Scott says it’s In a silent way citing York’s notice of a story that didn’t make it to the Big Voices, the NASA Muslim self esteem goal. He notes that “The silent treatment accorded York’s story is not uncommon. Much the same occurred with the widely reported story of the phantom n-word supposedly shouted at black congressmen by Obamacare protesters on Capitol Hill on March 20.”
On something the BV does like, try fear of technology. Bruce Schneier says the Threat of ‘cyberwar’ has been hugely hyped. Take note that he does not minimize the problem with fraud but rather says it is “within the context of normal life” just as fraud has always been. It is a matter for individuals and not for armies.
We surely need to improve our cybersecurity. But words have meaning, and metaphors matter. There’s a power struggle going on for control of our nation’s cybersecurity strategy, and the NSA and DoD are winning. If we frame the debate in terms of war, if we accept the military’s expansive cyberspace definition of “war,” we feed our fears.
We reinforce the notion that we’re helpless — what person or organization can defend itself in a war? — and others need to protect us. We invite the military to take over security, and to ignore the limits on power that often get jettisoned during wartime.
If, on the other hand, we use the more measured language of cybercrime, we change the debate. Crime fighting requires both resolve and resources, but it’s done within the context of normal life. We willingly give our police extraordinary powers of investigation and arrest, but we temper these powers with a judicial system and legal protections for citizens.
Dr. Ball takes on the latest climate whitewash taking note of just how obvious it is.
But the omissions are more basic and ones everyone can understand. For example, why didn’t they trace the source of the leaks? Why were only some of the emails leaked? Russell’s report chastises CRU for failing to provide data on request and for being secretive or refusing Freedom of Information (FOI) requests. What drove them to do this with information obtained and produced by public funding? It doesn’t matter how much climate science you understand, the level and extent of avoidance goes beyond laziness, time consumption as they tried to claim or any other excuse.
That should be contrasted to Monbiot’s column in the Guardian where he whines about the awful email he gets and cites some very ugly words. The contrast is that the skeptic, in this case Dr. Ball, addresses the substance with known sources while the defender cites unknown extreme sources that even he qualifies as incompetent. Another skeptic, Dr. McIntyre, also shows how logic and the values of science can be applied to strengthen this contrast.
These investigations should be considered in context of the problems with peer review and how it is presented as what it is not. Megan McArdle says Peer Review is No Panacea.
This is not to say that the peer review system is worthless. But it’s limited. Peer review doesn’t prove that a paper is right; it doesn’t even prove that the paper is any good (and it may serve as a gatekeeper that shuts out good, correct papers that don’t sit well with the field’s current establishment for one reason or another). All it proves is that the paper has passed the most basic hurdles required to get published–that it be potentially interesting, and not obviously false. This may commend it to our attention–but not to our instant belief.
The DoJ problems continue to be discussed. People are wondering why the feds are going after Arizona and not Rhode Island or the ‘sanctuary cities.’ The Adams testimony about the DoJ dropping an almost settled case of blatant voter discrimination is getting into other related issues. John Fund describes this as Another voter fraud scandal involving the Justice Department.
Mr. Adams’ allegations would seem to call for the senior management of Justice to be compelled to testify under oath to U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. But Justice is making none of its officials available and is refusing to enforce subpoenas issued by the commission. The more this story develops, the more it appears Justice is engaged in a massive coverup of its politicization of voting rights cases.
Dr. Hanson reminds us that American Decline Is a State of Mind and not a historical inevitability.
The United States still remains the most racially diverse, stable, free, productive, and militarily strong country in the world. Its current crises are largely the political and cultural creations of the most affluent and leisured generation in civilization’s history — not due to longstanding civil unrest, structural weakness, or a sudden shortage of natural resources.
Where the US goes from here will be where it chooses to go and that direction is set by its state of mind.