute video segment was thoroughly depressing.
Here is a link to a clip of the video. Since I'm not sure how long it will remain active, I'm also cutting & pasting the text of the piece, available from this transcript. (Emphasis is mine.)
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, while policy makers wring their hands over this latest Washington scandal, as important as it is, the truth is there are fundamental problems in this country that are eating away the foundations of America and the numbers don't lie.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ROMANS (voice-over): Policy makers, this is what you've achieved.
37 million people live in poverty. One in five American children is poor. And today the government announced a record 1.5 million babies born to unwed mothers last year.
50 percent of black and Hispanic teenagers will never graduate from high school. Overall, high school graduation rates in this country aren't even in the top 10 of industrialized nations.
Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich calls Washington an arrogant echo chamber. And he says as nation we are blowing it.
ROBERT REICH, FORMER LABOR SECRETARY: Our children are not going to do as well as we are doing. And that's for the first time in many, many years, since the Depression.
And, in fact if you extend backward in American society there's always been an optimism. There's always been a sense of progress. And I'm afraid we're going to lose that because all of the economic indicators, all of the social indicators suggest that we are sliding backward.
ROMANS: American students rank 28th in math preparedness, badly trailing the leaders: China, Finland and Korea. In science, American students are behind 21 other countries. We are no longer the most college educated nation.
ERIC HANUSHEK, HOOVER INSTITUTION, STANFORD: I think it tells us something about the long-run prospects if we don't in fact take a new tact and improve our schools.
Other countries in the world are pushing very, very hard at developing their human resources and the skills of their population.
ROMANS: China graduates eight to 10 times as many engineers each year as the United States.
Eric Klinenberg, a sociologist at New York University, has studied inequality for our elderly.
ERIC KLINENBERG, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY: Today, the United States is the great superpower of the world. But, we haven't found a way to take care of our elderly, our poor, young children and infants. In many respects here we lag behind nations that are far less advanced and powerful.
ROMANS: Life expectancy in the United States lags Japan, Canada, France, the UK, Spain and Singapore.
And here in Washington, D.C. the infant mortality rate is higher than cities in India.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROMANS: It is harder and harder to live the American dream in this country. Wages are stagnant, mortgage defaults are rising now, 47 million Americans are without health insurance. This is what America's policy makers have achieved.
14 Nov 18:05 | Link | Category: Current Events
November 10, 2005
Hey, Pat: Jesus Thinks You're A Jerk
Lately, Pat Robertson seems to have been in the news a lot. This can be fun at first. Pat's always good for a laugh. For example, I was fairly amused when he called for the assassination of Hugo Chavez ("Who Would Jesus Assassinate?"). And earlier today, I had a link in the Quick Links section to an entry at Pharyngula titled Either Pat Robertson is insane, or God is, which linked to a parody about Pat Robertson blaming the tornado in Indiana on Warren Beatty. It was funny because despite the story's absurdity, PZ and most of the commenters missed the fact that it was a parody. (Sadly, it wouldn't surprise anyone if he really did say something like that.)
But as I read about about Robertson warning Dover residents about God's wrath because they didn't support 'intelligent design', I realized I wasn't laughing. I think Pat's prominence in the media lately has pushed me into the dreaded state of Pat Robertson overload in which one recognizes the true power this man wields and the monetary reserves he draws on and the many poor souls who actually take him seriously. Pat Robertson overload is bad because he ceases to be amusing and becomes intensely irritating - even frightening. I don't often enter this state, but when I do, it's not good. I figure writing this post will help me vent so I can quickly get back in the amused-by-Pat mindset.
So here are some fun links for you:
- A collection of Pat Robertson quotes - lots of good ones.
- I Hate Pat Robertson - a fine blog dedicated to Mr. R.
- Pat's Biography from rotten.com
- Perhaps the most entertaining site of them all, the official Pat Robertson site
I find it truly astounding that more people don't see right through Mr. Robertson (not even the Chief of Police). He's a so-called "Christian" with a $200 million - $1 billion net worth who shrilly condemns others, suggests that a nuclear weapon exploding at State Department HQ would be good for the country, tricks the poor, old, and uneducated out of money through television, etc. etc. When I was a kid, my Mormon sunday school teachers warned of 'priestcraft'... I think Pat Robertson would be a shining example of that notion.
Last night, I was watching a TV show about Jesus (one of those silly programs where they interview religion professors, theologists, archaeologists, and the like as they try to determine 'who Jesus really was'). It struck me that Pat Robertson (the "Christian") is the embodiment of nearly everything Jesus so simply and eloquently spoke out against. (I believe this is known as 'irony'.) I really suspect Jesus would be appalled at all the religions that use his name... but particularly appalled at Robertson and his ilk.
(By the way, the title of this post comes from a Frank Zappa song that poses the truly timeless question, "Did he really choose Tammy to do his work?")
10 Nov 22:51 | Link | Category: Current Events, Opinion & Thoughts
November 8, 2005
Kansas falls to the ID-iots
I was just greeted with this unbelievable headline: Kansas school board redefines science. The following line floored me:
... the board rewrote the definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena.
No, this is not a story from The Onion. This really happened.
Since I'm still in a shocked, confounded state, I have nothing to say but "holy shit". I refer you to PZ Myers for more thoughtful words:
It's a sad day for American science. We've lost Kansas... For the next few years, a lot of schoolkids are going to get taught slippery twaddle—instead of learning what scientists actually say about biology, they're going to get the phony pseudoscience of ideologues and dishonest hucksters. And that means the next generation of Kansans are going to be a little less well informed, even more prone to believing the prattlings of liars, and the cycle will keep on going, keep on getting worse.
...
Rewriting the definition of science seems a rather presumptuous thing for a school board to do, I think, especially when their new definition is something contrary to what working scientists and major scientific organizations say is science. As for removing the limitation to natural phenomena, what do they propose to add? Ghosts, intuition, divine revelation, telepathic communications from Venusians? It's simply insane.
08 Nov 21:54 | Link | Category: Current Events, Science
November 7, 2005
"We do not torture."
Bush defended U.S. interrogation practices today: "So you bet we will aggressively pursue them but we will do so under the law. We do not torture."
As far as I know, he didn't specify which laws we will adhere to nor did he define "torture." I mention this because a 2002 Justice Department memo cleared by Alberto Gonzalez argued that laws prohibiting torture do "not apply to the president's detention and interrogation of enemy combatants", and that the pain caused by interrogation must be of the intensity of "injury such as death, organ failure, or serious impairment of body functions — in order to constitute torture". That's pretty vile. (John McCain had this to say: "We are Americans, and we hold ourselves to humane standards of treatment of people no matter how evil or terrible they may be. To do otherwise undermines our security, but it also undermines our greatness as a nation." I happened across Jimmy Carter on Larry King's [fluffy] show the other night, and he had some interesting words as well [scroll just past the first commercial break].)
Also... Isn't it disturbing that, as part of the CIA's covert overseas prison system, al Qaeda captives have been hidden and interrogated "at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe." (The EU and human rights groups are now demanding information from the U.S. and our buddies in "the 'new' Europe".)
Yet another item to add to the 'This is America...right?' file.
Also of interest, an item I posted nearly a year ago: You, too, are capable of committing torture.
07 Nov 18:49 | Link | Category: Current Events
October 3, 2005
Killer dolphins on the loose?
From The Observer, a rather odd Hurricane Katrina-related story/rumor. According to this article, armed dolphins trained by the U.S. military might be loose in the Gulf of Mexico:
Dolphins have been trained in attack-and-kill missions since the Cold War. The US Atlantic bottlenose dolphins have apparently been taught to shoot terrorists attacking military vessels. Their coastal compound was breached during the storm, sweeping them out to sea. But those who have studied the controversial use of dolphins in the US defence programme claim it is vital they are caught quickly.
Experts who have studied the US navy's cetacean training exercises claim the 36 mammals could be carrying 'toxic dart' guns. Divers and surfers risk attack, they claim, from a species considered to be among the planet's smartest. The US navy admits it has been training dolphins for military purposes, but has refused to confirm that any are missing.
Hmmm. (Where's Aquaman when you need him?)
(via John Hawks)
03 Oct 20:20 | Link | Category: Current Events, Misc. Tidbits
We're not scaremongering; this is really happening
A couple of news items to add to the pile of ice-is-melting articles:
- Arctic Ice Cap Shrank Sharply This Summer, Experts Say - "It also appears that the change is becoming self sustaining, with the increased open water absorbing solar energy that would be reflected back into space by bright white ice." ... "'Feedbacks in the system are starting to take hold,' Dr. Scambos said. 'The consecutive record-low extents make it pretty certain a long-term decline is underway.'"
- Report: Ice-free Arctic summers possible by 2100
03 Oct 18:49 | Link | Category: Current Events, Science
September 23, 2005
BBC News on the tenuous hurricane - global warming link
I noticed a good article from BBC News that concisely explains why scientists are reluctant to jump aboard the hurricane - global warming bandwagon. (Also see this CNN story.) One problem is a lack of data:
"The problem is," observes Julian Heming, "that we can only look back about 35 years with satellite data; before that the record is somewhat unreliable, and 35 years isn't long enough to draw a definite conclusion.
"Before global satellite coverage, we're pretty sure there are gaps in the record; storms would start at sea and die out at sea, so we never knew about them."
Another problem is the cyclic nature of hurricane formation:
"Activity is naturally very variable in terms of frequency, intensity and regional occurrence; in the Atlantic, there are active phases and not so active phases, and currently we're in the middle of an active phase."
There are other variables to account for, too - like other climate cycles and the spots where hurricanes land.
It is interesting, though, that one study found a rise in the number of intense hurricanes over the last 30 years:
The leader of that research project, Dr. Peter Webster, believes there may be a link to climate change.
"What I think we can say is that the increase in intensity is probably accounted for by the increase in sea-surface temperature," he told the BBC News website, "and I think probably the sea-surface temperature increase is a manifestation of global warming."
So it seems the jury's still out. I'm convinced of the reality of global warming, but I agree with those scientists who aren't sure about whether it's the cause of recent hurricane patterns. Hurricane formation is affected by the same incredibly complex sets of factors that affect all global weather. I think many people make a mistake in simplistically applying global warming to existing weather patterns. The reality of "climate change" is that it will change weather patterns in some unpredictable ways. Even with our advanced models and analytical tools, we don't have a complete grasp of how the weather works in "stable" conditions (if there are such things). Add in a major shift in global temperature and it turns into a total guessing game. That unpredictability is one of the most unsettling things about global warming.
(As an aside, if your computer has spare processor cycles you might consider joining climateprediction.net.)
23 Sep 23:36 | Link | Category: Current Events, Science
September 10, 2005
Another ironic twist on "freedom"
Four years after 9/11, 10,000 people will march in Washington in a patriotic "Freedom Walk" sponsored by the Pentagon. (I know the Pentagon was hit on 9/11, but is it really appropriate in any way to have a military-themed rally on Sept. 11th?)
Some fun facts about the Freedom Walk (from the Daily News and WP):
- The walk has Defense Department backing
- Anyone who did not sign up for the event by yesterday will not be allowed to enter the fenced-in route from the Pentagon to the National Mall
- Those who try to join the march without registering and refuse to leave will face arrest by the U.S. Park Police
- The route will be lined with four-foot-high snow fencing to keep it closed and "sterile"
- The U.S. Park Police will have its entire Washington force of several hundred on duty and along the route, on foot, horseback and motorcycles and monitoring from above by helicopter.
- It's billed as a memorial to victims of the 2001 terrorist attacks AND a show of support for those serving in the military
- It will be topped off with a concert by country singer Clint Black, known for his pro-troops anthem, "Iraq and Roll"
- The tight security is necessary to ensure the safety of VIPs, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
- One restricted group will be the media, whose members will not be allowed to walk along the march route
Sounds like freedom to me! (Aside from the lack of synchronized marching, of course.)
Look, I understand the reasons for the security precautions, but what does it all say about the state of our country? And how much more ideologized can "freedom" possibly become in the U.S.?
10 Sep 23:48 | Link | Category: Current Events, Opinion & Thoughts
September 6, 2005
"Unselfconscious depravity"
We all know the 'elites' are out of touch (or worse). Unfortunately, many of the stories illustrating this turn out to be highly embellished accounts or popular myths. Consider Marie Antoinette's "Let them eat cake," or George H.W. Bush's amazement at seeing a supermarket scanner for the first time in 1988.
But the latest one from Barbara Bush turns out to be true, and this time it's not as out-of-context as her "beautiful mind" gaffe or as ridiculously improbable as, say, her son's supposed "Do you have blacks, too?" quote.
Barbara Bush really did say that things are working out "very well" for evacuees from New Orleans. It would be fine if she had actually said, "Considering that these people were already destitute and this disaster took their community, their homes, and perhaps their friends and family, things are working out very well." But read this (emphasis mine):
In a segment at the top of the show on the surge of evacuees to the Texas city, Barbara Bush said: "Almost everyone I've talked to says we're going to move to Houston."
Then she added: "What I'm hearing - which is sort of scary - is they all want to stay in Texas. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality."
"And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this--this (she chuckles slightly) is working very well for them."
Ah, plutocracy.
The "scary" comment could be interpreted several ways, but the rest... I don't know. You can link to an audio clip here and see what you think. I know I shouldn't care one whit about flippant comments from some former first lady, but still... in a tiny way, I think it highlights how far the "ruling class" is from the harsh realities that face so many in this country and around the world.
I liked Patrick's post on the matter at Making Light. (The comments there are also good, as usual.)
06 Sep 12:18 | Link | Category: Current Events
September 4, 2005
Katrina TV clips (or, "Are the talking heads growing backbones?")
Very shortly after Katrina hit, I was watching CNN's coverage and veteran reporter Jeanne Meserve gave a highly and unusually emotional report, breaking into tears several times (download an MP3 here). Since then, I've noticed quite a bit of atypical behavior from reporters. One of the most notable trends is that many reporters and anchors seem to have lost their normal "professional reserve" and started to stand up to the bullshit they constantly receive from guests (and each other) on the air. (I'm sure the trend will not continue, but I must admit it's nice to imagine a world in which stonewallers aren't accommodated by brainless newsanchors. Anyway...)
Slate looks at this phenomenon and has a nice roundup of examples in The Rebellion of the Talking Heads, but here are some of my personal favorites:
- I can't stand Mary Landrieu, so it was just excellent to see Anderson Cooper scold her for having the audacity to sit there and pat other politicians on the back while people were dying throughout NOLA. Also watch his interview with Trent Lott (7 MB WMV).
- Ted Koppel also gets high marks for refusing to accept bullshit answers from FEMA director Michael Brown (9 MB QT). Even Paula Zahn (you know, that anchor who's "just a little sexy") went after Brown (2.6 MB WMV).
- NPR's Robert Siegel grilled Homeland Security Sec. Michael Chertoff.
- Perhaps the most interesting moments came from Fox News, where the heads in the field actually departed from the typical Fox script. As Bill O'Reilly sermonized about how the people just needed a Rudy Giuliani, "Shep" Smith responded that what they needed "on the first day was food and water and what they needed on the second day was food and water and what they needed on the third day was food and water." Later he joined Geraldo Rivera in lashing out at blowhard Sean Hannity (and feeble sidekick Colmes). (8 MB QT or 5 MB WMV)
While I'm listing TV clips, watch Jefferson Parish President Aaron Broussard on Meet the Press (4 MB QT).
Finally, watch Bob Schieffer's scathing "personal thought" segment (1.3 MB WMV) from Face the Nation:
"There is no purpose for government except to improve the lives of its citizens. Yet as scenes of horror that seemed to be coming from some Third World country flashed before us, official Washington was like a dog watching television. It saw the lights and images, but did not seem to comprehend their meaning or see any link to reality. As the floodwaters rose, local officials in New Orleans ordered the city evacuated. They might as well have told their citizens to fly to the moon. How do you evacuate when you don't have a car? No hint of "intelligent design" in any of this. This was just survival of the richest. By midweek a parade of Washington officials rushed before the cameras to urge patience. What good is patience to a mother who can't find food and water for a dehydrated child? Washington was coming out of an August vacation stupor and seemed unable to refocus on business or even think straight... Since 9/11, Washington has spent years and untold billions reorganizing government to deal with crises brought on by possible terrorist attacks. If this is the result, we had better start over."
(An aside: The feds clearly dropped the ball, but why aren't we hearing more condemnations of officials in New Orleans, the State of Louisiana, and other cities & states for being so terribly underprepared?)
04 Sep 16:59 | Link | Category: Current Events
Katrina = God's Mercy or God's Wrath?
You knew it would happen sooner or later... folks far and wide have started to explain that God either saved them from the storm or caused the whole damned thing. Check out this synopsis from "AgapePress" for both views:
But the seminary leader says he is able to discern God's hand in the situation.
"Imagine what would have happened if [New Orleans] had taken a direct hit," he tells BP. "The levee did not break until after the storm was clear and the winds had died down and the rescue workers were able to get out." Had the levee given way during the hurricane, he says, "untold thousands of people" would have been killed.
As puzzling as it is that so many people believe that an all-knowing, all-powerful deity plays such games (rather than being either completely in charge or completely uninvolved), at least that guy is trying to look at the situation positively.
Rev. Bill Shanks, by contrast, takes this despicable view:
Shanks says the hurricane has wiped out much of the rampant sin common to the city.
The pastor explains that for years he has warned people that unless Christians in New Orleans took a strong stand against such things as local abortion clinics, the yearly Mardi Gras celebrations, and the annual event known as "Southern Decadence" -- an annual six-day "gay pride" event scheduled to be hosted by the city this week -- God's judgment would be felt.
"New Orleans now is abortion free. New Orleans now is Mardi Gras free. New Orleans now is free of Southern Decadence and the sodomites, the witchcraft workers, false religion -- it's free of all of those things now," Shanks says. "God simply, I believe, in His mercy purged all of that stuff out of there -- and now we're going to start over again."
I don't even know how to respond to that.
04 Sep 16:43 | Link | Category: Current Events
A few more Katrina links
A few new links:
- You're on your own, Britain's victims told
- Notes From Inside New Orleans
- Survivors reveal Superdome horror
- One first-hand account
- Evacuees anguished at leaving pets behind
04 Sep 16:34 | Link | Category: Current Events
Katrina
The finger-pointing and second guessing started immediately after Hurricane Katrina dissipated and we all got a sense of the scale of the destruction and suffering. In a way, I hate to join in because I do feel that such discussion (especially in the wake of a natural disaster) should wait until relief efforts have been successful and the wounds have at least started to heal. However, there are links I'll lose and thoughts I'll forget if I don't post them now, and I suppose it's never too early to start figuring how to more effectively prevent/handle disasters in the future. Anyway, let me preface the rest of the with this link: Hurricane Katrina Help Center - information on volunteering and donation.
I think one of the biggest questions on everyone's mind is how the hurricane could wreak such havoc in a Western nation - indeed, the wealthiest nation on the planet. I think many people are forgetting just how powerful this storm was and how quickly it developed. However, it's worth noting the lack of preparation.
Terrible predictions of what would happen to New Orleans in the event of a strong hurricane have been made for years - just check out this extensive Wikipedia entry. The levee system has a been a disaster waiting to happen for decades, and for just as long experts have been aware that without major changes, New Orleans would face flooding if any of the levees failed. (Look at this elevation diagram.) The politicians - whether because they have selective memories or are lying outright - would like us to think nobody knew what might happen. Bush has the gall to say "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees." Completely wrong. Bill Clinton got in on the act, too: "I'm telling you, nobody ever thought it would happen like this."
It seems like scientists and planners are always harping on us about impending disasters... and because most of them don't happen in the short spans of time we humans tend to concern ourselves with, we just ignore them or pretend we were never warned in the first place. Even when similar disasters are recent, we refuse to accept the possibilities and probabilities of more disasters. Case in point: Last year was the worst hurricane year in decades. Experts started writing scenarios like this: What if Hurricane Ivan Had Not Missed New Orleans? (an eerily accurate prediction of Katrina). Interestingly, federal hurricane control and funding for New Orleans - which had already "slowed to a trickle" - was the lowest ever in 2005. I doubt extra funding would have helped in time for this hurricane, but the point is that our priorities have been dreadfully out of order (and getting worse) for a long time. Particularly damning: "In early 2004, as the cost of the conflict in Iraq soared, President Bush proposed spending less than 20 percent of what the Corps said was needed for Lake Pontchartrain, according to a Feb. 16, 2004, article." And this, from June, 2004: "It appears that the money has been moved in the president's budget to handle homeland security and the war in Iraq, and I suppose that's the price we pay. Nobody locally is happy that the levees can't be finished, and we are doing everything we can to make the case that this is a security issue for us."
Also damning is the fact that officials in New Orleans were well aware of the risks of such a hurricane and failed to have an adequate evacuation plan in place. They knew New Orleans had one of the highest poverty rates of any major U.S. city, and they knew that 27% of households - 120,000 people, did not have private transportation, one of the lowest percentages of any major U.S. city. Yet they failed to have an adequate evacuation plan. (Then, FEMA director Michael Brown proves how out-of-touch officials are by saying much of the death toll will "be attributable a lot to people who did not heed the advance warnings" - people who couldn't get out!)
There's lots more to talk about, but I don't have the time. Maybe I'll find time later to reflect on the way natural disasters shake up the stratified social order and expose the inequalities and deep dysfunction in our society that is normally hidden from view. There's also global warming's arguable effect on such natural disasters -- it seems that we're also blithely ignoring this most pernicious of threats. It's also interesting to note that the ballyhooed post-9/11 "homeland security" has been a complete and abject failure. Lots of topics to explore... too little time.
Anyway, here are a few extra links before I shut up:
- Katrina is case where laxity cost dearly
- Paul Krugman: A Can't-Do Government
- United States of Shame (one of Maureen Dowd's venomous columns that actually makes some good points)
- A Disaster Foretold
- A National Disgrace
I'll leave you with this heartwarming quote from Dubya (video):
The good news is -- and it's hard for some to see it now -- that out of this chaos is going to come a fantastic Gulf Coast, like it was before. Out of the rubbles of Trent Lott's house -- he's lost his entire house -- there's going to be a fantastic house. And I'm looking forward to sitting on the porch. (Laughter.)
... and all the great orators simultaneously roll in their graves.
04 Sep 12:00 | Link | Category: Current Events, Opinion & Thoughts
September 3, 2005
Katrina, part 2
A few days ago, I predicted "major disaster," but I had hoped it wouldn't be this bad. Check CNN's Katrina Help Center for ways to volunteer & donate.
I wrote up a longer post that I put in the '