Lonnie E. Schubert:

Yes, religious liberty is still a big deal in our country.

Originally posted on Reflection and Choice:

Screen Shot 2014-10-16 at 10.26.39 PM

Over at First Things, Mark Movsesian has provided an adequate summary of “what’s happening in Houston.” The mayor’s office tried to subpoena documents from local pastors. The pastors cried foul, even though the mayor’s staff might have had legitimate grounds for the subpoenas. Movsesian thinks that the subpoenas won’t be allowed in this case.

Then he provides this analysis:

Still, even if these pastors succeed in resisting the subpoenas, significant damage has been done. It’s hard to see how this episode will not chill religious and political expression. Most people, quite rationally, want nothing to do with lawsuits and subpoenas. They don’t want to make legal history. The lesson they will draw from the episode is this: If you want to avoid trouble, don’t make politically-charged statements about religious convictions that the government doesn’t approve, even if you’re at a private meeting in your own church. In…

View original 381 more words

Writing for the New York Times,  gives us a dozen interviews with philosophers.


Warning, these are about religion, not necessarily supportive. Still, good fodder for deep thinking.

JOSHUA A. KRISCH, OCT. 13, 2014, writing for the New York Times, here, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/14/science/haunted-files-the-eugenics-record-office-recreates-a-dark-time-in-a-laboratorys-past.html, describes an exhibit set up to remind us the horrors of eugenics.

It is insightful. I particularly liked the following paragraph.

My comments:

When the Eugenics Record Office opened its doors in 1910, the founding scientists were considered progressives, intent on applying classic genetics to breeding better citizens. Funding poured in from the Rockefeller family and the Carnegie Institution. Charles Davenport, a prolific Harvard biologist, and his colleague, Harry H. Laughlin, led the charge.

First, the founders of eugenics were not “considered” progressives, they WERE the luminaries of all things progressive and liberal minded. The were the very definition of then-modern leftist thinking. They had no compunction regarding compulsory policies and imposing their will on others. The inferiors owed it to the progressive elites. The sacrifice for the betterment of the elite would be taken for granted, but the elite would understand. Those poor inferiors, those experimented on, those forcibly sterilized and worse, were simply the price of progress. The same applies today in climate alarmism and public education. Yes, two so disparate fields are being treated the same by the elite. The elite simply expect us to submit, to comply, to die as the subjects of their experiments.

Note the names in the paragraphs. Could not a paragraph on the Common Core State Standards be written changing a very few words and the names? The Gates Foundation comes to mind. Follow the money. Follow the power, the control. It is the same, and it is just as evil. Yes, CCSS is just as evil as eugenics. Likewise with climate change alarmism, but it is enough different I’ll leave it here.

The entire article can apply point for point, almost word for word, to the experiment we call public education and the contrived experiment of the Common Core State Standards constrictions being applied to it.

CCSS is progressivist. Anyone how supports it is progressivist, liberal, leftist. Interestingly, many political Democrats do not support CCSS. It is too liberal for them. Sadly, too many political Republicans hold out for the CCSS. Who can tell why. My first suspicion is that they are more elitist and more progressive than even most left-leaning elitists.

And this:

“The Eugenics Record Office was built around very systematized ideas that still might be seen as legitimate today,” said Noah Fuller, an artist and co-curator of the exhibit. “At the time, this was widely accepted as legitimate science.”

It was settled science. It is still accepted today as evidenced by the flood that became CCSS. That flood that is being turned back by angry mothers and caring teachers.

Don’t pretend you, we, are too sophisticated to institutionalize such policies today. We did it. We, the hoi polloi, are turning it back and cleansing our society of this sin, but the elites are fighting. Progressivists and liberals are in it for the long game. They will not relent. We must never relinquish our freedoms, our rights, and our responsibilities. It is up to us. Resistance is not futile.

There are truths here, and lessons to be learned regarding immigrants too. Don’t be part of the problem. Those wanting to come here are mostly good and good for us and our society. Be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Mr. Micklos sat in a wooden chair and thumbed through a few of the files. “This is pretty much exactly what it would’ve looked like,” he said.

He shook his head and added, “Think of all the people whose lives were completely out of their own control.”

This statement applies exactly to millions of our children in our society today! Let it not stand.

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Skunk Works

That makes it legit but not necessarily successful.

Patience is required, not exuberance.

Update: Apparently this thing is expected to run on the D-D reaction. I doubt it. I won’t assume they are too dumb to figure it out, but the D-D reaction requires just over 100 times higher temperature than the D-T reaction. I’m not convinced it is doable at all. We shall see. Skunk Works folks are used to getting things done, and done better than people expected.

Further, there are still neutrons (less than D-T and lower energy). Neutrons are bad. Neutrons are really bad. The real reason we cannot do it yet is because of the neutrons. And while there are no atmospheric emissions from the potential methods of fusion energy production, any of them that produce neutrons activate the equipment, the entire vessel. The entire thing will be radioactive waste when it is no longer practical to operate.

A final note, there is a significant advantage to not using tritium, namely, there is no tritium. We have to make it for everything we use it for.

This youtube was over a year ago.

Moving slow.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

WUWT reader Paul Ostergaard  tips us to this article from Aviation Week and Space Technology – video follows

Lockheed Martin aims to develop compact reactor prototype in five years, production unit in 10

Hidden away in the secret depths of the Skunk Works, a Lockheed Martin research team has been working quietly on a nuclear energy concept they believe has the potential to meet, if not eventually decrease, the world’s insatiable demand for power.

Dubbed the compact fusion reactor (CFR), the device is conceptually safer, cleaner and more powerful than much larger, current nuclear systems that rely on fission, the process of splitting atoms to release energy. Crucially, by being “compact,” Lockheed believes its scalable concept will also be small and practical enough for applications ranging from interplanetary spacecraft and commercial ships to city power stations. It may even revive the concept of large, nuclear-powered aircraft that virtually never require…

View original 272 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:


Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

As many WUWT readers know, I have been using alexa.com for quite sometime to gauge the performance of WUWT. Reader “Pat” brought this recent strange disparity to my attention. When you see things like the Drudge report plummet and MSNBC soar, you know immediately that something isn’t right:

Those who run watchdog news websites are scratching their heads and trying to make sense of the latest data released by a California company that measures website traffic.

According to data for July through September, almost every major website – from WND to the Drudge Report and Breitbart – saw its rankings drop on Alexa.com while pro-government sites mostly went up.

Source: WND

The claim seems to be true when you look at Alexa’s publicly reported traffic graphs. Here’s the Drudge Report according to Alexa:

(Lower numbers are better, for example, Google is #1)

drudge[1]And here is MSNBC according to Alexa

View original 365 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

I’m inclined to agree. Seems counterproductive on the part of the mayor to say the least. Bad idea on her part regardless of legal consideration.

Still, don’t we stand for truth? Expose all the truth in every way possible. All pastors in Texas should send every sermon they ever prepared. Give the mayor and her layers all the truth and love possible.

Odd that I had known nothing of the Houston mayor. Now I’ve read about her twice this week.

It is said we can’t legislate morals. Yet the preachers of tolerance try to criminalize such whenever they gain the power. Love and understanding are the touchstones, and it’s a two way street. Tolerance is only a small single step toward what we all owe each other. We are all fellow travelers. We are in this together. We are only here a moment. Make the best of it, and do some good.

Originally posted on COLLIN GARBARINO:

The sky is falling here in Houston.

The mayor’s office has subpoenaed sermons from a handful of pastors. The request seems to be a bullying tactic aimed at pastors who have opposed the city council’s “Houston Equal Rights Ordinance,” which protects gender identity along with categories such as race, sex, and creed. The biggest point of contention is that the law requires businesses to allow people to enter public restrooms based on their self-proclaimed gender identity rather than their biological sex. Who’s surprised that some Texans are disturbed?

Houston’s churches are leading the resistance against the new law, and it seems that the mayor’s office is trying to intimate this resistance by requesting copies of sermons and other communications.

It’s a petty move.

It’s constitutionally disturbing.

It’s a violation of the separation of church and state.

But why don’t they just give her the sermons anyway?

View original 521 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

There is nothing happening now that hasn’t happened before.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

A new study using a reconstruction of North American drought history over the last 1,000 years found that the drought of 1934 was the driest and most widespread of the last millennium.

Using a tree-ring-based drought record from the years 1000 to 2005 and modern records, scientists from NASA and Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory found the 1934 drought was 30 percent more severe than the runner-up drought (in 1580) and extended across 71.6 percent of western North America. For comparison, the average extent of the 2012 drought was 59.7 percent.

farmer and sons during a dust storm in Cimarron County, Oklahoma, 1936

This photo shows a farmer and his two sons during a dust storm in Cimarron County, Oklahoma, 1936. The 1930s Dust Bowl drought had four drought events with no time to recover in between: 1930-31, 1934, 1936 and 1939-40.Image Credit: Arthur Rothstein, Farm Security Administration

“It was the worst by a large margin, falling pretty far outside the normal range of…

View original 962 more words

Writing for the Witherspoon Institute Public Discourse,  writes an insightful article. 

The Fundamental Case for Parental Rights.

I invite you to read her article. I recommend it.

I agree with her without reservation until she gets to “The Role of the State in Educating Children.”

At that point, she simply doesn’t go far enough. She states that coercion by the state should be as limited as possible, but I assert that it is possible to entirely proscribe state interference and coercion. 100%, no coercion. All coercion is immoral. The state, all governments at all levels, must add to their charters, their constitutions, that they shall make no laws regarding establishment of education, and they shall not restrict the free exercise thereof. There should be an even wider separation between education and the state than there is between religion and the state.

Fundamentally, there are no public goods, no needs of society, no compelling state interests that override the sovereignty of the individual over himself. This goes for children just the same, and the parent has the fundamental right and full responsibility to raise the child personally, as partners in the family, free of compulsion and interference of the state.

The state’s obligation, the state’s compelling interest is in protecting the rights of the parent and the child, of the family, to act sovereign within their family to grow and become good people, productive members of society, competent citizens free from any outside coercion. The only true function of the state is to protect us from the outside, too protect us from infringement of our rights overtly. It is just a much the state’s obligation to protect our freedom to mess up.

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes.” and “Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.” Ghandi

Lonnie E. Schubert:


This paper builds an in-depth physics model and ignores the oversimplifications taken for granted by most of climate science. The alarmism simply cannot be supported when a thorough physics model, including spectroscopy, is used to examine the data. Our Professor Brown recently pointed out the pitfalls associated with oversimplifications.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

Hot on the heels of the Lewis and Curry paper, we have this new paper, which looks to be well researched, empirically based, and a potential blockbuster for dimming the alarmism that has been so prevalent over climate sensitivity. With a climate sensitivity of just 0.43°C, it takes the air out of the alarmism balloon.

The Hockey Schtick writes: A new paper published in the Open Journal of Atmospheric and Climate Change by renowned professor of physics and expert on spectroscopy Dr. Hermann Harde finds that climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO2 levels is only about 0.43C, about 7 times less than the IPCC claims, but in line with many other published low estimates of climate sensitivity. 

The paper further establishes that climate sensitivity to tiny changes in solar activity is comparable to that of CO2 and by no means insignificant as the IPCC prefers to claim.


View original 1,702 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Quite significant. “This increase represents a 16% correction, which is large enough to explain the persistent overestimation of growth rates of historical atmospheric CO2 by Earth system models. Without this correction, the CFE for global GPP is underestimated by 0.05 PgC/y/ppm. This finding implies that the contemporary terrestrial biosphere is more CO2 limited than previously thought.”
It seems to me the take-away is that we are only beginning to have enough CO2 in the air for the plants. As the plants optimize to the slightly more plentiful plant food, they will increase their uptake even more.
It is worthwhile to keep in mind that while rates of burning have been ever increasing for decades, the CO2 concentration has been growing approximately linearly. While we have been tracking CO2, it grows steady, but the amount of CO2 we humans are adding goes up faster every year. It sure seems the plants are screaming, “THANK YOU!”

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

Global climate models have underestimated the amount of CO2 being absorbed by plants, according to new research.

Scientists say that between 1901 and 2010, living things absorbed 16% more of the gas than previously thought.

The authors say it explains why models consistently overestimated the growth rate of carbon in the atmosphere.

But experts believe the new calculation is unlikely to make a difference to global warming predictions.

The research has been published in the journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Working out the amount of carbon dioxide that lingers in the atmosphere is critical to estimating the future impacts of global warming on temperatures.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29601644


Understanding and accurately predicting how global terrestrial primary production responds to rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations is a prerequisite for reliably assessing the long-term climate impact of anthropogenic fossil CO2 emissions. Here we demonstrate that current carbon cycle models…

View original 291 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Overwrought subject headings are not problems. Letting people die so you can feel good about your “green” street cred is a problem.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:


I provide this video for informational and entertainment purposes only. I have no opinion pro or con on it. Videographer Paul Budline writes:

First, pardon the overwrought subject heading.  But I would like as many people as possible to see a 5-minute piece that I just finished.  It focuses on the unintended consequences of marchers demanding an end to fossil fuels.
It’s obviously shot on a shoestring and relies heavily on stock footage, but it’s an important topic:

View original

Lonnie E. Schubert:


Grace. We all need it, and God’s grace is sufficient.

Originally posted on Musings on Science and Theology:

YanceyPhilip Yancey has a new book coming out Vanishing Grace: What Ever Happened to the Good News?. This book tackles a topic that is down to earth real in my world and makes an interesting complement to Tuesday’s post Coming Soon … “The Talk”?. In his NY Times opinion piece David Barash argues that science has undermined any rational basis for faith in God and describes a no nonsense approach that makes this clear to his students. He can get away with this because his view is no longer an uncommon sentiment in our western world. Many (most?) of his peers, while not so abrupt, will agree with his conclusion. In Western societies many go a step further and see Christian faith as a net negative in society. Frankly, Christian faith is losing traction in society. It has lost traction in Europe and Canada where far fewer than…

View original 659 more words

SARAH REINHARD wrote a short interview with the authors of Would You Baptize an Extraterrestrial?: … and Other Questions from the Astronomers’ In-box at the Vatican Observatory


Looks quite interesting.


Worthy article pointing out the truth. Children are not the problem.

Stephen Phelan writing for First Things:




I remember long ago, there were people asking, “Why is a village considered more prosperous if a goat is born, but less prosperous if a child is born?”

Property rights. If the government of a place will guard and ensure the rights and freedoms of its citizens, in their persons and in their property, then each tries to better his own lot by industry and trade and voluntary cooperation.

Sure, the relationships are complex, but the requirements are simple. Security in person and property, the rest takes care of itself.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 365 other followers

%d bloggers like this: