Casey Dreier has an interesting history of how NASA finally got a decent budget to fulfill its planetary-defense mandate.
We thought we were going to hear next week if SCOTUS would grant our petition for certiori, but just heard that they’ve delayed it to the next conference on October 11. Apparently at least one justice is interested, but we can’t know if that’s because they want to move it to a less-crowded conference than next week’s for fuller discussion, or because they know they’ll turn it down, but want to write a dissent.
Yes, of course they bond with their owners.
Ember is almost a year old now (how time flies) and he’s almost like a dog in his desire for affection. Ashe is a little more aloof, but she likes to be on my lap while I work.
Per requests in comments, here are some pics. These are the kittens on the stairs, a few days after we got them at Christmas. Ashe is on the left, and we didn’t know that Ember (who was smaller at the time) was a boy. [Bumped]Continue reading Cats
…is harming our kids.
Yes, she should be in school, but not in a school that has deranged her to this degree. And not only are not “all” of us coming to her for hope, but I doubt that many are. This is another example of government schools being a vicious form of child abuse.
An unrolled Twitter thread from a mother with an autistic child on why what her handlers are doing to her is so cruel and abusive.
[Update early afternoon]
She hasn’t cured her mental issues; she’s simply found a different outlet for them. But her adult enablers are doing her no favors.
[Update a few minutes later]
Fox News cuts ties with Michael Knowles over calling Thunberg “mentally ill.”
I saw that segment, and the outrage (probably faux) from the Democrat. Well, he wasn’t wrong; she is clearly having problems, and shouldn’t be used as a prop for socialism.
[Update a few minutes later]
I’m glad Trump didn’t bow to her. I wouldn’t have, either.
[Update a while later]
The media is very protective of teenagers, unless they’re wearing MAGA hats.
Experts agree that restructuring the global economy is the best way to treat a child’s anxiety.
The latest analysis, at the WSJ. We should know next week if SCOTUS will be taking up the case.
[Update Tuesday afternoon]
Someone posted the whole thing in comments, but that’s a copyright violation, and not fair use. So I’ll delete that comment, but excerpt it here:
The legal issue hinges on whether what Mr. Simberg said is subjective opinion that should be decided in public debate, as NR contends, or a factual assertion that a jury could find false and defamatory, as Mr. Mann claims. By sending the case to a jury, the D.C. Court of Appeals has rewarded Mr. Mann’s attempt to use the courts to settle the science and silence the criticism. That sets a dangerous precedent.
In some senses the Mann suit may represent the perfect storm for litigation because so many consider climate science beyond question. The opinion of the appellate court, for example, carries the whiff of a religious authority rendering final judgment—the idea being that university faculties and other authorities have spoken so debate must be closed.
There’s also the venue. This lawsuit didn’t go through the federal courts but through D.C.’s equivalent of state courts, where judges and juries probably aren’t the friendliest to conservatives. With so many publications, think tanks and activists keeping offices in the nation’s capital, it isn’t hard to see how Washington could quickly become the venue for similar lawsuits.
The larger point is that while so-called climate deniers might be the first defendants, they are unlikely to be the last. If the D.C. ruling stands, National Review asks in its petition to the high court, what’s to prevent, say, Charles Koch from suing Greenpeace for accusing him of having funded a “junk study . . . loaded with lies and misrepresentations of actual climate change science”? Or Steve Bannon from founding a deep-pocketed organization to sue Trump opponents, and then shopping for a venue where a friendly jury might agree that an over-the-top opinion is a defamatory statement of fact?
“The only way to protect free speech for our allies is to protect it for our adversaries,” says Art Spitzer, legal director for the ACLU of D.C. “Today it’s unacceptable to deny climate change, but yesterday it was unacceptable to deny that homosexuality was sinful, and tomorrow it may be unacceptable to deny that robots are better parents than humans. Society can’t progress unless people are free to express and consider heretical ideas, because there’s no way to predict which heretical ideas will be tomorrow’s truths.”
The ball’s in the Supreme Court—if the justices will take it.
I should note that it’s not just as NR contends, but as CEI contends as well. We’ll find out next week.
Elon wants to manufacture fuel from the earth’s atmosphere. He takes climate much too seriously.
Could it hit southern California? As a hurricane? That would be…different.
Slow it down by seeking novelty? Maybe, but the fact that when a year is ten percent of your life to date, as opposed to on sixtieth of it, it’s going to seem to go by faster.
Zero out of the last thirty predicted have actually come to pass. Someone should show this to Greta Doom.