Archive for Mind Games

Brady v NFL

John Dowd asks: Was Tom Brady ambushed? The issue is about clarity in rules and procedure that are especially important in sports.

Football, baseball, soccer and virtually every sport on the planet have one thing in common: They all have rules that are supposed to protect the integrity of the game. When rules get broken, everyone loses.

But when sports authorities don’t enforce their own rules with transparency and fairness, the integrity of the game is equally compromised. What’s happening today with the NFL undermines the concepts of integrity and fairness in the application of the rules and threatens to damage football’s credibility for years to come.

The NFL’s fundamental failure to conduct an expeditious, fair, honest and consistent approach to rules enforcement undermines the entire game. The league needs to reconsider its suspension of Tom Brady, and use this unfortunate episode as an opportunity to correct a terrible injustice to one the greatest quarterbacks in NFL history.

This is particularly interesting in that the NFL is trying to maintain that its actions were all about the integrity of the game. They seem oblivious to the idea that the concept of integrity also applies to them.

Leave a Comment

Critical Race Theory

A comment on Dennis Prager, “The Left Only Sees White Evil.”

The devil works in obvious ways sometimes. Hating other individuals simply because of the color of their skin–even if you think that brings them “power” or “privilege”–is racism. But at least two generations of Americans have been taught the opposite, thanks to the far left dominance of the academy. Prager is sadly correct when he ascribes growing black-on-white racial hate crimes to the far left’s “victimhood” narrative, as well as his conclusion that more bloodshed is likely to come. — Instapundit

Only whites can be racist is a self contradictory concept upon which to base a rationalization for an ideology.

Leave a Comment

Implications: the war on weapons

It was just a matter of hours before prominent Democrats politicized a tragic on air shooting and that a “fired former journalist known on camera as “Bryce Williams” who murdered two of his former collegues on air with a Glock 19 9mm pistol this morning was a black, gay, racist fan of serial killers” (Bob Owens). The White House spokesman denied reality by claiming that gun violence was an emerging problem. Another story was about the fact that many gun related crimes were committed with stolen weapons. There are a few things about that as well. Gun Free Zone” Laws Are Arming Criminals explains the problem.

We’ve noticed a trend in recent months of law enforcement officers having their personal vehicles and professional vehicles alike targeted by gun and tactical gear thieves … Law enforcement agencies need to radically revisit the concept of leaving guns in their unattended vehicles. They are not alone, as their civilian counterparts are discovering that they have much the same issue

The vehicle thefts are not inevitable, but are the direct result of concealed carriers being forced to leave their personal protection firearms in their vehicles in order to attend events in certain public or private spaces where guns have been banned.

Criminals then wander through the parking lots outside these locations—at malls, outside stadiums, in parking garages, at businesses, and on city streets—and look for vehicles that match a likely target profile.

That means, despite a denial of the reality of the correlation between allowing citizens to arm themselves and crime, there is also the reduce to the absurd in the belief that more guns mean more gun related crimes and that many efforts to eliminate guns have implications and side effects. Gun free zones have been known a ‘free target zones’ and now it is becoming evident that they can be resources for the acquisition of firearms by theft.

As the panelists on Fox Five said of Juan Williams on one of these arguments: “He’s carrying more water than an Alhambra truck” in trying to defend against reality. Juan is not alone.

Leave a Comment

Marx and the evolution into the modern political conundrum

Scott S. Powell on The Quiet Revolution: How the New Left Took Over the Democratic Party:

In a free society, extreme and derivative ideologies from the destructive legacy of Marx, Lenin, and the Frankfurt School can find some appeal to the alienated and disaffected. A constitutional republic like the United States should have sufficient strength to withstand most contradictions and absurdities held by a relatively small minority.

The problem today is threefold: the Left’s wholesale domination of much of the knowledge industry, a growing uninformed and disengaged electorate, and a failing two-party system. The normal process of checks and balances, which is made possible when compromise can be accomplished between the parties, simply no longer works. With the long march through the institutions having resulted in one of those parties no longer sharing much in the way of common ground — in terms of a philosophical heritage and values of liberty, private property, and limited government — compromise has become nearly impossible. The radicalization of the Democratic Party has so affected Congress and the current president as to render bipartisan solutions and reconciliation all but impossible.

In the end, what is important for Americans to realize is that the experiment with a left-wing president, like Barack Obama, is less an aberration than the logical outcome of the transformation of both the Democratic Party and the American culture.

The big question is whether the nation can survive and prosper if the culture remains fractured with a majority adrift from the heritage, morality and values of liberty and personal responsibility that are at the heart of the Declaration and the Constitution.

There is worry … and reason for that worry. Lloyd Marcus describes on the efforts to leverage the plaints of the “alienated and disaffected” as Generations of Stolen Black Dreams.

In response to my article, “Please Tell Black Lives Matter to Shut Up and Go Away,” a sincere black activist emailed asking me with what would I replace it? I asked him to explain. The bottom line of his lengthy passionate reply is “Negroes” are still not free in America. He says America has reneged on its promise of liberty and justice for all.

So what is Obama’s solution to fixing these problems plaguing blacks? He lets drug dealers who prey on urban youths out of jail, claiming their crime is non-violent. He has his DOJ bully police across America to back off urban thugs. Obama minion Baltimore mayor said, “Let them loot. It’s only property.” Violent crime is up big-time in Chicago, New York and Baltimore.

Despite claims otherwise, America has not failed its poor. We have welfare and entitlement programs out the ying-yang; a huge chunk of America’s national debt.

Then there is the claim that America “systematically” and “institutionally” hinders opportunities for blacks. Hogwash! A black college professor friend heads a program offering blacks free college tuition. He has trouble finding applicants. This is a guy who worked his way through college and grad school. He was stunned when students thought having to pay their cell phone bill was a legitimate excuse for not purchasing the book and materials for his course.

Like formerly fat people who continue to see an obese person in the mirror, Democrats have ingrained in blacks that they are victims of an “eternally” racist America; despite glaring evidence proving otherwise.

Sadly, there are a large number of black Americans whose brains are entombed in a victim mindset; impenetrable by the truth. A prime example is the disgusting comments made by a black woman during a TV interview, expressing her support of a black youth. “He didn’t do no wrong. He just shot a cop.” This hateful woman is the equivalent of the KKK justifying killing blacks.

To my sincere black activist friend, I say we replace “Black Lives Matter” with “Tough Love.” Tell blacks to stop blaming whitey, seeking more doomed-to-fail government programs and voting for Democrats. Generations of black dreams have been stolen due to Democrats addicting blacks to government dependency

Today, liberals excuse irresponsible behavior, defending it with fancy intellectual sounding language. My late mom would simply say, “Stop acting stupid.”

Stop acting stupid black America. Stop acting stupid.

Yes, some are worried. But what to do when faced with such intransigence in denying reality? 

Leave a Comment

The climate front

The debate has turned to argument and then gone sour. Climate Statism: Science, Poverty, Free Speech at Issue by Paul Driessen offers a description and a call to action.

It appears the Climate Crisis Industry has too much invested in climate catastrophes: prestige, political power, billions of dollars in research and renewable energy grants, and the desire to control energy use, livelihoods, living standards and entire economies.

Instead of reasoned debate, they continue to predict manmade climate chaos, and engage in increasingly vicious and vitriolic attacks on replicable evidence-based science; on the scientific method that brought centuries of profound planetary and human progress; and on any scientists, scholars or ethicists who raise inconvenient questions or threaten alarmist views, policies and funding.

They are also waging war on capitalism … on hydrocarbon energy … on poor, minority, blue-collar and working class families – and on the most powerless, destitute, deprived, diseased families on Earth.

Equally unsettling, in league with Liberal-Progressive-Leftist politicians, activists and media, climate alarmists are also attacking the very idea of free speech and open, robust debate.

Tactics used to advance the Climate Crisis agenda are too numerous to recount here, but many are shameful, intolerable, dishonest and even lethal.

It is the rational and logical vs the ideological and religious, intellectual integrity vs deceit and dishonesty. The stakes are very high.

Leave a Comment

What happened to history?

“The problem, however, is that reasonable men may be rarer than ever these days, and the substance of history has been all too often distorted by an elite class which is driven by a pursuit of political agendas.” — Lincoln vs. Lee: How History is Distorted to Preserve Legends By William Sullivan

The radical efforts to erase some symbols of the civil war are based on an ignorance of history. A failure to learn from history is bad enough. Distorting history to suit one’s preferences takes it to another level of deceit and dishonesty.

Leave a Comment

Is the smoke clearing?

Perhaps the behavior is being noticed in the arguments about important political issues. For example. Kurt Schlichter says Gun Rights Advocates Have A Devastating New Argument Against Gun Control. Here It Is.

The fact is that there is no point in arguing with liberal gun-control advocates because their argument is never in good faith. They slander gun owners as murderers. They lie about their ultimate aim, which is to ban and confiscate all privately owned weapons. And they adopt a pose of reasonability, yet their position is not susceptible to change because of evidence, facts or law. None of those matter – they already have their conclusion. This has to do with power – their power.

You can’t argue with someone who is lying about his position or whose position is not based upon reason. You can talk all day about how crime has diminished where concealed carry is allowed, while it flourishes in Democrat blue cities where gun control is tightest. You can point to statistics showing that law-abiding citizens who carry legally are exponentially less likely to commit gun crimes than other people. You can cite examples of armed citizens protecting themselves and their communities with guns. You can offer government statistics showing how the typical American is at many times greater risk of death from an automobile crash, a fall, or poisoning than from murder by gun.

But none of that matters, because this debate is not about facts. It’s about power. The liberal anti-gun narrative is not aimed at creating the best public policy but at disarming citizens the liberal elite looks down upon – and for whom weapons represent their last-ditch ability to respond to liberal overreach.

In light of this sort of opposition, there is very little one can do as far as any debate goes. That means the argument proceeds to the next level and that is where the situation gets worrisome.-

Leave a Comment

Careless language

Bruce Thornton gets into the The Truth About Western “Colonialism” amd “How the misuse of a term legitimizes the jihadist myth of Western guilt.” It’s about displacing blame as a propaganda tool.

This leftist interpretation of words like colonialism and imperialism transforms them into ideologically loaded terms that ultimately distort the tragic truths of history. They imply that Europe’s explorations and conquests constituted a new order of evil. In reality, the movements of peoples in search of resources, as well as the destruction of those already in possession of them, is the perennial dynamic of history.

Whether it was the Romans in Gaul, the Arabs throughout the Mediterranean and Southern Asia, the Huns in Eastern Europe, the Mongols in China, the Turks in the Middle East and the Balkans, the Bantu in southern Africa, the Khmer in East Asia, the Aztecs in Mexico, the Iroquois in the Northeast, or the Sioux throughout the Great Plains, human history has been stained by man’s continual use of brutal violence to acquire land and resources and destroy or replace those possessing them. Scholars may find subtle nuances of evil in the European version of this ubiquitous aggression, but for the victims such fine discriminations are irrelevant.

Yet this ideologically loaded and historically challenged use of words like “colonial” and “colonialist” remains rife in analyses of the century-long disorder in the Middle East. Both Islamists and Arab nationalists, with sympathy from the Western left, have blamed the European “colonialists” for the lack of development, political thuggery, and endemic violence whose roots lie mainly in tribal culture, illiberal shari’a law, and sectarian conflicts.

Colonialism and Imperialism were efforts to create a global community out of tribal cultures. In some places, the tribal ethos struggles to exist and that can create much strife. The mid-east provides the current example.

Leave a Comment

GMO and FUD

William Saletan calls it an Unhealthy Fixation, that is “The war against genetically modified organisms is full of fearmongering, errors, and fraud. Labeling them will not make you safer.”

I’ve spent much of the past year digging into the evidence. Here’s what I’ve learned. First, it’s true that the issue is complicated. But the deeper you dig, the more fraud you find in the case against GMOs. It’s full of errors, fallacies, misconceptions, misrepresentations, and lies. The people who tell you that Monsanto is hiding the truth are themselves hiding evidence that their own allegations about GMOs are false. They’re counting on you to feel overwhelmed by the science and to accept, as a gut presumption, their message of distrust.

Some people, to this day, believe GE papayas are dangerous. They want more studies. They’ll always want more studies. They call themselves skeptics. But when you cling to an unsubstantiated belief, even after two decades of research and experience, that’s not skepticism. It’s dogma.

That’s the fundamental flaw in the anti-GMO movement. It only pretends to inform you. When you push past its dogmas and examine the evidence, you realize that the movement’s fixation on genetic engineering has been an enormous mistake. The principles it claims to stand for—environmental protection, public health, community agriculture—are better served by considering the facts of each case than by treating GMOs, categorically, as a proxy for all that’s wrong with the world. That’s the truth, in all its messy complexity. Too bad it won’t fit on a label.

One thing we’ve learned is that fear of GMOs is unfalsifiable. … Another thing we’ve learned is that it makes no sense to avoid GMOs based on standards that nobody applies to non-GMO food. … A third lesson is that GMO segregation, in the form of labels or GMO-free restaurants, is misguided. … The people who push GMO labels and GMO-free shopping aren’t informing you or protecting you. They’re using you.

That’s what genetic engineering can do for health and for our planet. The reason it hasn’t is that we’ve been stuck in a stupid, wasteful fight over GMOs. On one side is an army of quacks and pseudo-environmentalists waging a leftist war on science. On the other side are corporate cowards who would rather stick to profitable weed-killing than invest in products that might offend a suspicious public. The only way to end this fight is to educate ourselves and make it clear to everyone—European governments, trend-setting grocers, fad-hopping restaurant chains, research universities, and biotechnology investors—that we’re ready, as voters and consumers, to embrace nutritious, environmentally friendly food, no matter where it got its genes. We want our GMOs. Now, show us what you can do.

The behavior is the same as with climate change alarmists. The results with both false ideologies are to burden the less fortunate. In one case with an increased cost of food and in the other with an increased cost of energy. The advocates think they are doing “God’s work” but don’t seem to consider the implications of what they advocate nor to realize the depths to which they have sunk trying to rationalize and excuse their ideologies.

Leave a Comment

How it’s done: a towfer

Steve Tetreault reports that the New national monument blocks rail route to Yucca.

Besides preserving desert valleys and buffering a massive piece of modern sculpture, a new federal conservation area in rural Nevada carries another impact: It blocks a priority shipping route to Yucca Mountain.

So, first, is the ‘national monument’ route which doesn’t require any Congressional or public approval to implement then you block off a chunk of land to assert power and control for PC purposes and then choose that land so as to obstruct another problem.

Rather than turn Yucca Mountain into a nuclear reprocessing facility and energy resource, the effort is to kill it to cause constipation in the entire nuclear energy sector. That, in turn, makes the non-polluting energy source more expensive and that then helps the PC energy sources become more competitive as well as eliminating a vital resource for those most in need. 

Leave a Comment

Character assasination

After the mob has moved on, we learn Nobel scientist Tim Hunt isn’t a sexist monster says Mary Katherine Ham.

Sir Tim Hunt, a scientist rather renowned for his skills, as his title suggests, in the United Kingdom before he spoke to a room full of scientists in Seoul, South Korea at the World Conference of Science Journalists in June. During a short speech or toast, Hunt made comments about women in science that perfectly fit into the left-leaning cultural critique of the scientific community as plagued by institutional sexism fueling underrepresentation of women.

A leaked report from an EU official’s investigation into the incident suggests there was much more to his comments and they bear out Hunt’s version of events and that he prefaced them by self-deprecatingly calling himself a “chauvinist monster” and rounded them out with a commendation of women scientists

The outrage industry made a stand, claimed a reputation, and moved on. End of Discussion. Someone should write a book about it.

The problem with such a smear is the same as the problem with climate change and many other issues: people accept the charges with no questions and do not consider the implications, sources, or evidence. Then they become attached to their alternate reality in such a way they must defend it at any cost. The result is tragic on all fronts.

Leave a Comment

Government burning man

Ed Morrissey notes an example of government wielding its power in an extortion attempt to provide for the luxury of its bureaucrats. BLM: Say, maybe our demand that Burning Man supply us with on-demand ice cream was a little much.

For almost thirty years organizers have staged the Burning Man festival, starting off on the beaches of San Francisco and then out to the desert in northern Nevada. It’s akin to the Woodstock festival, focusing on both art and music where “radical self expression” meets “radical self-reliance” to form an intentional but temporary community. The use of the desert emphasizes the self-reliance, but it also requires Burning Man to get permits from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Organizers wanted to move the festival to a larger area thanks to its growing popularity, and BLM said, sure — as long as Burning Man builds them a compound for BLM staffers with washers, dryers, and an endless supply of food (via The Hill).

Burning Man doesn’t sound like my cup of tea, but neither does strong-arming citizens for the use of public land as an excuse to pamper a bunch of public servants. Perhaps this part of radical self-reliance will rub off on BLM officials — and maybe it will prove instructive for those who see government as a solution to everything, especially land management.

When you go out to get in touch with nature, notice who has the best equipment, the newest trucks and toys, the fanciest gear. It is the same group that is always crying about a shortage of funds and charging you exorbitant fees to use public lands. And woe be unto you if you don’t toe the line!

Leave a Comment

Just what is science, anyway?

Matt Ridley worries about The Climate Wars’ Damage to Science. Scandals and politics and ideology all wreak havoc.

None of this would matter if it was just scientific inquiry, though that rarely comes cheap in itself. The big difference is that these scientists who insist that we take their word for it, and who get cross if we don’t, are also asking us to make huge, expensive and risky changes to the world economy and to people’s livelihoods. They want us to spend a fortune getting emissions down as soon as possible. And they want us to do that even if it hurts poor people today, because, they say, their grandchildren (who, as Nigel Lawson points out, in The Facts, and their models assume, are going to be very wealthy) matter more.

Yet they are not prepared to debate the science behind their concern. That seems wrong to me.

On the bright side, there is debate based on intellectual integrity and reality. It just isn’t in the usual and normal – old school – methods the establishment still holds dear such as ‘scientific’ journals. The topic is also polluted by a propaganda machine pushed by the MSM and activist groups. Getting through the noise is perhaps a tougher challenge than it has been in the past but that may be that now we can just see the noise a bit better. 

Leave a Comment

The red Pope?

Two comments regarding the Pope’s latest encyclical provide a bit of understanding about weakness and humanity.

Warner Todd Huston thinks that It is Now Indisputable That Pope Francis is a Risible Communist.

From now on, Pope Francis should be utterly dismissed as an important leader of the world. His latest global warming “encyclical” has proven he subscribes to a risible, anti-western and anti-capitalist theology and is less a Catholic than a communist.

In this message–which lays out this terrible pope’s absurd ideas on his new religion of global warming–says that we need to stop buying things and turn the world back several thousand years to a time when life was brutal, uncomfortable, and short. He is essentially calling for an end to capitalism in this rambling paper.

Pope Francis goes on to claim that wealthy countries need to stop being wealthy and give away everything to the supposedly poorer nations but he doesn’t spend a second coming to term with why they are poor. He just assumes that rich nations are greedy and evil and must stop being so wealthy. This is quite a communistic theme.

On a bit less heated level is Dr. Tim Ball wondering Is The Catholic Church Burned By The Sun Again?.

The distorted headline provides context for disturbing evidence that the Vatican does not know its science, any more than it did 400 years earlier. Their position is a matter of faith not facts, evidence, or science. With great irony, lack of knowledge about the sun is central again. Item 23 of the Encyclical provides all the information we need to show they don’t understand the science and, therefore, cannot understand how it is misused.

the position of the Vatican set out in the Encyclical is a matter of faith, not science. It appears that they are getting burned again, which sadly suggests they didn’t learn from history.

The matter is that of false witness as described in Exodus 20:16. If you cannot accurately testify to the nature of God’s work, including the progress of man away from poverty and in stewardship of the planet, there is indeed reason to question your motives and ability to serve as a reliable witness.

Leave a Comment

Marking the decent

Victor Davis Hanson on Building the New Dark-Age Mind. “America’s descent into the Dark Ages will not end well. It never has in the past.”

Current popular culture is not empirically grounded, but operates on the premise that truth is socially constructed by race, class, and gender concerns. … Science, logic, probability, evidence — all these cornerstones of the Enlightenment — now mean little in comparison to the race, class, and gender of those who offer narratives deemed socially useful.

Eric Holder called the nation “cowards” for not holding a national conversation on race. But Holder did not wish a freewheeling discussion about the break-up of the black family, the epidemic of violence and drug use, the cult of the macho male, the baleful role of anti-police rhetoric and rap music — in addition to current racism, a sluggish economy, and the wages of past apartheid. Instead, the ground rules of racial discussion were again to be anti-Enlightenment to the core. One must not cite the extraordinary disproportionate crime rate of inner-city black males, or the lack of inspired black leadership at the national level. One most certainly does not suggest that other minority groups either do not promote leaders like Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson or do not seem to have a need for national collective spokespeople at all.

In our current Dark Age, logic is ignored in lieu of ideology.

Scary stuff: Toss the Western Civilization we inherited and go for tribal Africa as a model. 

Leave a Comment

The little red book

Whether it’s Hitler’s Mein Kampf, The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx, or The Little Red Book, the name commonly known in the West for the pocket-size edition of Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung, there is a guide for the social movements and it purpose is often other than elucidation. Scott Johnson takes on an example in a look at The deep secrets of racial profiling about Michelle Alexander’s The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness.

Alexander’s book represents the state of the art in the assault on law enforcement in the name of racial disparities.

the book comes in a scholarly wrapping. It footnotes assertions of facts and data with citations to sources in the traditional style of legal scholarship, but the footnotes frequently fail to support the text. Moreover, and more to the point, basic scholarship that contradicts her theses goes missing. Following David Harris’s tack in Profiles In Injustice, Alexander’s scholarship is a pretense.

Alexander’s book is not itself a work of scholarship. it is a polemic. It is, more accurately, a work of obfuscation in the service of political propaganda. As propaganda, it is an unsavory piece of work at that.

Ideology blinds and that wants social acceptance. Little red books are after that ‘pat on the back’ and, all too often, seem to get it. The expense in civility is often huge.

Leave a Comment

Politicizing prosecution

Several cases have surface recently that raise questions about the motivation behind the search for criminal misconduct. Scott Horton describes The Thin Gruel of the Hastert Prosecution — “We should all be concerned about Dennis Hastert’s strange indictment“.

The fundamental problem in the Hastert case is simple: what, exactly, is the crime? As presented, the crime consists of a series of structured withdrawals supposedly designed to avoid a reporting duty, about which Hastert misled federal agents when they questioned him. This is not only extraordinarily thin gruel, it is also ripe for abuse. Keep in mind that the prostitution scandal that was manipulated by a Bush-era prosecutor to end the career of Eliot Spitzer was also triggered by similar bank payment reports.

Another case is described by Armstrong Williams suggesting that a South Dakota ‘voter fraud’ case deserves more attention.

The 43-year-old Sioux Falls physician was accused by State Attorney General Marty Jackley of having committed what is commonly referred to as “voter fraud.” Specifically, she had been indicted for having turned in nominating petitions that include the names of people whose signatures she did not personally witness.

That she did so is not in dispute; how the doctor has been treated very much is. According to ballot access activist Paul Jacob, Mr. Jackley’s “threatened penalty is the most severe any American has ever faced on a petition-related charge,” while “the transgressions alleged against Dr. Bosworth are arguably the least sinister” the activist has ever seen brought to trial.

Then there’s the Oregon case where the allegation is that the prosecution colluded with an LGBT group in going after a $135k discrimination claim. The Orange County disqualification of all of its lawyers in the district attorney’s office in a capital murder case is another problem in this vein.

These prosecutions are only the active half. The other half can be seen in Baltimore, New York, and other places where Police are inhibited in their efforts to tackle crime by political demands. Then there is the judicial front such as in the suit to stop the mainlining illegal immigrants. The war is on many fronts in may different ways.

Leave a Comment

And the fools rush in

Robert Merry describes The cheap currency of judging historical figures by today’s standards.

New York Times columnist Gail Collins is on a tear. Her sense of civic rectitude oozes from her prose. Her characteristic breezy haughtiness is on full display. The moral imperative that has caught her fancy and led to two columns in as many months: Getting that angular-faced Andrew Jackson off the $20 bill and replacing him with a woman, preferably an African-American or American Indian.

One might wonder why, in a world beset by ISIS, rampaging debt, growing inequality and venal soccer officials, anyone would even care whose faces grace the U.S. currency, whether it be Ms. Collins or myself.

But the currency of any nation reflects its heritage, and the heritage of any nation deserves respect. Indeed, a nation that attacks its own heritage with excessive abandon is likely heading for decline. And the American heritage is under assault these days from many quarters.

So, sure, Ms. Collins is free to malign Jackson in her simplistic way and bring forth any number of historical women, however obscure, whose money visage would tickle her feminist sensibilities and Gloria Steinem‘s. But she ought to step back sufficiently to give an honest portrayal of the man she wants off the twenty. Her country’s heritage is worthy of at least that.

A foolish idea backed by ignorance seems to be in vogue. Whether the face on a twenty dollar bill or the trashing of the police while watching the crime rates skyrocket, it does seem the fools rush in. The consequences are often tragic.

Leave a Comment

Manufacturing data: climate alarmists

Fist up is John Cook on Manufacturing doubt about climate consensus.

Scientists have observed distinctive greenhouse patterns such as winters warming faster than summers and a cooling upper
atmosphere. This consilience of evidence has resulted in overwhelming agreement among experts — 97 per cent of climate scientists
agree that humans are causing global warming. But where does the 97 per cent figure come from?

Then there’s Ross McKitrick answering the question that the Claim that 97% of scientists support climate alarm cannot be supported.

In my column I pointed out that people who invoke the 97 per cent consensus often leave vague what is actually being agreed upon.
John Cook does this too: Note that his wording is consistent with a range of interpretations, including that greenhouse gases
definitely cause only a tiny bit of global warming.

He cannot claim that 97 per cent of scientists believe greenhouse gases cause a lot of warming and that this is a big problem, since the surveys either didn’t ask this, or did but didn’t find 97 per cent support.

Who is it that is going psych by putting up the issue of denial as an item of interest? Who is carefully defining terms and issues? Who is alleging “cherry picking” without specification or rebuttal?

Yes behavior is an important factor to consider. But rather than label that behavior in derisive terms (e.g. “denier”), look for choices of words and manner of reasoning. There is a good comparison here.

Leave a Comment

More on the nature of man and the implications of different beliefs

Dennis Prager starts with underlying beliefs about the nature of man in looking at the Differences Between Left and Right: Part I.

Left-of-center doctrines hold that people are basically good. On the other side, conservative doctrines hold that man is born morally flawed — not necessarily born evil, but surely not born good. … To those who argue that we all have goodness within us, two responses: First, no religion or ideology denies that we have goodness within us; the problem is with denying that we have badness within us. Second, it is often very challenging to express that goodness. Human goodness is like gold. It needs to be mined — and like gold mining, mining for our goodness can be very difficult.

This so important to understanding the left-right divide because so many fundamental left-right differences emanate from this divide.

Material poverty doesn’t cause murder, rape or terror. Moral poverty does. That’s one of the great divides between left and right. And it largely emanates from their differing views about whether human nature is innately good.

One of they key understandings in looking at this is that the belief starts at home. The belief that all people are basically good means a belief that the self is intrinsically good as well. That mean’s one motives must be good ones and the impulse to control the behaviors and thoughts of others must also have ‘good’ motivations. That also leads to the idea that ‘since I an basically good then those who don’t agree with me must be bad.’

The striving to overcome one’s own evil tendencies leads to introspection of one’s motivations and to skepticism about one’s conclusions. That is one reason why science and reason has flourished in a Christian environment as science requires taking a close look at reality and weighing one’s observations against a greater whole.

Leave a Comment