I post a lot. I get nearly no feedback. No worries. That isn’t what I’m doing.

Here, I’m interested in recording what I’m interested in. I hope to write and learn here. Writing helps me think.

On Facebook, it is mostly just sharing what I came across that interested me at the moment. I get a like on Facebook here and there, but mostly only when I post a photograph of one of my exceptionally beautiful daughters. (Yes, I’m a proud daddy, but of course, my wife and mother get all the credit in the beauty department.) Facebook is so random. I mostly figure there is no telling what people saw even if they were trying.

I posted today that this is the tenth anniversary of my father’s death, and I received some very appreciated comments. I suppose I would have thought there would have been more.

It really is not that big a deal to me, but it just seems it needed another word. Thus, this.

Lonnie E. Schubert:

This is only part of why solar will never be significant. It has it’s place, and as rgb points out, it may become fairly common as an add-in, if, if, and if… Still, solar just CANNOT be a substantive share of our energy needs. We must burn the fuels. It is burn or die. Really.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

black_solar_cellGuest essay by Philip Dowd

Whenever the subject of renewable energy comes up, the conversation usually turns to solar. You hear statements like: “The world receives more energy from the sun in one hour than the global economy uses in one year.”[a] You then ask yourself; “Why can’t we just capture the energy from the sun and solve our energy problem that way?” Why not, indeed?

View original 3,353 more words

The Freeman published an interesting story. The Freeman is published by the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE).

Keep Them Down, Keep Them Dependent

How to prevent the young and poor from succeeding

JULY 30, 2014 by ISAAC M. MOREHOUSE

He makes a compelling case.

http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/keep-them-down-keep-them-dependent

If the objective is to hamstring our youth, then what we are doing should work quite well.

This is further evidence that we must rid ourselves of the notions of institutionalized compulsion. We must repeal all truancy laws and empower mothers (and fathers) to educate their children any way they see fit. We must allow children the freedom, with parental guidance, to choose for themselves. (Developmentally appropriate freedom.)

Obviously forcing them to go to school (and punishing their parents if they don’t) doesn’t work. That is, the outcome is semieducated drones that just cannot function as independent, self-sufficient adults.

Since we spend a dozen or two years teaching them to be dependent, what else should we expect?

End truancy.

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Contact your congressional representative and your Senators. We must repeal the necessary laws to eliminate the EPA, and we must replace it with a small, targeted, and limited agency with no executive authority. Limit its duration from the beginning.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

How a Club of Billionaires and Their Foundations Control the Environmental Movement and Obama’s EPA

A new report was released today by the Senate Environment and Public Works committee, and it is damning. All this time that climate skeptics are accused of being in the employ of “big oil” is nothing more than a projection of their own greed.

Some excerpts:

Over 7.9 BILLION in funding between these groups. 

View original 45 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Repulsive Harvard Prof taunts the disabled. While this is absurdly typical of fundamentalist alarmists, it is also typical of progressives.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

While Steve McIntyre writes in detail about the sorts of gyrations that went on behind the scenes with Ove Hugh-Goldberg and John Cook, trying to prevent having to reveal Cooks’ rating data on his “97% consensus” paper by requests from Dr. Richard Tol, I stumbled across something so hateful, so juvenile, so bereft of moral character, that I couldn’t just let it be, and believe me I thought long and hard about whether to bring this up. I decided that certain forms of abuse just can’t go unchallenged.

It’s one thing to say things about me because I hold contrary ideas about global warming, that’s fair game. But I have to say that combining that criticism of my views on global warming with taunts over my hearing problem, is just so over-the-top and beyond decency, that it deserves a notice here.

View original 186 more words

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Recorded history, not simulation form computer games.

Originally posted on Watts Up With That?:

GWBurningFrozenEarth[1]

Earth: A Climate Janus

From But Now You Know. There is most certainly a pattern to climate change…but it’s not what you may think:

For at least 114 120 years, climate “scientists” have been claiming that the climate was going to kill us…but they have kept switching whether it was a coming ice age, or global warming.

(A timeline of claims follows, updated to 2014)

View original 2,201 more words

Worth the while:

http://petalsofjoy.org/?p=1116

 

The ROPE organization realizes that the work required to Restore Oklahoma Public Education is not about stopping CCSS, so on they work. So must we all. Our Governor has realized her error on Common Core, now she needs to back up her realization and take the lead in helping our state set reasoned standards and develop reasonable, age appropriate ways to measure it.

I am not convinced that Governor Fallin holds what we generally call conservative principles. Yes, she is conservative, but she seems to have statist, progressivist leanings, or she would have never bought into CCSS in the first place. Being the head of an organization does not mean you necessarily support its projects. CCSS is a project that Mary Fallin should have canned the day after she took the reins of the National Governors Association.

I think the word is out that Jeb Bush is a RINO at best, a true statist who says Republicans to need focus on winning elections, not making points. Same for Chris Christie, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/04/06/jeb-bush-to-make-decision-on-2016-by-the-end-of-this-year/ Their efforts to continue CCSS nonsense is not the example to follow.

Frankly, we need to stand on Constitutional principles and work for less government, less regulation, and lower budgets. Our Governor does not seem to always stay focused on such. She seems to be running for POTUS herself. Frankly, I’d rather see T.W. Shannon run for President.

Anyway, the ladies at ROPE posted this, http://restoreoklahomapubliceducation.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-oklahoma-standards-writing-process.html, and it is worthy of consideration. Our Governor needs to take the lead here. If we can involve Dr. Sandra Stotsky, I suggest we should.

Ms. Nova had this, http://joannenova.com.au/2014/07/what-meetings-are-like-for-engineers/

I’m sure it is elsewhere. It will probably not make you laugh, but it is quite humorous, at least if you are an engineer.

Gina McCarthy said. “And the great thing about this proposal is it really is an investment opportunity. This is not about pollution control.”

Ms. Jo pointed this out, http://joannenova.com.au/2014/07/gina-mccarthy-epa-carbon-reduction-is-not-about-pollution-its-about-money/

Dr. Roy Spencer, likewise, http://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/07/epa-admits-to-senate-that-co2-regs-not-about-pollution-control/

With governmental regulation agencies, it’s always about the money; more money for their budget and more power and control for them.

Regulation is what will destroy this county, not taxes or deficits.

 

First, what’s up with prefixes and hyphens? https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/576/01/ http://www.allaboutlearningpress.com/how-to-teach-prefixes#Six rules for hyphens with prefixes Prefixes are normally not hyphenated.

The two authorities I consider definitive agree, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-STYLEMANUAL-2008/content-detail.html, and http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/home.html.

Anyway, if one types antiscience in a browser (at least Chrome), it shows as misspelled. It isn’t, but it is often misused. Typing it into Google search brings up what you might expect. I see wikipedia first, and it is a sad article. I suppose most scientists are antiscience if I’m to accept this statement, “Antiscience proponents also criticize what they perceive as the unquestioned privilege, power and influence science seems to wield in society, industry and politics; they object to what they regard as an arrogant or closed-minded attitude amongst scientists.”

Richard Feynman strongly advocated questioning authority, doubting, and digging deep into all topics of interest. He and nearly all great scientists have denounced any attitude of privilege or power in science.

What the statement seems to be describing is scientism. That is another word Chrome doesn’t know how to spell, and it is another word misused across the internet. Most people see different results in Google (et al.) searches, but the first several results presented indicate scientism is simply an acceptance of science as useful. No. Put simply, scientism makes science into a religion. It is the deification of science itself. That is a sad state. One cannot place ultimate moral authority and purpose into empirical experimentation and observation.

As to accepting science as useful and trustworthy overall, well, that is what normal people do. Scientism is a more dangerous form of superstition, at least when “scientists” are afforded the status of priests or shaman.

For the most part, everyone accepts science as good and useful, but people also have priorities, and when a higher priority contradicts simple facts, the facts are sidestepped in some way. Accordingly, we must guard against getting our priorities out of whack. As Feynman said, we must be careful not to fool ourselves, and we are the easiest ones to fool.

Getting to my point, it is in vogue to decry anyone who does not support evolution or isn’t afraid of global warming as antiscience. What I don’t get is how the two can be equated. Biology is well established and accessible to anyone who wants to look into it. It is easy to look up related information, it is easy to look around and see the biological similarities, and it is even easy to do some of the pertinent experiments for yourself. None of that is true with regard to what is referred to as climate science.

The people who reject biological evolution tend to see it as a threat or as opposed to their faith and innermost beliefs. It is understandable that they would be weary, but it is apparent that as more religious leaders come to grips with the subject, that more people accept the facts and quit being afraid.

Not so with global warming alarmism. First, it is alarmism; the same as any ancient apocalyptic or any modern doomsday cult. That alone should clue folks were the science resides in the matter. Further, the people who oppose alarmism tend to be well educated, scientists and engineers, and they tend to have no apparent religious motives, but rather scientific motives.

Overall, I assert the word antiscience seldom applies, and it should be used very sparingly. Name calling is emotionalism. Science cannot afford to succumb to emotionalism.

Perhaps I’ll receive feedback and write more in response, but for the moment, I will simply state that Dr. Webb’s articles are arguments, not proofs. He is hoping we can discuss, have a conversation, and not fight over it.

He first compares the Civil Rights movement to the gay marriage activist strategies.

http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2014/07/why-gay-rights-are-not-the-new-civil-rights

Then he responds to a critic with some thorough and thoughtful reasoning.

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2014/07/can-gay-love-really-be-straight-2

These articles are worthy of thorough reading, and perhaps we can all learn more together.

I generally find Dr. Webb quite worth reading. He makes me think.

http://www.firstthings.com/featured-author/stephen-h-webb

Lonnie E. Schubert:

Lomborg is not my favorite person to quote, but he is always fact-based. Hard to argue with facts.

Originally posted on STOP THESE THINGS:

Bjorn-Lomborg-wsj

Bjørn Lomborg: the Skeptical Environmentalist.

When it comes to assessing the costs, risks and benefits of environmental policy Bjørn Lomborg has always tried to provide balanced, detailed analysis supported by facts and evidence. The economic choices we make – about allocating scarce resources to unlimited wants – should – as Lomborg consistently points out – be made taking into account all of the costs weighed against properly measured benefits (see our post here).

When it comes to renewable energy policy, however, fundamental economic doctrine has been simply thrown to the wind.

The wind industry and its parasites tout spurious and unproven benefits in terms of CO2 emissions reductions – reductions which cannot and will never be delivered by a generation source delivered at crazy, random intervals that adds nothing to the entire Eastern Australian Grid hundreds of times each year – and which, therefore, requires 100% of its…

View original 1,033 more words

I spotted this article on Facebook:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140720204633.htm

It indicates that most of the factors that contribute to autism can be attributed to our common genetic factors. Some seem to kind of stack up, and then one or two of other key factors can add up to something significant and result in being on the autism scale. There is significant information there, but the article is at Nature, here:

http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ng.3039.html

As usual, Nature is very proud of their articles. You’ll have to fork over some big bucks if you want to read it. (Well, you can rent it on Read Cube for less, but I haven’t spent any time figuring out what that means.)

HOWEVER, note that there is a list of references and lots of supplemental information for those interested in digging in and figuring out exactly what these researchers are on to.

I’m not digging in, so I cannot suggest how many of the references are also behind paywalls versus freely available. Keep in mind that many libraries, particularly university libraries, will have subscriptions, and these articles and resources will be available for taking the time to visit the library and determining their requirements for checkout and research.

Anyway, it shows progress, even if it doesn’t show hope of a quick fix.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 354 other followers

%d bloggers like this: