We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
What happens next? We don’t know, but we observe that in some respects, the meta-story has become the story. The Zimmerman story is not an important national story. The contraception story was never an important national story. What both stories illustrate is just how far in the tank the media are for the White House, that they will resort to anything to advance a political agenda. The open and unapologetic corruption in the media is an important national story.
It must be true, NOW doesn't want to be anti-science do they? What they need is a self-esteem industry to help the plain girls believe they can catch a man and stop all this foolishness about a career.
Talk about timing, I wonder if this is fortuitous or if the DM has been sitting on this story for a while?
BD does a great job with these daily links (proving the old adage 'if you need something done, ask someone who's busy') but sometimes there's something he probably orta highlight in a special box all its own.
If you believe the giant twin entitlements are a fair bet to be the end of the political entity known as the USA, and if you are heedful that all the voices agreeing never mention any solution but the word 'reform' (like Steve Martin's advice on how to live like a millionaire, "First, get a million dollars...."), then you really really should invest 90 seconds in the superb thumbnail sketch in yesterday's links describing the evidence of those three Texas counties.
Your jaw will hit the floor so hard they'll hear it in China.
Tuning into MF was such a lucky happenstance Beside getting into new hosta varieties (from which I found you0, I'm taking the Hillsdale classes, have my grandkids on all the eagle/falcon/hummingbird/etc sites, pick up on a Kahn Academy session from time to time, and try to get better informed through Dr. Mercury and your interesting, well-informed crew of contributors. Kudos to your crew. You do lead the pack of must-go-to web sites.
Judith Curry’s words “By publishing this, Nature seems to be looking for headlines, rather than promoting good science” seem to ring loud and true in light of further observation-based research.
I don't know about the "instead of good science" part, but every researcher knows---and Nature's editors freely admit---that the magazine looks for articles that pack a punch. It's no secret they seek headlines. They measure their success as a publication by the "impact" their articles have on the field. And how do they measure 'impact"? By the number of citations, of course. In the very short term (but probably not the long term), whether an article is right or wrong is irrelevant to citation counts. Bad papers can receive as many citations as a good one, possibly even more, as later researchers try to disprove earlier results they consider to be incorrect. There's nothing like a good academic fist fight to pump up an article's citations in the literature. If the editors and peer reviewers do their jobs, this system works like Brownian motion, and the science is self-correcting. That's what will happen in this case, with two conflicting papers being submitted just months apart to two different journals and being reviewed, I presume, by different referees. For the first group of authors, perhaps their best response should just be a very public, "Whoops. Our bad."
Everyone believes in magic...yep. I reckon magical thinking has helped overcome many an obstacle to achievement over the course of history. Besides, a purely scientific phenomenology is soul crushing if it utterly defines a worldview. It's gentler and more pleasant to acknowledge that there may be more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in our philosophies.
The NOW President feels that Ann Romney doesn't have the real life experiences and "imagination" to "understand real women." What pernicious rubbish! I suspect that a houseful of five active growing boys supplied her, non-stop, with an absolute host of real life experiences to draw upon for understanding. I get so tired of folks who live by rote, by other people's templates, whether it's women or men. Ann Romney has successfully raised five boys who are now useful successful citizens, children who have given her the pleasure of sixteen grandchildren. I think she has lived an extremely successful life already, and I hope she'll be with us for many more years.
Years ago, my Dad said to me one Sunday after church, waving his hand at several of the older women of his parish. "Those women are the guardians of all that is best in our civilization. With their memories and daily efforts they keep us safe and steady, and help us preserve the wisdom and vigor of our civilization." In his vision of our world order, the men went out and struggled to grow, and then protect the best of America as it was, and still is. And women were the country's shared memory.
I got the gist of what he was saying, but I can no longer remember the exact words. But I think he was right.