The “Science”

continues to be unsettled:

So we have an expert on birds guessing that white blobs on a photo are drowned polar bears.

That’s it.

That’s the science.

He called it a parsimonious explanation. I call it Rorschach.

I call it the deliberate raising of hysteria by lies, in the service of a leftist agenda. And the foremost liar, or deluded fool, is Al Gore.

[Update a few minutes later]

Another food fight breaks out in the climate “science” community.

[Update a while later]

Lying, cheating climate “scientists” caught lying and cheating again.

The “Occupy” Movement

…should be occupying prison:

The media has by and large been very supportive of the various Occupy stunts organized by unions and radical groups. The allegations of rape, pimping underage girls and underage drinking are largely ignored by a national press that repeatedly lied about the peaceful, law-abiding Tea Party movement. With Occupy, police have had to arrest more than 1,000 Occupiers — even as police ignore permit violations, camping violations and pot-smoking. I cannot recall police arresting a single Tea Party member, even though there were 100 times as many of them.

My hope is the American people will see through this charade and vote Republican next year in a backlash against this group of freeloaders.

I hope so, too. I wish there were a better alternative, though.

[Update a while later]

A message for #OWS from an oil rigger’s wife.

A Unified Theory

..of left-wing causes:

Isn’t it interesting that no matter what the current global crisis is, according to leftists, the solution is always the same: a benevolent world dictatorship of the enlightened elite, and mass transfer of wealth from rich nations to poor nations.

That’s what they want to do about global warming. It’s what they wanted to do about overpopulation. It’s what they wanted to do about endangered species.

I’m sure it’s just coincidence. But anyway, it will be a benevolent dictatorship, so that’s OK.

Oh, Wow

Steve Jobs last words, according to his sister.

What I found interesting was this:

A middle-class boy from Los Altos, he fell in love with a middle-class girl from New Jersey. It was important to both of them to raise Lisa, Reed, Erin and Eve as grounded, normal children. Their house didn’t intimidate with art or polish; in fact, for many of the first years I knew Steve and Lo together, dinner was served on the grass, and sometimes consisted of just one vegetable. Lots of that one vegetable. But one. Broccoli. In season. Simply prepared. With the just the right, recently snipped, herb.

That is not a healthy diet. Broccoli is good for you but not just broccoli. He probably could have lived a lot longer if he’d understood nutrition better.

Wine Tasting

Why we can’t tell good wine from bad:

In 2001, Frederic Brochet conducted two experiments at the University of Bordeaux.

In one experiment, he got 54 oenology (the study of wine tasting and wine making) undergraduates together and had them taste one glass of red wine and one glass of white wine. He had them describe each wine in as much detail as their expertise would allow. What he didn’t tell them was both were the same wine. He just dyed the white one red. In the other experiment, he asked the experts to rate two different bottles of red wine. One was very expensive, the other was cheap. Again, he tricked them. This time he had put the cheap wine in both bottles. So what were the results?

The tasters in the first experiment, the one with the dyed wine, described the sorts of berries and grapes and tannins they could detect in the red wine just as if it really was red. Every single one, all 54, could not tell it was white. In the second experiment, the one with the switched labels, the subjects went on and on about the cheap wine in the expensive bottle. They called it complex and rounded. They called the same wine in the cheap bottle weak and flat.

I’ve always suspected this. And it reminds me of this post from a couple years ago.

The Pope’s Praise Of Agnostics

I consider myself an agnostic, but not in this sense:

In addition to the two phenomena of religion and anti-religion, a further basic orientation is found in the growing world of agnosticism: people to whom the gift of faith has not been given, but who are nevertheless on the lookout for truth, searching for God. Such people do not simply assert: “There is no God.” They suffer from his absence and yet are inwardly making their way towards him, inasmuch as they seek truth and goodness. They are “pilgrims of truth, pilgrims of peace.” They ask questions of both sides. They take away from militant atheists the false certainty by which these claim to know that there is no God and they invite them to leave polemics aside and to become seekers who do not give up hope in the existence of truth and in the possibility and necessity of living by it. But they also challenge the followers of religions not to consider God as their own property, as if he belonged to them, in such a way that they feel vindicated in using force against others.

These people are seeking the truth, they are seeking the true God, whose image is frequently concealed in the religions because of the ways in which they are often practised. Their inability to find God is partly the responsibility of believers with a limited or even falsified image of God. So all their struggling and questioning is in part an appeal to believers to purify their faith, so that God, the true God, becomes accessible. Therefore I have consciously invited delegates of this third group to our meeting in Assisi, which does not simply bring together representatives of religious institutions. Rather it is a case of being together on a journey towards truth, a case of taking a decisive stand for human dignity and a case of common engagement for peace against every form of destructive force.

That doesn’t really describe me at all. I don’t think that I “suffer” from God’s absence, and I’m no seeking Him in any way (other than in my religious belief that it is humanity’s teleological duty to bring life and awareness to the universe). I’m functionally an atheist, in the sense that I live my life as though there is no God — I’m an agnostic only in the sense that I know that I can’t know whether or not there is a God, so I’m not an evangelist of the belief that He doesn’t exist, as people like Dawkins and Hitchens are.

PDR or CDR?

I’m glad that NASA has approved SpaceX’s Preliminary Design Review for the launch abort system, but this doesn’t seem right:

NASA has approved the preliminary design review of SpaceX’s launch abort system, which will help crews aboard the Dragon capsule get out of harm’s way should any problems crop up during liftoff, company officials announced last week. With this hurdle cleared, SpaceX can now start building hardware for the system.

Emphasis mine. That’s not my understanding of a PDR. I thought that PDR meant that you could start doing detailed design, advancing to a Critical Design Review. After passing CDR, you start bending metal. Is there not going to be a CDR?

Biting Commentary about Infinity…and Beyond!