Category Archives: Media Criticism

Baby, It’s Rape Outside

I’m glad that these people don’t seem to have the slightest understanding of how sex works; at least it means they won’t procreate.

[Update a couple minutes later]

I agree with the comment over there that it’s annoying to have non-Christmas songs like this (and Over The River And Through The Woods, which I think is a Thanksgiving song) being substituted for actual ones, that actually talk about, you know, Christ and stuff.

“Fake News”

The primary purveyors of it are those complaining the most:

John Nolte of the Daily Wire helpfully points out that the media has been totally fine spreading fake news in the past, such as the false narrative that Ferguson teen Michael Brown held up his hands and asked a white police officer not to shoot him. The “hands up, don’t shoot” narrative was a lie, but some in the media and on the left still parrot the claim, even after forensic evidence proved it wrong.

Nolte notes that the media narrative of racist white police officers (or black police officers with internalized racism) out to get unarmed black men has resulted in the targeting of innocent police officers. So yes, fake news can be dangerous, but until now the media has been more than okay in spreading it.

There are several additional, high profile examples of the media promoting the spread of fake news, though these examples thankfully have not resulted in physical harm.

I don’t want to hear anything about “fake news” from the people who defended Dan “Fake But Accurate” Rather.

The Future Of Space

As we mourn the loss of a pioneer, it’s important to note that it lies with the billionaires, not NASA or other government programs:

“One [path] is that we stay on Earth forever and then there will be an inevitable extinction event,” [Bezos] told the audience of scientists and engineers. “The alternative is to become a spacefaring civilization, and a multi-planetary species.”

Ashlee Vance, longtime tech journalist and author of Elon Musk: Tesla, Space, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future, thinks these ambitions are driven by a mix of entrepreneurial curiosity, altruism and a dash of egotism. “The guys who are rulers of the universe now are the nerds,” he says. “They were all geeks raised on science fiction and the vision of space we had in the 1960s and 70s. Now they have the money to make this a reality.”

Yes.

The “Consensus” On Climate Change

Scott Adams explains why he accepts it, even though it’s probably wrong:

when it comes to pattern recognition, I see the climate science skeptics within the scientific community as being similar to Shy Trump Supporters. The fact that a majority of scientists agree with climate science either means the evidence is one-sided or the social/economic pressures are high. And as we can plainly see, the cost of disagreeing with climate science is unreasonably high if you are a scientist.

While it is true that a scientist can become famous and make a big difference by bucking conventional wisdom and proving a new theory, anything short of total certainty would make that a suicide mission. And climate science doesn’t provide the option of total certainty.

To put it another way, it would be easy for a physicist to buck the majority by showing that her math worked. Math is math. But if your science depends on human judgement to decide which measurements to include and which ones to “tune,” you don’t have that option. Being a rebel theoretical physicist is relatively easy if your numbers add up. But being a rebel climate scientist is just plain stupid. So don’t expect to see many of the latter. Scientists can often be wrong, but rarely are they stupid.

…I accept the consensus of climate science experts when they say that climate science is real and accurate. But I do that to protect my reputation and my income. I have no way to evaluate the work of scientists.

If you ask me how scared I am of climate changes ruining the planet, I have to say it is near the bottom of my worries. If science is right, and the danger is real, we’ll find ways to scrub the atmosphere as needed. We always find ways to avoid slow-moving dangers. And if the risk of climate change isn’t real, I will say I knew it all along because climate science matches all of the criteria for a mass hallucination by experts.

It does indeed.

[Late-evening update]

The Scott Adams post was via Judith Curry, who has related links from other “heretics” (i.e., they “believe” in AGW, but aren’t hysterical about it) Roger Pielke and Matt Ridley:

The truly astonishing thing about all this is how little climate heretics – such as myself, Roger Pielke, and Matt Ridley – actually diverge from the consensus science position: RP Jr. hews strictly to the IPCC consensus; Matt Ridley is on the lukewarm side of the IPCC consensus, and I have stated that the uncertainties are too large to justify high confidence in the consensus statements.

RP Jr and Matt Ridley provide appalling examples of the personal and arguably unethical attacks from other scientists, journalists, elected politicians and others with government appointments.

Scott Adams provides some genuine (and as always, humorous) insights into the psychology behind the dynamics of the climate debate.

As to the question: to be or not to be a climate heretic?

I’m planning a climate heretic blog post shortly after the first of the year. After seeing RP Jr’s title, perhaps I will title it ‘Happy Heretic’ (stay tuned). Here’s to hoping that the Age of Trump will herald the demise of climate change dogma and acceptance of a broader range of perspectives on climate science and our policy options .

I’ll personally be looking forward to it.

The Hard Left’s Violent Tantrums

Comey’s FBI should investigate them.

True. But then, there are other things that Comey’s FBI should have properly investigated, like Hillary Clinton’s and her aide’s felonies and corruption.

[Update a while later]

Related: The Left’s coming counterattack:

We sent our offspring to them for an education, and they sent them back to us, spitting with hatred for the way of life that enabled their ease. “You dare defy us? Our soldiers are your own flesh and blood!”

They threw them at us like grenades – warped, misguided and misinformed, filled with explosive fury and lit by an impossibly short fuse. Wave after wave, they sent them into the streets to burn, to riot, and to cloak their debauchery of liberty with the fresh face of a new generation.

And we backed down, knowing we had been gravely molested but unwilling to challenge the perpetrators for fear of ensnaring our own children in the fray.

We held elections. We elected majorities who then refused to fight. We listened to our “leaders,” who told us to appease the gnashing beast because the world was changing and we had to remain “relevant.”

Now, after a great while and innumerable offenses, we have elected someone who sees no value in the bureaucrat’s mantra of “that’s the way we’ve always done it.” We explored unfamiliar electoral terrain and found someone who respects the origin of our ideals as embodied in our founding documents. A man who brusquely (and entertainingly!) dismissed the circus-mirror image of America peddled by the left and their fawning, complicit media. Tired of being beaten about the head and shoulders while those we elected to defend us stood by holding the coats of our abusers, we elected a brawler of our own.

I wish that he “respects the origin of our ideals as embodied in our founding documents,” but I continue to see no evidence that he’s ever even read them. But one goes to war with the army one has.

The Father Of Global Warming

dials back the alarm:

What a difference a few months make!

Just in time for holiday season, and for the Trump Administration, the father of the climate alarm, formerly a climate scientist with NASA/GISS, and now a full-time scientist/activist, has ameliorated his grand climate alarm. The 10-year ultimatum announced in 2006, made more dire in 2009 and since, is now moderated.

This October, we were told that the net emissions of of man-made greenhouse gases in the atmosphere must go negative. Now, “we don’t need to instantaneously reduce GHG amounts.”

A climate scientist might want to see Dr. Hansen’s math and model simulation to understand the revision in the last sixty days.

Maybe the climate can survive Donald Trump after all!

He’ll probably kill us all some other way.

The Fresh Face Of The Democrat Party

Yes, after re-electing Nancy Pelosi, putting a black leftist Muslim anti-Semite at its head is just what a party whose senior leaders are old white people needs:

The main takeaway here is not Greenblatt’s embarrassing retreat. It’s the fact that Democrats have a choice to make. If, with the help of people like incoming Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (who claims to be the guardian of Israel in Congress but has nonetheless endorsed the Minnesota congressman), Ellison is elected to head the DNC, the party will be making a symbolic statement that goes beyond the identity politics they prize so much. His elevation to the head of the party at a time when when it has few other national leaders is a sign that the Democratic drift away from Israel has reached a tipping point. Pro-Israel Democrats must either stop Ellison or quit pretending that their party is still a bastion of support for the Jewish state.

Go for it.

The Life Of Julia

Part of the overwhelming feeling of relief after the election was that it offered an opportunity to escape from it, something that I had feared was lost, and would have been under continued Democrat rule:

In a state in which central planners call the shots, we are less and less free to choose. Individual enterprise becomes desperately unrewarding, or even illegal. Freedom fades, and bureaucratic dictates supplant the information and incentives that are part of free markets. Economic growth declines, and people fight over access to the favors of the state elite and their bureaucratic retinue, the overlords who decide who gets what slice of the shrinking vegetarian meatloaf.

That’s the real life of Julia, the direction in which the country has been heading for too many years now, while Obama has scolded Americans that whatever they earn, or achieve, or invent, belongs — cradle-to-grave — to someone else: “You didn’t build that.”

To watch America in recent years spiraling down into the life of Julia has been excruciating. This is a country made great not by conquest, or constraints, or cross-subsidies, but by freedom and free enterprise. Long before the welfare state offered free amenities (courtesy of American taxpayers), it was freedom that drew people to America, and fueled the melting pot — the real form of “inclusivity” — once they arrived. Our true iconic figures — if you plumb the American spirit — are not Julia and Pajama Boy, but sharpshooter Annie Oakley and that out-sized folklore lumberjack of the Western frontier, Paul Bunyan. This is the country that led the way to victory in World War II, and during the Cold War stood — and in some places fought — as a bulwark of freedom.

And here’s what the real Life of Julia would be under government “care.”

And a reminder: if you want to know what “single payer” health care would look like, you need look no further than the VA:

Nearly 600 veterans could have been infected with HIV, Hepatitis B or Hepatitis C at a Veterans Affairs facility in Tomah, Wis. because a dentist didn’t properly clean his instruments.

The Tomah VA is investigating the dentist, who has not been fired but was removed from patient care.

No accountability.

Mark Whittington

His latest nonsense:

The problem, from the perspective of commercial space supporters, is that Shank represents an institutional, NASA-centric viewpoint where it comes to space exploration. While at the space agency he supported the Bush-era Constellation program which was subsequently canceled by President Obama. In Congress, Shank helped support the Orion spacecraft and the heavy lift Space Launch System. Many commercial space advocates find these views abhorrent, believing that NASA should simply outsource its space exploration plans to the private sector, to companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin.

I don’t know any commercial space advocates who believe that. What we believe is that there is no need for NASA to be in the launch business.

Shank’s association with Mike Griffin has also raised some hackles. Griffin has been blamed, unfairly for the most part, for the troubles that beset Constellation before it was cancelled. In fact many of these problems, including the fact that the project was underfunded, occurred above his paygrade.

There is nothing unfair about blaming Mike Griffin for choosing a terrible rocket design that was certain to cost more than was allocated for it in the budget sandpile, in the belief that he could somehow talk Congress into increasing his budget.