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.
Partly because of our temperamental skepticism, and partly from knowing the history of science (consisting of one discarded theory after another), we are interested in thinking about the idea (or is it a religion) of Scientism.
This is a challenging essay, The Folly of Scientism, but worth two or three readings. It begins:
When I decided on a scientific career, one of the things that appealed to me about science was the modesty of its practitioners. The typical scientist seemed to be a person who knew one small corner of the natural world and knew it very well, better than most other human beings living and better even than most who had ever lived. But outside of their circumscribed areas of expertise, scientists would hesitate to express an authoritative opinion. This attitude was attractive precisely because it stood in sharp contrast to the arrogance of the philosophers of the positivist tradition, who claimed for science and its practitioners a broad authority with which many practicing scientists themselves were uncomfortable...
One more quote:
Is scientism defensible? Is it really true that natural science provides a satisfying and reasonably complete account of everything we see, experience, and seek to understand — of every phenomenon in the universe? And is it true that science is more capable, even singularly capable, of answering the questions that once were addressed by philosophy? This subject is too large to tackle all at once. But by looking briefly at the modern understandings of science and philosophy on which scientism rests, and examining a few case studies of the attempt to supplant philosophy entirely with science, we might get a sense of how the reach of scientism exceeds its grasp.
When it comes to a question of "How important is this, really?" Net Neutrality usually gets pushed to the side.
Bigger than ISIS? Maybe or maybe not, but not as hair-raising. Bigger than Hillary using her personal email? Absolutely, but not as top-of-mind or intriguing. Bigger than Immigration Reform? Probably not, but interestingly the topics which are involved would play a role in hopefully reducing the influx of illegals by opening up markets more.
We are smarter than you, and we know what's best for you. Don't worry that you never voted for us, or that we are completely unaccountable. It's in your best interest.
Ultimately, it's a kind of boring topic. Which is why I like it, because it involves politics, law and economics. Economics being 'the dismal science', Net Neutrality has often been misconstrued and misunderstood in the media because it doesn't attract much thought beyond a populist angle. After all, most reporters and bloviators who comment on the topic work for companies that will benefit from Net Neutrality. Of course, they were never harmed without it, but hey, these populists are busy looking out for your best interests. Because, of course, nobody else will and you're simply not smart enough to know better. I'll be clear, I work for a company that supports Net Neutrality and conceivably benefits from it. Which is one reason the small level of anonymity which blogging provides is beneficial when writing pieces like this.
The passage, last week, by the FCC of a policy which treats broadband providers as "common carriers" under Title II of the Telecommunications Act basically means they are now utilities. Not completely, but close enough to make that claim without much disagreement. But what sparked this vote, why is it needed (or why do populists feel it is needed), and what does it potentially do?
We've had a few good times in Mexico, visiting ruins as ancient as Egypt's and fishing in Cabo. And great food, especially seafood, but I think we have checked it off our bucket list for now. Is Mexico (outside of the bad neighborhoods of Mexico City and the border towns) safe for travelers? Completely safe, and the people are wonderful, friendly, warm, full of life and good cheer. The opposite of Yankees.
Today, a thanks to the excellent (English-speaking) doctors in Cabo San Lucas who saved my father-in-law's life this week from an unfortunate cardiac event. The in-laws have liked to escape the northeast to Cabo for a couple of months each winter for many years, with all of their retired pals and new friends. Puerto Vallarta right across the Gulf is good, too, and more antique. Many Americans have houses there.
Also, thanks to the cousins from Boston who had been luckily visiting them with kids at the time, and managed everything with us via phone and email.
He is stable and on a chartered medical plane at this moment up to the amazing Sulpizio Cardiovascular Center at UC San Diego Medical Center, and Mrs. BD just hopped a plane from a snowy NY to beautiful SD to keep my mother-in-law company. I am sure the tough old guy will be fine and back up here to fight the snow fairly soon.
Thank God for family. We'd all be lost in this world without them. Who else do we turn to first?
Pic is a crowded Pacific beach in Cabofrom one of our beach hikes
Are there no normal, balanced, wholesome, smart white males there who play sports, dig cute chicks, and like beer? They can be assigned the oppressor job.
The single most important price in all of capitalism is the money market interest rate. That is the price of poker in the Wall Street casino; it is the cost of production for the carry traders and gamblers who provide the marginal “bid” for risk assets.
By supplanting free market price discovery with an artificially pegged price of zero, the Fed is unleashing the furies of greed and reckless speculation in the financial system once again. So it has truly become a serial bubble machine headed by a babbler who apparently believes in make pretend.
The 2008 worldwide financial crisis was produced due to excessively easy monetary policy, which caused the largest debt driven mal-investment in housing, automobiles, and Chinese produced crap in world history. It was done purposely by a uber-wealthy ruling class who call the shots, rig the game, reap the benefits, and deny responsibility when their machinations create havoc and suffering across the globe for the masses.
The consequences of this debt bacchanalia should have been the orderly liquidation of the Wall Street entities that created the crisis, the writing off of trillions in bad debt, corporate and personal bankruptcies of businesses and people who borrowed recklessly, a sharp steep economic decline to cleanse the excesses, and politicians who immediately began the process of reducing budgets and addressing long term unfunded unpayable liability promises. Instead, the psychotic oligarchs did not want to lose any of their power, wealth or control over the proletariat. They have done the exact opposite of what needed to be done. You must deleverage to solve a crisis caused by excessive debt. The oligarchs have succeeded in further raping and pillaging the working class, but have only delayed the final reckoning and guaranteed a debt apocalypse when their futile schemes fail again. And fail they will.
Arrogant condescending central bankers, narcissistic Wall Street psychopaths, crooked bought off politicians, and narrow-minded government apparatchiks across the developed world have colluded to add $57 trillion of additional debt to the existing Himalayan Mountain of unpayable debt we started with in 2008. We’ve entered the NIRP phase of the currency debasement race for the bottom.
Man, do I agree with that. When do government fixes ever work?
Unfortunately, the Democrats no longer understand the middle class. They no longer hang out with the middle class, and an increasing number of them no longer come from it. Like Ms. Clinton, they belong to the media-lawyer-academic-coastal class. They are overly worried about things like the under-representation of women in $150,000 Silicon Valley tech jobs. They do not seem to be aware that while millions of middle-class men scrounge for work, millions of middle-class women are newly prospering in the booming fields of health care and government administration. Across vast stretches of the U.S. middle-class economy, it’s already a woman’s world. Ms. Clinton’s rhetoric about women’s disadvantage is simply obsolete.
We may be skeptical most of the time about most things, but we do pray for a return to the climate of the 1300s when Greenland was green and there were vineyards all over England
One of the unspoken political goals of Dodd-Frank was to give the government more influence over credit allocation, and this looks to us like an example. Politicized lending in time always leads to trouble. We thought that lesson had been learned in the housing-mortgage crisis.
What lesson, though, was learned by the people who matter? The sub-prime mortgage crisis worked out great for the government. Create a problem, then pretend to solve it by grabbing more power: what’s not to like? Liberals will be perfectly happy to do it all over again.
Obama blamed the Paris terror attacks on a failure to integrate. But Islamic terrorism is an attempt to integrate Europe into Islam. The bombs and bullets, like the Sharia patrols and the No-Go Zones, are statements by Muslims that they will not be integrated into Europe. Europe must integrate with them.
Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute tells a story about Julian Simon, the late and great economist.He was at some environmental forum, and he said, “How many people here believe that the earth is increasingly polluted and that our natural resources are being exhausted?” Naturally, every hand shot up. He said, “Is there any evidence that could dissuade you?” Nothing. Again: “Is there any evidence I could give you — anything at all — that would lead you to reconsider these assumptions?” Not a stir. Simon then said, “Well, excuse me, I’m not dressed for church.”
Here. Lawyers will get rich on this for many years, and Americans can rest comfortably knowing that our internet is in good hands, same as in Russia and China.
The problem with this, of course, is that most respectable medical research turns out to be wrong too. I recently read that coronary bypass has no value compared with the alternatives, but they are done constantly. I also read that prostate cancer surgery may be pointless after age 65 or 70, yet they are performed constantly.
...while coming up with eye-catching theories is relatively easy, getting reality to bear them out is another matter. The great majority collapse under the weight of contradictory data when studied rigorously. Imagine, though, that five different research teams test an interesting theory that’s making the rounds, and four of the groups correctly prove the idea false, while the one less cautious group incorrectly “proves” it true through some combination of error, fluke, and clever selection of data. Guess whose findings your doctor ends up reading about in the journal, and you end up hearing about on the evening news?
When politics gets involved, it all gets worse. If you need a doctor, get one with grey hair (who has seen it all) and a male (not bound by all the idiot rules).
Not long after it was announced that 2014 was the hottest year on record, evidence has come to light of massive tampering of temperature data to make it appear that the earth is warming.
Paul Homewood discovered the tampering when he examined NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies temperature recordings. You may read about his findings here and here. He began by looking at the recordings from rural stations in South America. What he found was staggering. The originally recorded data had been changed dramatically. Not just altered slightly but shifted dramatically.
The originally recorded data clearly showed a relatively steady cooling from 1950 to now. Actual temperature readings ranged from a drop of 1/2° Celsius to a full one degree. However the doctored data flipped the original graph almost completely around. The new graph, the published data, showed almost a full 2°C warming. It’s outrageous! And this is the data that “climate change” experts base their bogus assertions on. And because they’re “men of science” no one is allowed to question. Oh, and it’s not just on graph or one temperature station.
There can be no reasonable explanation for this. These “men of science” have been lying to us for decades, and this deception is finally, albeit overdue, coming to light. They are being shown for who they truly are – liars and cheats.
Excuse me, Mr. Kerry, but when the earth was formed it was not like today. Fact is, without amazing human ingenuity, little of earth would be inhabitable by humans today.
“I don’t think we should jump every time the freaks with the ACE bandages around their faces put out videos,” Ingraham told the Fox hosts on Tuesday, adding that the U.S. should not be reacting “emotionally” to threats from ISIS, Al-Shabab or other terrorist groups.
Annie Hall was on the other night. As a young teen, and to some degree even today, I remain a devoted Woody Allen fan. His personal issues, which are many, aside, he made some great films. I had forgotten this exchange, as the Alvy seeks to convince Annie to return to New York from Los Angeles:
Alvy: So what - you-you're not gonna come back to New York?
Annie: What's so great about New York? I mean, it's a dying city. You read Death in Venice.
Alvy: Hey, you didn't read Death in Venice till I bought it for ya.
Annie: That's right, that's right. You only gave me books with the word 'death' in the titles.
Alvy: That's right, 'cause it's an important issue.
Annie: Alvy, you're incapable of enjoying life, you know that? I mean you're like New York City. You're just this person. You're like this island unto yourself.
Alvy: I can't enjoy anything unless everybody is. If one guy is starving someplace, that puts a crimp in my evening.
There are no real class divisions in America except one: the college-educated versus the non-college educated. It helps to think of this in terms borrowed from the world of a Jane Austen novel: graduating from college is what makes you a “gentleman.” (A degree from an Ivy League school makes you part of the aristocracy.) It qualifies you to marry the right people and hold the right kind of positions. It makes you respectable. And even if you don’t achieve much in the world of work and business, even if you’re still working as a barista ten years later, you still retain that special status. It’s a modern form of “genteel poverty,” which is considered superior to the regular kind of poverty.
If you don’t have a college degree, by contrast, you are looked down upon as a vulgar commoner who is presumptuously attempting to rise above his station. Which is pretty much what they’re saying about Scott Walker.
Mexico! More historic than Europe, and mostly safer than Finland. My in-laws are there now, and each winter. Us? Been there, done that.Mayan ruins, beaches, amazing seafood, delightful people.
Which
is the most improved vacation opportunity for American dollars? - See
more at:
http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2015/02/which-is-the-most-improved-vacation-opportunity.html#sthash.jupdWdSy.dpuf
He is talking about the moonbat churches. They are not very representative, and I do not think many people attend them. Why would they? Those are not the churches I know.
Marie Harf and the State Dept. are right: the solution to Violent Extremism does belong in your Community ... as long as your Community is Barksdale AFB in Shreveport, LA ... Home of the USAF Global Strike Command.
... all our money is, in effect, pocket money, doled out by the
government-parent to the citizen-child. We are the wards, not the
masters, of the state.
Deputy State Department spokesman Marie Harf gives the catastrophic foreign policy of the Obama administration a lighter than air, Valley Girl kind of feel. She is a walking self-parody. As such, she presents a novel use of expressive form.
The Islamic State is no mere collection of psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs, among them that it is a key agent of the coming apocalypse. Here’s what that means for its strategy—and for how to stop it.
- Please, if you must walk, or walk your dogs, in the street in the nightime dark or the morning dark because the sidewalks are snowdrifts, wear something light-colored instead of black. Sheesh. I swerve over the icy roads to try to avoid hitting you.
- I love the wintry cold. Problem is dressing. You go from outside frigid to frigid-then-warm auto, then to cold again, then to heated building. There is no way to dress for the changes.
- Feeding birds. Either do it daily, or not at all. They become dependent on your food to survive, like people on welfare. If you miss a day, they will die unless neighbors are feeding them. If you don't feed them at all, they will figure it out on their own. Or go south.
I was wondering whether Gore is now working on a second documentary, “An even more inconvenient Truth – I was wrong”. But of course he is not doing this. Ideas that have become an ideology do not admit falsification. Global warming has become an ideology, mostly but not exclusively concentrated in the progressive portion of the political spectrum. Its three central propositions have become axiomatic among progressives: that significant global warming is in fact occurring (“the science is in”); that its consequences will be dire; and that its major cause is industrial pollution (especially by evil American capitalism—never mind the fog of pollution hanging over the cities of India and China). Deeply committed progressives are as eager to sign petitions to stop this or that “carbon footprint” as petitions to pull American troops out of Afghanistan or to boycott Israeli products. The only (rather ambiguous) concession to the notion that, just maybe, all the science is not in, has been a shift in language from “global warming” to “climate change”. Critics of the ideology are pelted with pejorative labels—political reactionaries, uneducated ignoramuses (comparable to creatonists or flat-earth theorists), or agents of the petroleum industry.
I am not a climate scientist. But I can claim to be a specialist in ideologues who claim to be privileged epistemologically and thus entitled to disdain anyone who dares to reject their alleged truth...
In the piously denied but ongoing clash of cultures, Islam has multiple advantages. Most are not self-made: the PC-defined victim contributes them. Whatever presents itself as a “religion” benefits from a tolerance that is unwarranted by the facts. Curtailing religious liberty is harder than it is to limit the freedom of speech. In the case of secular opinions, free expression is granted but not unlimited. Example: the exploitation of freedoms to abolish democracy. The softness against extreme leftists shows, the assertion against all subversives determined to abolish democracy suffers from the one-sidedly applied Nazi precedent.
All they want is more love and understanding? Well, so do I...and I am not getting any from them and, on a bad day, I don't even get enough tolerance from my girlfriend.
It's all interesting. However, it's all a repeat of ancient history. Except for the UK, most of the anglosphere has little to do with all of this. Who needs to watch out? Europe, the Saudis, Egypt, Turkey, Tunisia. The US can get out of the way and let them all work it out. They have all done this before. Gates of Vienna, Poitiers, Lopanto, and all that.That's why I dislike the FOX warmongers and fearmongers, Yellow Journalism. Chill, and let the locals deal with their issues as they have always done.It's just a blip in a long history of cultural warfare. Let's include Thermopylae.
“I thought the Crown Heights riots were a pogrom because you’re going out trying to kill Jews,” Giuliani said. “Why is this man incapable of saying that? You’ve got to be able to criticize Islam for the parts of Islam that are wrong. You criticize Christianity for the part of Christianity that is wrong. I’m not sure how wrong the Crusades are. The Crusades were kind of an equal battle between two groups of barbarians. The Muslims and the crusading barbarians. What the hell? What’s wrong with this man that he can’t stand up and say there’s a part of Islam that’s sick?”
It's not so much about bubble-wrapping our precious snowflake kids as it is about municipal lawsuits. "Sled at your own risk" does not insulate. Same goes for skating on ponds, etc. Something is deeply wrong with the American tort system, but it's about politics. The wealthy tort bar fills the Democrat cash register. There will never be tort reform, and all outdoor fun will be illegal except on your own property.
It's a rare kid in the northeast who has not broken or sprained something sledding or skiing, not to mention concussions, etc.
The issues with ski areas are complex, and ambulance-chasers abound. Very few things in life have zero risk and even waivers are limited. In the US, almost anybody can sue somebody for anything and get a settlement just to go away. Generally, a settlement is cheaper than defending a case.
There Is A 
Climatic Jihad? 
Pic: Gwynnie's hawk du jour, trying to keep warm 
American ballet: 
Oliver Sacks,
Things Episcopalians say (1): “Not literally.” Seriously? 
It’s official:
A book of interest: 
Winter's Tale: 
It's chilly in olde Newe Englande. I like to say "invigorating." Five below zero F here, with blustery wind. Almost like a normal day in Minneapolis. 
Indeed we do because we refuse to