Thursday morning links

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Thursday, September 24. 2026

Schrödinger’s blunder created the quantum measurement problem. Quantum reality has both waves and particles

My late friend Peter Max filled my home with art — and my life with memories

An AI Went Looking Through DNA and Found Something Humans Had Missed

A Part of the Population Will Always Live in COVIDville - "People like you kill disabled people in the name of your own leisure and convenience,"

What Nikole Hannah-Jones Wouldn’t Let Herself See - Her daughter’s school failed not because of racism or segregation but because of bad pedagogy, the promotion of “equity” over standards, and zero accountability.

How the Ellisons pulled off Paramount-WBD settlement talks and cleared major hurdle to forging media giant

Milei:

The state is not an abstract creature. It is made up of people, officials, and bureaucrats. Granting it control over innovation means granting some people, in the best and most naive of cases, the power to limit what everyone else can create. History gives us reason to scrutinize such power carefully. For centuries, fear over tomorrow has been used as an argument for restricting freedoms today, always with the same promise: give us a part of your freedom and we will protect you from this new threat.

The Somali Daycare Fraud Story Just Got Way Bigger Than Minnesota

Scott Jennings Takes a Victory Lap for Trump on the Greenland Deal as Other CNN Panelists Seethe

Speaking of empires in decline: The average British worker now makes about the same hourly wage as a functionally illiterate American.

Posted by Bird Dog in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 08:30 | Comments (25) | Trackback (1)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

PingBack

Weblog: www.thepiratescove.us
Tracked: Sep 27, 09:26

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

QUOTE:

Scott Jennings Takes a Victory Lap for Trump

So, Trump threatens to annex Greenland—contrary to international law and contrary to the will of Greenlanders. Trump backs down and signs a deal which is essentially what was in previous agreements and everybody declares victory. Gotta be worth a Nobel Peach FIFA Peace Prize.

Meanwhile, Poland wants more American presence there due to Russian aggression, so they tell Trump they'll call it Fort Trump.

#1 Zachriel on 2026-09-24 10:37 (Reply)

"Trump backs down and signs a deal which is essentially what was in previous agreements and everybody declares victory."

Curious. It only takes a few minutes and a few internet searches to refute your claim. The new agreement survives any future dissolution of NATO and Greenlandic independence. The old agreements did not. The new agreement explicitly grants far more extensive ground transit and overflight rights to the USA than the old agreements. The new agreement explicitly grants additional basing rights to the USA which Denmark had veto rights over under earlier agreements. The new agreement gives the USA veto power over most (de facto, almost all) investment by nom-NATO/EU countries. The old agreements included no such surrender of Greenlandic sovereignty. But yea, just the same, other than that.

Given your fondness for confidently making assertions about complex issues requiring high level cognitive thinking typically requiring expertise, your failure at basic lover level facts really damages your credibility. IOW, you're either not very bright or you're a liar.

But on to more important meta issues. The notion that Greenland, and island of over 830,000 square miles with a population under 57,000 (< .07 people per square mile) should be treated as a completely sovereign entity is an absurdity maintained only a stable, peaceful prosperous global system that has been largely maintained by and at the sufferance of the USA. Globalism is failing. Donald Trump is the result of the failure, not the cause. He is aggressively pursuing the interests of the USA and its citizens. This agreement is just one example of that. His doing so insulates the USA from the worst impacts of the failure of globalism. For that, he deserves the praise of anyone who loves the USA. The new agreement is also very much in the interests of Greenlanders.

Now to your tone policing of Trump. His over-the-top rhetoric was probably necessary to achieve this laudable objective. Because it reset baseline expectations in a way nothing else would. Few other presidents would have even attempted to address the legitimate American concerns the new agreement addresses. Likely no other would have succeeded. Dito for the Canadian trade fiasco. Carney bears 95+% of the blame and Canda has been freeloading off of the USA while simultaneously looking down their noses at us for decades now. Which is a situation that should have addressed long ago. Try coming up with critiques of policy rather than tone.

#1.1 James on 2026-09-24 17:59 (Reply)

Looking for the clause that grants exclusive rights in perpetuity for the Trump Resort and Above the Arctic Circle championship golf course.
For better or worse we appear to have adopted a vassal state called Greenland.

#1.1.1 OtG on 2026-09-25 09:44 (Reply)

James: The new agreement survives any future dissolution of NATO and Greenlandic independence.

2026 agreement: "No state that is not a member of NATO shall be allowed to establish its own manned or unmanned military installations in Greenland nor shall they be allowed a persistent presence of military forces in Greenland, unless otherwise agreed by the Parties." While more explicit than previous agreements, it not substantially different from the past. NATO and the United States have and continue to have bases in Greenland.

James: The new agreement explicitly grants far more extensive ground transit and overflight rights to the USA than the old agreements.

1951 Agreement: "the Government of the United States of America may enjoy, for its public vessels and aircraft and its armed forces and vehicles, the right of free access to and movement between the defense areas through Greenland, including territorial waters, by land, air and sea." The new agreement does give the US more flexibility, but it is not substantially different than previous practice.

James: The new agreement explicitly grants additional basing rights to the USA which Denmark had veto rights over under earlier agreements.

So? Denmark and Greenland have agreed to allow the US new bases in Narsarsuaq and Mestersvig. Additional bases have to be negotiated. This is how it has been since 1951.

James: The new agreement gives the USA veto power over most (de facto, almost all) investment by non-NATO/EU countries.

Only in what the agreement calls "Particularly Sensitive Sectors or Activities", which will include certain mineral resources.

Most of these provisions are quite reasonable and supportable. That's not the issue, but the use of coercion by a larger power over a smaller power, including threats of illegal annexation, when simply asking under normal protocol could have led to the much the same outcome.

By the way, the 2026 agreement is considered an Amendment and Supplement to the 1951 Defense Agreement and the 2004 Igaliku Agreement—not a replacement.

As Trump said to the United Nations, "To the victor go the spoils."

#1.2 Zachriel on 2026-09-24 20:18 (Reply)

Two other points worth mentioning.

The agreement has to be ratified by the legislatures of both Denmark and Greenland, which may attach conditions.
The agreement has an explicit withdrawal provision. So, the agreement only holds until or if the US, Denmark, or Greenland withdraws. A withdrawal is automatic if they leave NATO.

#1.2.1 Zachriel on 2026-09-24 20:45 (Reply)

The agreement has an explicit withdrawal provision.

That was incorrect. There is no explicit withdrawal provision in the publicly available text. The larger point about coercion and Trump’s statement “To the victor goes the spoils” stand.

#1.2.1.1 Zachriel on 2026-09-24 22:13 (Reply)

Bill Nye the “Science” guy just got his 12th covid booster. Lol!

#2 Rusty on 2026-09-24 10:42 (Reply)

COVIDville: Their pronouns are complainer, whiner and victim.

The obvious solution if you believe you are at risk of catching something in crowds is stay home. Perhaps I'm naive in this but why would you go to a bar if you are sick or think you will catch something from the other patrons? Is the bar time THAT important? Seriously, do something else and stay out of bars. AND if the bar was important to your social or addictive life why would you attack the bar owners for trying to stay in business and ease the restrictions that are strangling them? If the bar is important to you wouldn't you want them to be able to stay in business?

Then of course there is that much better understood knowledge that masks don't prevent transmission of highly infectious diseases. If they did, or if you believed they did then wearing a mask would make you safe regardless of what the other patrons did or didn't do.

I do get the fear/concern. Yesterday I picked up a prescription and the staff at Walgreens asked if I wanted a flu shot. No! Call me a conspiracy nut but the Covid shot removed all my faith in big pharma and government regulators. I am under the impression that new vaccines will use the mRNA methodology and that concerns me. Since neither the government nor the vaccine manufacturers have taken on this concern openly and honestly I think it is wise to wait until they do. Something is still wrong with the mRNA and my best guess is the reason they cannot address it honestly is out of fear of civil and criminal consequences. So until this plays itself out I don't trust the new vaccines.

#3 OneGuy on 2026-09-24 10:49 (Reply)

OneGuy: If they did, or if you believed they did then wearing a mask would make you safe regardless of what the other patrons did or didn't do.

That doesn't follow unless masks are 100% effective. For instance, if masks are 50% effective at protection and 50% effective for transmission, then both people wearing masks will reduce the change of transmission to 25%. In terms of the community, if the rate of transmission (R0) is reduced, then the spread will slow or eventually die out (if R0 < 1).

Turns out that masks are not very effective against COVID in crowded bars. The air becomes saturated with aerosols and those people who are susceptible will be exposed (though the amount if viral load may be reduced). Masks are not effective outdoors with reasonable social distancing either, because the rate of transmission is already near zero as aerosols cannot accumulate. Masks are effective in many other environments people do find themselves in, such as well-ventilated offices and shops with social distancing. See Cheng et al., Face masks effectively limit the probability of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, Science 2021.

#3.1 Zachriel on 2026-09-24 11:03 (Reply)

Your math is correct but your facts are wrong.

A virus is to a face mask what a mosquito is to a chain link fence. If a mask can only stop 10% or 50% of viruses it is because the virus being stopped is "clumped" with something to make it to large to pass through. If someone with Covid was wearing a mask and 50% of the virus passed through his mask then 100% of those virus are not clumped and can easily pass through the next mask.

My coffee filter is 100% effective... at stopping the very large coffee particles and seems to be 0% effective at stopping the very small particles of coffee. Using your logic/math 2 or 3 or 4 coffee filters would result in pure water. Something we know from observation is untrue. "But the math" You say is correct! And yet it is wrong.

Put it another way: The Ebola virus is highly communicable. BUT it is just a virus and with enough masks we would be safe! It must be so because "the math"!! And yet those silly doctors and technicians in Africa won't go near that virus with just a mask they insist on a freaking space suit! Please, spend some of your valuable time with them to educate them on the math. LOL!

#3.1.1 OneGuy on 2026-09-24 13:19 (Reply)

One need only watch one of the many youtube videos of people vaping and blowing water vapor through an n95 mask.

It was one of the most truly stupid lies they told. Even Fauci at the beginning said they were possibly worse than no mask at all since it encouraged more face touching.

#3.1.1.1 Rusty on 2026-09-24 13:37 (Reply)

You are trying to use logic on him.
Do you not understand the foolishness of that attempt???

#3.1.1.2 Mark Matis on 2026-09-24 16:23 (Reply)

When satanic commies like Z make retarded assertions like "CO2 make hot - CO2 BAD!" or "Mask stop covid - must wear mask" it often conjures an image of Steve Martin as The Jerk.

He hears gunshots, sees cans exploding, and shouts "He hates cans!!!"

For Z, there is always just one or two simplistic variables, so he adds 1 +1 in his mind and smugly assumes he has the right answer. The idea that there may be dozens, or thousands of other just as important variables is just overwhelming to his narrow, limited mind.

Alas you are correct. For Z and other satanic freaks like him, the answer will always be "Stay away from those cans!"

#3.1.1.2.1 Rusty on 2026-09-24 17:48 (Reply)

If I can be permitted to insert knowledge and facts learned since 2021, here's what we actually know today.
1. due to continued mutations making today's strains less virulent and allowing for increased immunity acquired through vaccination and exposure, total morbidity due to COVID is dramatically lower than five years ago.
2. when covid is listed as a cause or contributing factor to death since at least 2024, it is almost universally found in association with comorbidities such as COPD, emphysema, lung cancer, or pulmonary silicosis, or had some other immunocompromising ailment.
3. over 85% of those with COVID listed as a main or contributing cause of death are over 65 and suffer from at least one of the above noted comorbidities.
4. the Science n95 study was fundamentally flawed, as it was based on a model which assumed that all those who wore such masks would wear them properly and consistently. Most people who wear the masks without the proper initial and refresher trainings wore them too loose, causing them to effectively breathe around rather than through the filter portion of the mask.
So, what does this all mean? If you're young and otherwise healthy, your risk of dying of COVID in the next year is far lower than the risk of driving in a motor vehicle. If you happen to fit into one of the higher-risk categories mentioned above, it may make sense for you to wear a mask after proper training. If you think you may have the symptoms of COVID, you should probably avoid crowded locations, or if you cannot, wear a mask.
There is no such thing as a risk-free life, and the ultimate death rate remains unchanged at one per person.

#3.1.2 Another guy named Dan on 2026-09-24 13:32 (Reply)

OneGuy: A virus is to a face mask what a mosquito is to a chain link fence.

But COVID viruses are not transmitted as viruses, but in droplets and aerosols.

OneGuy: If someone with Covid was wearing a mask and 50% of the virus passed through his mask then 100% of those virus are not clumped and can easily pass through the next mask.

You're still using binary thinking. There is a probability of an aerosol particle being caught by a mask. Even if it gets through the first barrier, there is still a probability it will be caught by a second mask. That's why masks are usually made of more than one layer of material, e.g. an N95 is typically made of multiples layers of polypropylene. Each layer decreases the probability that a particle will get through. Some will get through anyway. But it takes a minimal viral load to cause infection.

#3.1.3 Zachriel on 2026-09-24 14:11 (Reply)

Z: "You're still using binary thinking. There is a probability of an aerosol particle being caught by a mask."

Z exhibits binary thinking (An aerosol particle either gets caught, or it doesn't) even as he levels the accusation of binary thinking.

The truth is, just like the climate, infectious disease transmission has way too many variables to be accurately modeled to make point forecasts, therefore any oversimplified model like the one you've presented here is guaranteed to be wrong..

An important thing to remember about satanic commie freaks - they always accuse you of what they, themselves are doing.

#3.1.3.1 Rusty on 2026-09-24 15:41 (Reply)

Another guy named Dan: 1,2,3

True. True. True.

Another guy named Dan: 4

There has been discussion, but subsequent studies have shown that masks can reduce transmission. The Cheng study has not been shown to be fundamentally in error or retracted.

Another guy named Dan: your risk of dying of COVID in the next year is far lower than the risk of driving in a motor vehicle.

True.

Another guy named Dan: If you happen to fit into one of the higher-risk categories mentioned above, it may make sense for you to wear a mask after proper training. If you think you may have the symptoms of COVID, you should probably avoid crowded locations, or if you cannot, wear a mask.

All sensible suggestions.

Another guy named Dan: There is no such thing as a risk-free life, and the ultimate death rate remains unchanged at one per person.

Sure, the plague is bad, but you're gonna die sooner or later.

#3.1.4 Zachriel on 2026-09-24 14:23 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Schrödinger’s blunder created the quantum measurement problem... Such claims are belied by “pilot-wave theory,” first developed by French physicist Louis de Broglie

Bohmian mechanics is one proposed solution to the measurement problem, but it is not universally accepted. It reproduces quantum predictions, but at the cost of explicit nonlocality and multiplying entities beyond those required by standard quantum mechanics. Whether that trade-off is worthwhile remains a matter of interpretation rather than settled physics. You can apply Occam's Razor at your pleasure.

As for Schrödinger's cat, modern work on decoherence suggests that Schrödinger's cat was never really the right scale at which to look at the problem. Long before an entire cat could become a coherent quantum object, interactions with its environment would already have washed out the relevant quantum effects.

#4 Zachriel on 2026-09-24 10:53 (Reply)

Military models Canadian response to hypothetical American invasion

I believe this is from January so some of this is a bit dated.

Does anyone else think Canada is getting just a bit paranoid?

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-military-models-canadian-response-to-hypothetical-american-invasion/#msdynmkt_trackingcontext=76270f56-b6ec-4866-b01c-69f434080200

#5 feeblemind on 2026-09-24 11:36 (Reply)

Trump threatened to annex Canada, referring to it as the 51st state. Just the other day, at the United Nations, Trump said, "To the victor go the spoils." Then he portrayed himself as the peace president while warning he might "annihilate" Iran.

"What, me worry?" — Alfred E. Newman

#5.1 Zachriel on 2026-09-24 11:52 (Reply)

Remember when Z ridiculed Obama when he accepted a Nobel Peace prize for doing nothing, and then he bombed the shit out of 7 different countries, slaughtering civilians and US citizens with impunity?

No, I don't recall that either.

#5.1.1 Rusty on 2026-09-24 13:18 (Reply)

In the largest autopsy study of deaths from Covid has determined that 74% of those deaths were caused by the vaccine. This is from testimony before congress from a Medical Doctor/scientist that was involved in that study. Covid was not dramatically worse than any of the yearly flues and most people caught Covid and many caught covid more than once even those who were fully vaccinated. We did not need the masks, we needed our government to do their job and make sure that the vaccine was safe.

#6 OneGuy on 2026-09-25 12:18 (Reply)

OneGuy: In the largest autopsy study of deaths from Covid has determined that 74% of those deaths were caused by the vaccine.

The paper, Hulscher 2024, was withdrawn.

OneGuy: Covid was not dramatically worse than any of the yearly flues

That is clearly not the case. Hundreds of thousands died just in the US before the vaccine even became available.

#6.1 Zachriel on 2026-09-25 15:10 (Reply)

It was censored.

Most of the people who died from Covid died because the government implemented flawed procedures. If they were to implement those same protocols for the yearly flu hundreds of thousands would die from the flu.

In retrospect I don't think the extra deaths caused by political interference were intentional. It was merely stupidity on a massive scale. I do believe that the government, Fauci and others knew better but the fix was in to make Covid bigger than it would have been so the election steal could also be bigger.

As bad/immoral as all those unnecessary deaths were IMHO the bigger issue was the resultant and continued loss of faith in the government institutions that were supposedly designed to protect us. THAT and the destruction of health care workers careers when they refused to be bullied into compliance.

#7 OneGuy on 2026-09-25 15:47 (Reply)

OneGuy: Most of the people who died from Covid died because the government implemented flawed procedures.

People died because they couldn't breathe because the virus destroyed their lungs (and other organs), which actual autopsies repeatedly confirmed. This had nothing to do with treatment.

The so-called study used cherry-picked data and doesn't even show what you think it does. Have you read it? They didn't do autopsies. Or do you just agree with it because it confirms your biases?

#7.1 Zachriel on 2026-09-25 16:02 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Thursday, September 24. 2026

Thursday morning links