I think the larger question is why we are seeing such a sudden rash of anti-keto stories. So many of them quote no experts [sic] sources and do not provide citations for their claims. Skeptics with little acquaintance with the diet are quoted exclusively instead. From a journalistic perspective, this lack of balance of viewpoints and the failure to back up claims with evidence falls below basic reporting standards. Offenders on this list include even the Harvard School of Public Health, which recently published more than one unsourced, one-sided article on the keto diet (This is in addition to the Lancet Public Health article cited above, by Harvard researchers, which suggests that a low-carb diet kills you). These stories could reflect lazy reporting or they could very well be scare tactics to steer people away from the keto diet. Why would reporters or scientists at Harvard be doing such a thing? That’s material for another post. Stay tuned.
I’m seeing a lot of the usual nonsense about how if NASA can land a robot on Mars why don’t we believe them about climate? That’s like saying, if someone on a baseball team is a really good pitcher, why don’t we pay any attention to the outfielder’s opinions about politics?
Also, this.
This is a chronic pet peeve of mine about space, and "rocket scientists." People who design rockets are engineers, not scientists. It also feeds into the association of space with "science," when in fact human spaceflight has little to do with science, and never has.
It’s not going to happen until the line of affordability crosses the line of desirability for a sufficient number of people. Over the weekend, Elon made the point that living on Mars is not for the faint of heart (or as a haven for rich people).
Meanwhile, the NatGeo series Mars has started to explore the legal issues, an area in which I am currently involved. Note that Dennis O’Brien is a big fan of the Moon Agreement (that he calls the “Moon Treaty”). I am not.
This is only news to people who didn’t actually follow what was going on at the time, or people who have been fed a false history for two decades (he was impeached for a BJ, or “lying about sex”). Which is most people. Subornation of perjury (and not just Lewinski’s, but from Linda Tripp, via Lewinski, with physical threats to her family) was one of the reasons he was impeached.
As I’ve noted on Twitter several times, expertise in removing bullets from bodies does not confer any policy knowledge of how to prevent them from being inserted.
According to the robot programmed by a liberal, if you want to talk to somebody about hot-button issues over Thanksgiving dinner, the only acceptable responses are to agree with the liberal or to avoid openly disagreeing with the liberal. Anything else and you’re just an angry uncle.
But you don’t need some stupid bot to help you out, right? You’ve got a stupid blogger right here! Here are a few of my tips for getting through Thanksgiving dinner with people who disagree with you even though you’re absolutely sure you’re right.