Category Archives: Social Commentary

Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Social Commentary, War Commentary

Of Feet And Knees

11 Comments

Thoughts from Sarah Hoyt on the “elites”‘ timorousness in defending Pamela Geller. This is the post from Ace that she’s referencing.

As I’ve watched person after person “distance” themselves from Pamela Geller, a disgraceful and bizarre idea, because, let’s make this very clear: she had a contest for people to draw Mohammed in vile ways; two people tried to shoot her and everyone in there.

Let’s repeat that in case you don’t get it: lines on paper, which no one who potentially could be offended by it needed to see were responded to with an attempt at killing her.

If you don’t think that’s bizarre, substitute the contest to draw Mohammed with a contest to draw Christ in the most vile way possible [we already have that. It’s called the NEA-ed.] Imagine that two armed people showed up to shoot you for it. How many people who did the ritual “Geller made the poor Muslims do it” all over the media, including Fox News, would do the same? One? None?

Of course, Christians don’t do that. At most they would show up at pray at you. And THAT would be considered hateful and closed minded, and people would talk about being intimidated going into the art show [Every time another show comes up with a way to insult Christians this script plays out.] And then the police would show up to keep them separated, just like outside Planned Parenthood, the people who pray the rosary at you have to keep a certain distance or be arrested, because, well, they make people feel bad and it’s hate speech.

I have yet to hear a talking head say “Well, if people don’t want to be prayed at, they shouldn’t have abortions in a fixed place, in public. I mean, it’s like a trap for Catholics.” Or “if people don’t want those fundies to show up and shout Bible verses at them, they shouldn’t have [yet another] a play showing the Messiah of Christianity having gay sex.” Or… No, you don’t hear it, and for students of religion who wonder about things like the Crusades which, they keep telling us, have no Biblical support, it might be a good idea – as the good professor says – to think about the incentives you’re providing.

As I noted on Twitter the other day, I think we should have a lot more events like this, as honeypots to draw out the savages into the open. It would be a demonstration of the most profound American value, not “tolerance” (these people wouldn’t know tolerance if it kicked them in the nads), but freedom of expression. You could even expand the contest to mock Jesus and Mary, Moses, Brigham Young, and Buddha. Who do you think will show up with guns blazing?

Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Social Commentary, Technology and Society

Victory In Europe

6 Comments

It’s the 70th anniversary.

There was a simpler time, when we recognized enemies waging war on us, declared war on them, and soundly defeated them.

[Update]

Here’s a round up at the WaPo of today’s war bird flyover of the Mall. When I was a kid, there used to be an AT-6 Texan parked at Bishop Airport, in Flint. It wasn’t that old at the time. I’d note that one of the planes had to make an emergency landing at DCA, disrupting air traffic there. It looked like a P-40.

[Update a couple minutes later]

Remembering Okinawa.

There was a reason we dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and it wasn’t because we were racists. That saved hundreds of thousand of lives, both of American troops and civilians in China.

[Update a couple minutes later]

“’All told, Okinawa killed 12,500 Americans and wounded approximately 50,000. It was the U.S. Navy’s biggest killer, with 4,907 sailor deaths and 4,874 wounded. Japan lost an estimated 75,000 military dead. As for civilians? Estimates run from 50,000 to 110,000.’ Today, America is afraid of offending a few savages with cartoons.”

Media Criticism, Philosophy, Political Commentary, Popular Culture, Social Commentary, Space, Technology and Society

The First Woman To Be Raped In Space

16 Comments

…has already been born.

As Glenn notes, this seems to be gender feminism’s major contribution to spaceflight.

I ruffled some feathers this weekend at Space Access by having the temerity to point out that there will be some people who will oppose our expansion into space, because they don’t trust us to do it “right,” and with “social justice.” So much will they oppose it that they may even get violent about it. They do, after all, call themselves “warriors,” and they use a lot of eliminationist rhetoric, like “Smash patriarchy.” I got an email or two about it.

My quick take: Saying that I am “picking a fight” with these people is like saying that the New York Times was picking a fight with the Japanese by reporting that they had bombed Pearl Harbor. As I noted in my talk, they went after the gamers, and the SF community. They’re already on their way to go after the space settlers, as the above linked piece indicates.

I’ll have a longer take at Ricochet or PJMedia.

[Update a few minutes later]

Sort of related: Why Joss Whedon left Twitter.

[Update a while later]

Here’s one hot off the press (Monday) from D. N. Lee (the Scientific American blogger whose tweet I highlighted in my talk). This is much more mild than the tweet, but it gives you an idea of what we’re up against.

Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Social Commentary

Vagina Voters

4 Comments

What has happened to feminism?

She thinks Hillary would be a great president because she “knows what it’s like to menstruate, be pregnant, [and] give birth.”

So you’re going to pick your leader on the basis of her biological functions, the fact she’s experienced the same bodily stuff as you? Imagine if a man did that. “I’m voting for Ted Cruz because he knows what it’s like to spunk off. And he knows the pain of being kicked in the balls.” We’d think that was a very sad dude indeed. Why is it any better for a female commentator to wax lyrical about voting on the basis of her biological similarity to a candidate rather than any shared political outlook?

She should be embarrassed, but she has no idea why. If you’re voting with your body parts, you’re definitely doing it wrong

Business, Economics, Mathematics, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Science And Society, Social Commentary, Technology and Society

Judith Curry’s Testimony

21 Comments

Congress had some follow-up questions:

1. President Obama has warned that, “for the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change.” He said we must “choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science – and act before it is too late.”

A. Is there an overwhelming judgment of science or any science, showing that the President’s regulatory actions will prevent the threat that he is so concerned about?

If you believe the climate models, then President Obama’s INDC commitment (total of 80% emissions reduction by 2015), then warming would be reduced by 0.011 degrees Centigrade, a number that was provided to me by Chip Knappenberger of CATO using the MAGICC model with an equilibrium climate sensitivity of 3.0oC http://www.cato.org/blog/002degc-temperature-rise-averted-vital-number-missing-epas-numbers-fact-sheet. If the climate models are indeed running too hot, then the warming would be reduced by an even smaller number.

2. We have heard a lot of doomsday scenarios about what will happen if we do nothing on climate change. However, there has been less attention to what the results of any actions we take to combat climate might be.

A. Suppose we cut all greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Would this avert the supposed catastrophic impacts?

Eliminating all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 would reduce the warming by 0.014oC (as per the EPA MAGICC model). This is an amount of warming that is much smaller than the uncertainty in even measuring the global average temperature.

3. Dr. Curry, what happens to academics who step out of line on climate change?

A. Why would experts be afraid to question climate change orthodoxy?

The censure of scientists disagreeing with the IPCC consensus was particularly acute during the period 2005-2010. As revealed by the Climategate emails, there was a cadre of leading climate scientists that were working to sabotage the reviews of skeptical research papers (and presumably proposals for research funding). Further, scientists challenging climate change orthodoxy are subjected to vitriolic treatment in news articles, op-eds and blogs, damaging the public reputation of these scientists. I have heard from numerous scientists who are sympathetic to my efforts in challenging climate change orthodoxy, but are afraid to speak out or even publish skeptical research since they are fearful of losing their job.

Since 2010, things have improved somewhat especially in Europe; I think this has largely been due to reflections following Climategate and the fact that disagreement about climate change is not as starkly divided along the lines of political parties (i.e. the issue is somewhat less politicized). In the U.S., with President Obama’s recent pronouncements about climate denial and climate deniers (as anyone who does not agree with the consensus) has increased the toxicity of the environment (both academic and public) for scientists that question the IPCC consensus on climate change.

There’s a lot more.

Social Commentary, Space, Technology and Society

Charles Pooley Of Microlaunchers

4 Comments

He was supposed to give a presentation at Space Access. He didn’t show up.

Over at Arocket, Ed LeBouthillier (his collaborator on his book) has a report:

I just got a call from the Las Vegas coroner’s office.

Apparently Charles has passed on and is no longer with us.

May the rocket gods look kindly on his soul. May he join his family, friends and ancestors in the family hall with honor.

Sorry to hear that. I didn’t know him well, but I’d talked to him a few times. RIP.