Dean's World

I hope you're all having a fun night.

I have my hair in a mohawk. Anyone want to see it? :-)

Iran’s hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told the latest cabinet meeting in the Iranian capital that “if we were permitted to hang two or three persons, the problems with the stock exchange would be solved for ever”, according to a Tehran-based newspaper.

Frustrated with the inability of his economic advisers and experts to come up with any solution, Ahmadinejad told them that the only way out of the current stock exchange and financial market problems was to “frighten” speculators by hanging two or three of them.

The Blog.

Those of us who were disappointed in the President's choice of Harriet Miers have gotten what we wanted with his appointment of Judge Samuel Alito: a solid conservative who is making the Democrats arch their backs and hiss and spit. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., attacked Bush today for not picking someone in the "mold of Sandra Day O'Connor, who would unify us." Rrreeow!! PHFTHP! PHFTHP! MeeeowrRRRR!!!

Man I love politics...

Ron Coleman has some thoughts on the matter.

I must admit to being completely torn. I am of the "information wants to be free" mentality, although when I say that I mean "free" like free speech and not like free beer. So I hate when people just hijack other people's work to make money for themselves and don't compensate the original creator. But I also hate it when information is locked up and hard to get--out of print books that are hard to find, stuff locked away in estates no one can get to, and scientific journals which charge hundreds or thousands of dollars just to look at what they have. (The latter is particularly irksome when it's reports on studies paid for primarily by government grants.)

Entirely coincidentally, in another thread here on Dean's World recently, the topic of one of my favorite minor historical characters came up: Vilhjalmur Stefansson (See Wikipedia entry here). He was an early 20th century scientist in the old romantic tradition, who made major contributions to anthropology as well as medicine by travelling and living among previously-unstudied people in the arctic. He had studies published in prominent anthropological journals as well as the Journal of the American Medical Association. Yet today, all his books are out of print, his papers are in editions of the scientific journals which are not currently online, and anything else is locked up in a storage room somewhere in the Dartmouth college library.

The man died 43 years ago. You would think that at this point most or all his works should be free to the public for open distribution on the internet, but good luck trying to get that done. The only person who can grant permission is his widow, who long ago remarried and no longer answers mail or telephone inquiries regarding her first husband's work. (At least, the last I checked. By now she may have passed away.)

The practical financial value of his papers is very low. Yet he's a fascinating minor historical figure who was once very nearly as famous as Charles Lindberg or Marie Curie. There would be value in getting his papers online for free access, but good luck trying to read any of it unless you haunt rare book establishments, or make an appointment with the Dartmouth library staff. Public redistribution? No chance. That to me is crazy. It should be out there. (I've read some of it and it's all deeply fascinating.)

So when I read what Google is doing with "indexing" content, part of me cheers, and part of me cringes, and I'm not sure what exactly I think.

Apparently there is some confusion on why this is funny. If you are not getting it, click here to clear things up...

Well I guess I'm behind the times. Apparently the practice of third parties hijacking blog article and traffic content and placing it on their own page is growing as a way to troll for search traffic and thus generate ad revenue. A service to stop it exists: Splog Reporter.

I guess I've had my head in a hole, I really hadn't heard about this before. Now I know. Die sploggers die!

In response to this thread on In Search of Utopia, I was going to re-post an old article of mine, "Rosa Parks Laments." I was planning on putting it up this week anyway as Rosa Parks fittingly lies in state in Washington DC, but David's thread got me going again.

I was a little annoyed, however because none of the links in my original article work anymore, and I couldn't find new links to replace them. Which means a re-posting would virtually require a re-write. I finally decided it would be best just to link it again in honor of this great lady's passing. So here it is again: Rosa Parks Laments.

Glenn's really tired of historical revisionism on the reasons we went to Iraq.

So am I. Having been part of those debates when they were happening, I am utterly appalled at people I used to think of as intelligent and well-informed who keep repeating falsehood after falsehood after falsehood. And I am utterly exhausted with having to, at least once a month or so, go back and rehash the same arguments because some people are not honest enough, diligent enough, or caring enough to go back and look at the historical record and just be honest about it.

I find having to rehash it all about as pleasant and satisfying as chewing on aluminum foil. It's not disagreement I can't stand, it's the constant repetition of falsehoods that makes me want to scream. Glenn's latest debunking roundup is the best I've seen lately for rehashing what should have been settled long ago.

Christopher Hitchens says the Plame kerfuffle has made fools of almost everybody.

I'm inclined to agree. But then, somewhat to my surprise I increasingly find myself agreeing with him on almost everything.

Wow: how did this not get more attention in the media?

Well, it appears that radical Kashmir separatists killed 61 people and injured many more on Saturday. No claimed ties to Al Qaeda as yet, but I would imagine it's only a matter of time before groups like this seek such ties.

Here's the thing: stable and prosperous democracies generally speaking do not react in ways that terrorists want, most of the time. Despite whatever impressions you may have from movies or from history, India today is just such a place, with a rapidly growing middle class, rapidly rising standards of living, and clear and undeniable movement toward greater and greater civil and political freedom. They are in fact the largest liberal democracy in the world today.

I predict therefore that this event will cause India to be more determined than ever not to give up either its dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir, and yet more determined than ever to work with Pakistan to get and keep the borders open in cooperation with Pakistan.

The real question is, how will Pakistan's far less prosperous and free government react?

Moore's law states that computers double in power and go down in price about every 18 months. Although that sounds ludicrous, that law has held true for over 40 years now and shows no sign of slowing down today. As far back as 1980, a 1 megahertz computer cost around two thousand dollars. Today a computer running at 3 gigahertz--3,000 times faster--sells for well under a thousand dollars. And that's just the clock speed, that's not counting the fact that those 1 mhz processors only processed 8 bits of data at a time, whereas modern applications process 32 or more bits at a time. The machines now are roughly 15-20,000 times more powerful. In only 25 years.

If Moore's Law continues to hold, well, do the math. Today you can buy a 3 gigahertz computer for under a thousand dollars (EXAMPLE).

What will 20 years bring? 20 years divided by 18 months is 13.3.

3 gigahertz 2^13d power is 30,257 gigahertz*. There'll be storage and memory amounts that have multiplied that far as well. All for well under a thousand dollars.

What will we be able to do with that kind of computing power? The mind boggles. But don't be foolish and say "no one will ever need that much." The more you can do, the more you want to do. My first hard drive had ten megabytes of storage and cost about $600. Today you can buy USB memory drives with 128 megabytes of storage for under $20. Pictures, songs, movies, a running video recording of your entire life, and more. There's no end to what people will want to do, or be able to do.

It's fun to think of the top side of that, but the dangers will be there too, and we will see it on our watch. Imagine what you can do with gene splicing equipment in your own home.

* - Corrected

* Update * An objection is made that processors can't keep going up in clock speed ("hertz") forever. But this has long been true; indeed, everybody who knows how they work acknowledge that the "hertz" rating is really just a very rough shorthand for speed. Parallel processing, wider buses, and new materials mean that processors are evolving rapidly in their power. Chances are that by 2025 we won't be referring to the "hertz" rating at all anymore, but the equivalent power will have doubled many times by then.

Work safe, but barely: Colombia's answer to Victoria's Secret. And I agree with David regarding the nude form.

Neat to see these designers are popular in Costa Rica. That's one slice of heaven in Latin America.

I recently noticed that a commercial site selling porn and other web advertising has been copying, verbatim, all the postings here on Dean's World.

I've sent a polite note demanding an immediate cease and desist, and noted that all content here is copyrighted and with all rights reserved. Anyone have any advice on how else I can stop these slimeballs?

The true tale of the telekinetic monkey.

I make it a point to avoid Bill Maher's show, as I don't find irrational and ill-informed hatred and fascist apologism particularly entertaining.

However, Patterico is right, Tony Snow cleaned Maher and his entire audience and panel's clock recently, and did it with a smile and a good-natured twinkle in his eye. It was amazing to watch.

If you can get past the vicious snarling monologue the show starts with, and the interview with that name-calling moonbat Helen Thomas, the panel discussion is worth watching as Snow time after time points out things Maher & Co. don't even seem to know--but ought to. Watching him school their ignorance all while forcing them to like him was classic.

Who's your nomination for most fascinating person of the 20th century?

My nomination: Nikola Tesla.

Some people will never get it.

I call such people our modern-day reactionaries, although for some strange reason some choose to call them "liberals." I never do though, because it's silly.

Wow. The European Union may not be completely dominated by crazed totalitarian sympathizers and appeasers after all: they've given a prominent award to Cuban dissidents. I'm sure Uncle Fidel bit right through one of his cigars when he heard the news.

I was also rather moved to read this story of two of Cuba's most successful recent defectors.

I am an inveterate Cuba watcher, for those of you who don't know. It comes from the fact that I used to be a Soviet communist apologist and appeaser myself. I don't think I will ever recover entirely from the shame I felt after reading The Black Book of Communism, or any of a couple of dozen other post-Soviet Union exposes like it. I hope I never quite do either. Thus my hatred--and yes, it is hatred, a hatred I'm proud of--for the leftover relics of that movement of horrors burns bright and pure. I can't wait for Castro to die, and I way without a trace of pity that I hope he dies a horribly pain-filled, fear-filled, and lonely death.

Hating the right people is good for the soul.

But as much of a Cuba-watcher as I am, if you share my own interest in this little slice of Hell just off the coast of Florida, here's an even better blog you should read. If you haven't checked it out before, you should.

1) Friendly reminder: Daylight Saving Time is over. Unless you're in one of those lucky, lucky areas that doesn't bother with this, it's now an hour earlier than it was yesterday. Reset* your clocks.

2) Why the f&@# do we let the government do this to us every year? I have never heard a single rationale for it that made the least bit of sense to me.

I notice that President Bush signed a law this year that will experiment with extending Daylight Saving to run from March to November starting in 2007. So instead of getting rid of this distracting nuisance, we get slight more of it--and the government will then conduct a study to measure the impact of the extension.

How about this for an experiment, George: make everyone's life simpler and get rid of it!

Hey, one of our boys in Iraq is getting some static he doesn't need. Sondra K has details on how you can help.

Why the hell don't we have automatic permanent residency status and expedited citizenship processes for anyone who volunteers to serve in uniform? We really ought to do that.

Interesting interview with Joel Garreau about the coming shift in human evolution--which starts within the next decade or two, according to some.

Unlike visionaries like Kurzweil, or utter pessimists, he's cautiously optimistic but worried.

Tony explains why, and is right about all of it.

Go share your thoughts.

My own impression: I vastly prefer the second, simpler ad.

Rand Simberg has the awful news.

One of the bigger misconceptions about the social sciences is that they are not "real" science because they use arbitrary standards, don't use math, or don't make predictions. In some areas this is probably a legitimate criticism (especially in some areas of psychology), but in many cases it's simply wrong. Demography, for example, is a science that has been one of the most influential in the last 100 years, right up there with discoveries in physics and medicine in changing how we live our lives. We see instances of demography every day without even being aware of it: the very concept of an "ethnic minority" depends upon it, as do public opinion polls (which influence how politicians govern) and census data, which provide an enormously useful look at at populations and trends over time.

Another area that really is a science is political science. One of the most easily accessible data sets in political science is the Freedom House data set, which measures freedom around the world. You think it can't be measured? They've been using the same measurement standards for well over 30 years, and that data set has been used to make remarkably vigorous predictions.

Yes, of course, there's some arbitrariness and subjectivity to some of the measurements used in political science, but so what? If you think other fields don't have that problem, try some time to get a biologist to give you a specific, concrete, universally understood and agreed-upon definition of "species" that all of his colleagues will agree with. Or ask a physicist how you determine both the position and velocity of a subatomic particle.

The Freedom House data has been used to make some remarkable predictions: for example, no two nations ranked at least 4,4 or better has ever gone to war with any other nation ranked 4,4 or better, and the Democratic Peace Theory holds that they never will. So far there have been literally hundreds of thousands of opportunities for that to be falsified, and it never has been. Thus what you have here is a strong theory. (There's a weak version which says merely that it will be rare, but so far the proposed exceptions are very weak indeed.)

Interestingly, political scientists have also put together indexes to measure corruption. While it might surprise a few folks, political scientist Rudy Rummel notes that his fellow scientists have found that the more democratic a nation is, the less corruption there is in government.

This should be no surprise if you think hard about it. Free speech, free press, and free elections make corruption much riskier. When we see evidence of corruption in the new, it's not evidence of how corrupt our system is, it's evidence that it's working properly.

Think of it another way: if you come down with a fever, is that proof your body is hopelessly corrupted with infection? In some rare cases yes, especially if the fever goes completely out of control. But most often, in the vast majority of cases, it's just a symptom of your body successfully fighting off an infection.

Rudy also makes the interesting observation that sometimes in science you get a theory that people seem obsessed over. The Democratic Peace Theory is just such a theory, because it's shown through rigorous data analysis and specific predictions that democracy reduces war, reduces poverty, reduces starvation, and, yes, reduces corruption. People hear you talk like that and it sounds like you think you've found a panacea, but all you have to do is look at the data, folks.

I had a similar experience some years ago experimenting with low-carbohydrate diets. I was part of a community of people who used them. Those who advocated low-carb diets routinely said they weren't for everybody but that in a substantial number of people they could a) help lose weight, b) help diabetics attain blood sugar control, c) reduce blood pressure, and d) improve serum cholesterol numbers.

This by eating a diet consisting of things like red meat, bacon, eggs, and cheese on a daily basis.

I remember the howls of rage I would get from some people, the incredible scorn, and yes, the warnings that I was advocating something dangerous that would kill myself and others. Dr. Robert Atkins was a flake, a liar, a con artist, and even possibly a murderer.

It was amusing to watch over the last decade as controlled study after controlled study showed that, indeed, for at least some people, those were the exactly predictable results of such diets. For years Atkins had advocated that such studies be done because of the results he was seeing in his patients, but no one wanted to do them. They preferred to abuse him and a few of his colleagues who said they had the same results instead.

I think that was my first experience in dealing with fulminating bullies in science and medicine. It was most instructive, and is something I've never forgotten. When the data is on his side, even a mouse can stand up to a lion.

Scott Kirwin's got articles from The New Scientist (a publication I generally like by the way) which are critical of the ID proponents in Dover: here, here, and here. I'm sure some will find them inspiring reading and useful ammunition. I find most of it irrelevant and some of it depressingly predictable, like reading a New York Times piece on red state America and the strange specimens found there.

What's sad is that these people can't even make themselves think for one minute--not for one minute--that maybe, just maybe, it's they who are imposing doctrine and trampling free inquiry and democratic values, that it might just be they who are acting in the mold of William Jennings Bryan and not the sadly beleaguered (and apparently Dowdified) Michael Behe.

The biggest irony of all is that they even admit that there's a very good possibility they could win their way through democratic means, but they prefer to see that as a backup, a sort of last-ditch escape hatch: "Oh, if we don't get to impose our will by forced censorship, maybe we can count on open debate and democratic values? Well that's cold comfort, but at least we've got that as an emergency escape hatch. Or maybe we'll just move to France."

Chances are they'll win the day in court, because it looks like precedent is on their side--never mind that the precedent they rely on is an attrocious one. When they win they'll almost certainly high-five themselves and congratulate each other for their court-imposed victory against pernicious ideas and corrupting influences that might cause our young people to think improper thoughts.

"Oh we got trouble my friends, right here in Science City!"

The result will be the same: another generation of kids taught that scientists are intellectual tyrants who are afraid of a debate, and that science teachers lie to them and censor ideas they don't like. Oh yeah, and that school board elections are a farce, that school boards only exist to rubber-stamp whatever the Federal courts officially approve of.

Meanwhile, science curriculums around America will remain a boring, bland, uninspiring regurgitation of nothing but officially approved dogma, typically averaging about 10-20 years behind the real state of research in most fields. And the vast majority of people will continue to think of scientists as the high priests of an arcane religion that they find incomprehensible and intimidating, or intolerant and dogmatic.

I can't write on this subject anymore. It's too upsetting.

Although we can't say for sure yet, I'd say odds are Bill Quick is right on Scooter Libby.

Mind you, Libby deserves whatever he gets, unless this is a massive frameup (highly unlikely).

Couldn't the White Sox and the Astros come back and play a couple more games, just for the heck of it?

This is mildly amusing: a Walloon husband is suing his Flemish wife in Belgium for racism.

I guess political correctness isn't just rampant here in the US, although I can't help but think if it was the wife suing the husband people would be cheering her on.

I also think the best thing about Belgium is the fact that their major ethic groups are called "Flemings" and "Walloons." I'm not sure even Dr. Suess could come up with better names.

By the way, interesting point: Belgium has been divided between these two different ethnic groups, with two different languages, for only about 175 years. So much for the notion that different ethnic groups, despite their tensions, can't form a stable democracy.

So what are you up to?

A sniper fires on American troops in Iraq. In the milliseconds before the bullet hits — in fact, before the shot is even heard — a computer screen reveals the gun's model and exact location.

That's the kind of intelligence that can save soldiers' lives. The Army is currently testing the technology in combat.

Kimzey said that because the technology has become so mobile and keeps getting smaller, there's virtually no end to the possibilities.

For example, the Marines recently tested a program that links the infrared detector to an automatic weapon. It would allow the combatant wielding that weapon to get a shot off almost immediately after the enemy fired.

So. The Vice President's chief assistant has been indicted on minor felony charges for obfuscating during an investigation--an investigation that appears to have turned up no crime except said obfuscation.

It is certainly serious to lie to a grand jury, even if your motives are fairly trivial. In the case of Scooter Libby, it's probably to be assumed that he started sweating and thought he might have done something wrong and so did the idiot thing and started denying. But the question must be asked: two years and how many millions of dollars on this investigation, and this is the best that could be produced? Not even an indictment for revealing the identity of an undercover agent, just obfuscating during the investigation? This is tame even by the "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" standard--which is another special prosecutor investigation that should never have happened in the first place.

Yes, dear reader, I have said in the past that I thought Clinton's impeachment was correct, but I've also said repeatedly that I only thought so because once you had proof of felony perjury, no matter how trivial, you had a felony. But I always thought that having special prosecutors was a bad idea and I still do, and that those investigations should have stopped well short of putting Clinton in that position in the first place. The country shouldn't have been put through that, it really shouldn't have been.

This practice of unendingly investigating government officials and then finding anything possible to indict them on needs to end. We've now got to the point where the assistant to the Vice President is being indicted not for doing anything to endanger national security or endanger an undercover agent, but for, apparently, freaking out and dissembling on the stand. What next? Indicting the office interns?

More special prosecutor indictment roundup here.

My life just got a little better now that I've discovered the semi-official home page of the spork.

Yowza, how cheap is this?

(Via Penny Wit.)

Wow. Denny Hastert has a blog.

What a world.

Ayn Clouter notes a civil rights travesty, and has a judicial nomination suggestion to help redress the grievance.

I think her recommendation is a bit too liberal though. I prefer a more conservative nominee, say a Du Pont or a Ford....

Dean's world reader Mark writes:

Hey Dean-

You've already posed some questions for skeptics wrt intelligent design, so how about some for the ID proponents?

If you decide to do a post like that, I was wondering if you might touch on one thorny subject. IDers are postulating a designer, and from what I gather the more philosophical-minded of them imagine this designer to be one that sets up the laws of the universe which then became increasingly complex, etc., until life came about.

Well, OK as far as that goes, but that's exactly what philosophers themselves do, meaning that these IDers are creating a God in their own image rather than the other way 'round.

That's creating an Idol to worship, isn't it?

-Mark

That's a fine question. I'll add another skeptical question for the Intelligent Design advocates: a key hallmark to a genuine scientific theory is that you make specific, falsifiable predictions. Real science doesn't require lab work per se, but making predictions is key. So what are the specific predictions that ID would teach us that we can test?

I'll note that I asked this in a comment on William Dembske's blog, and rather than being answered it was deleted. Possibly this was for being off-topic, I don't know.

ID proponents are at their strongest when they note the rather substantial areas not covered by evolutionary theory, the very biggest one of all being that we haven't got any more than vague ideas of how life made the leap from prebiotic to so much as the most primitive of single-celled organisms. But where they seem weak is that the ID proponents make very few predictions. At least, I've only seen one or two. So what are the big predictions ID makes?

..and Mecca malls?

Marcus at Harry's place says:

Why do Islamist terrorists want to steer aeroplanes packed with frightened passengers into office blocks and murder Jews wherever they are found?

[Guardian columnist Dylan Evans] has decided he knows:

..If this really was the end of history, it would be an awful anticlimax. Look at the way we live now, in the west. We grow up in increasingly fragmented communities, hardly speaking to the people next door, and drive to work in our self-contained cars. We work in standardised offices and stop at the supermarket on our way home to buy production-line food which we eat without relish. There is no great misery, no hunger, and no war. But nor is there great passion or joy. Despite our historically unprecedented wealth, more people than ever before suffer from depression...

...It is this complacency, this lack of idealism, that is in part responsible for the repugnance with which Muslim extremists view western society.

What can you do here but fall about and cackle helplessly? I just love 'self-contained cars'. Better would be cars which you can fall out of so as to fall into other people's. Then there's 'we eat without relish' (hey, you could pick some up at that supermarket) and 'nor is there great passion or joy'. Well, speak for yourself, why don't you?

I have a vision in America, Muslims owning property all over, Muslim businesses, factories, halal meat, supermarkets, all these buildings owned by Muslims. Can you see the vision, can you see the Newark International Airport and a John Kennedy Airport and LaGuardia having Muslim fleets of planes, Muslim pilots. Can you see our trucks rolling down the highways, Muslim names. Can you imagine walking down the streets of Teaneck, [New Jersey]: three Muslim high schools, five Muslim junior-high schools, fifteen public schools. Can you see the vision, can you see young women walking down the street of Newark, New Jersey, with long flowing hijab and long dresses. Can you see the vision of an area of no crime, controlled by the Muslims?

We bow to Mecca five times a day in increasingly fragmented communities, hardly speaking to the people next door, and drive to work in our self-contained cars. We work in standardised offices and stop at the halal butcher on our way home to buy food which we eat without relish. There is no great misery, no hunger, and no war. But nor is there great passion or joy.

* UPDATE: This vision was from Wahhabi-trained Brooklyn Imam Siraj Wahhaj who has called for replacing the American government with a caliphate. Wahhaj was also featured in Pipes' article. He was a character witness for Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, the cleric convicted for his role in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Siddiqi's vision was to see Islamists in power in Washington before 2020. My mistake.

Huh. George Takei has come out of the closet.

Some probably wonder why he took so long. Mostly young people who don't remember what it was like 25, 35, or 45 years ago.

Peggy Hall has a good takedown of another attack piece on the dangers of blogging.

I don't agree with Fred Reed on everything, but I do agree with him a lot, and on this one he's spot on so far as I'm concerned:

Why, oh why, are the curricula of the schools the business of the courts? If Pennsylvania wants to mention Creationism, or to require three years of French for graduation, it seems mightily to me that these things are the business of parents in Pennslyvania. Yes, I know: In practice, both freedom of expression and local government are regarded as ideals greatly to be avoided. The desire to centralize government, impose doctrine, and punish doubt is never far below the surface, anywhere. Thus our highly controlled media, our "hate-speech" laws, our political correctness and, now, Evolutionary Prohibition. The Catholic Church once burned heretics. The Church of Evolution savages them in obscure journals and denies them tenure and publication. As a heretic I believe that I would prefer the latter, but the intolerance is the same.

And:

Now, what grave consequences are thought to await if children hear briefly in school an argument that they have heard a dozen times in the course of ordinary life? Will the foundations of civilization crack? The birds of the air plunge, appalled, to earth? The planets shudder in their orbits and fall inward in dismay? Surely everyone short of the anencephalic knows of Creationism.

Or is it thought that kids attracted to the sciences will abruptly change their course through life and enter the clergy? That applications to graduate school in biochemistry will cease? Children learn (or did) of the Greek gods and goddesses, and that ancient people believed that the earth rode on the back of a giant turtle. I have not heard that they now sacrifice oxen to Athena.

And my favorite part:

Now (and I hope this doesn’t bore those who have read me before on the matter), an entertaining way to study the politics is to ask the Evolutionists questions that a scientist would answer (since scientists are not ashamed not to know things), but that an ideologue can’t afford to. They are simple. (1) Has the chance occurrence of life been demonstrated in the laboratory? Yes or no. (2) Do we really know, as distinct from guess, hope, or imagine, of what the primeval seas consisted? Yes or no. (3) Do we know, as distinct from guess, pray, wave our arms, and hold our breath and turn blue, what seas would be needed for the chance formation of life? Yes or no. (4) Can we show mathematically, without crafted and unsupportable assumptions, that the formation of life would be probable in any soup whatever? Yes or no.

I once posed these questions in a column on Fredoneverything.net and, in another place, to a group of committed evangelicals of Evolution. A tremendous influx of email resulted. Much of it was predictable. Many Christians congratulated me on having disproved Evolution, which I had not done. The intelligent and independent-minded wrote thoughtfully. Of the Knights Templar of Evolution, none—not one—answered the foregoing yes-or-no questions. They ducked. They dodged. They waxed wroth. They called names.

This is the behavior not of scientists but of true believers.

Although that last description is not true of anyone who currently has a working comment account here on Dean's World, it does adequately describe a couple who've been tossed out for boorish behavior, and what I've encountered in other forums. It also describes some bloggers I know to a "t".

Fred's column is a treasure from start to finish. You can read the whole thing here.

I'll finally add this: The courts did a tremendously stupid and destructive thing back in the 1980s when they banned so-called "creation science." The impression was made loud and clear to tens of millions of parents and students: scientists are intellectual bullies and cowards, and science teachers are liars who censor arguments that don't fit their prejudices.

You deny that was the intent? No matter. That was irrefutably the result.

There are people right now in Dover, Pennsylvania fighting to ban a completely harmless book called Of Pandas And People from public school science classes, against the express wishes of a majority of the parents. Tap-dance around it all you want, that is an attempt to ban a book from the classroom and censor ideas. You can put all the lipstick you want on this pig, with armwaving generalizations about "separation of church and state," but the pig won't get any prettier. It is censorship that is being advocated here, period. It will belong right on the ALA's Banned books list, alongside The Catcher in the Rye and Huckleberry Finn. If the Stalinist ACLU and the self-proclaimed "defenders of science" have their way, anyhow.

And if they do get their wish and manage to get the book banned, the message will be loud and clear once again: believers in evolution are intellectual tyrants, and science teachers are liars who hide ideas from their students.

And finally, just because this doesn't ever seem to penetrate: I am frequently asked why I don't advocate that creationism, Intelligent Design, or whatever else be discussed in religion or philosophy class. The answer is stunningly obvious: I can think of nothing worse than having a religion or philosophy teacher whip out a biology textbook to point out everything she thinks is wrong with it. Who really thinks that's a good idea? No, discussing these ideas is part of the philosophy and history of science, is as old as Darwin, and is part of the tale of Darwin. It does Darwin and science no service to censor and hide from debate.

Michael Balter has it exactly right: Let them have the debate. The kids will learn more from that than they ever will by simply regurgitating whatever's in their Court-Approved textbooks, textbooks that are Carefully Filtered By The Commissars Of Science To Remove All Dangerous Thoughts.

And maybe, just maybe, the kids will learn that rigorous discussion and debate of ideas, weighing evidence and counterevidence, and learning and exploring are among the most wonderful things about science.

...is the title of an article in the Yemen Times defending me by Abdulkarim al-Khaiwani, the Yemeni editor the bloggers helped me circulate a petition for. He was granted amnesty a week later (this was back in March.) Sometimes payback is not a biaytch.

It discusses the Yemeni regime's attempts to contact me before they decided to start calling me a Zionist and numerous other nasty names in the governmental papers.

So this line is pretty funny: The question, which has been raised, is that how is it possible for the President’s journalist Mr. Sanabani to meet a Zionist writer.

Is that snark? Translated from Arabic it still comes through as snark. Jane

*Congratulations to the Chicago White Sox, from a former Chicagoan, lifelong Cardinals fan, and believer that Shoeless Joe belongs in the HOF. - SK

So Harriet Miers has withdrawn her nomination to the Supreme Court, and the President has reluctantly accepted it. I did not support Ms. Miers’ nomination, and actively called for her withdrawal. However I am not jubilant, or even happy that she will not be confirmed to the Supreme Court. While I do feel relief, I am mostly filled with concern over the President’s decision to nominate her in the first place, and the apparent drift of his presidency so early in his second term highlighted by this nomination.

The person responsible for this nomination should be forced to tender his or her resignation immediately, and the President should “reluctantly accept”it. If this person was the president himself, his advisors should resign for their failure to convince the president that it was a bad pick. If they tried but didn’t succeed at convincing the president, then they should resign for their failure to get backing for Ms. Miers nomination after it was announced.

As a center-right supporter of the president, I am not happy. This whole episode weakens the Bush’s presidency at a time when it should be nearing its peak. After next year’s elections, the President will be a “lame duck” and his influence will wane as speculation about his successor captures the headlines and spotlight.

The war on terror continues, a housing bubble is near to bursting, and the massive budget and trade deficits threaten American prosperity. Now is not the time for a weakened presidency, yet the Miers nomination has done just that.

Subj: Are you deliberately lying, or merely ignorant?

"Of 113 paid-up battalions, the Americans regard just one as reliable in a firefight,"

I don't know if you're being deliberately mendacious or are merely ignorant of the truth, but either way this is an unconscionable misstatement of fact and I will be demanding your paper issue a retraction and correction.

The number of battalions regarded as "reliable in a firefight" numbers 117, perhaps 80,000 troops, and 37 are operating independently or taking the lead in operations every day. The number you refer to is the number capable of operations totally independent of coalition forces, with no logistical or combat support (such as air support) whatsoever, not the number "reliable in a firefight."

In the hopes you are merely ignorant, allow me to educate you with work from an actual journalist:

http://billroggio.com/archives/2005/10/training_the_ir_1.php

Level Number of Battalions at Level Definition of Level
1 1 Units are completely independent; Units do not require air, armor, artillery, logistical support (supplies).
2 36 (estimate) Units are capable of independent operations, requires some level of logistical or heavy weapons support.
3 about 80 (estimate) Units are capable conducting combat operations alongside Coalition forces.
4 Undefined Units currently in training, not in combat

Kindly be more careful in the future, and avoid libelling our troops efforts in training Iraqis to defend their democracy.

Regards,
--Dave
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dear Dave Price
Thank you for your email. Your information bears no relation to the recent evidence provided by the Pentagon to the Congressional Armed Services Committee. Nor does it relate to what I was told in Baghdad last week. If you can find 117 "paid-up battalions" you are doing better than the chaotic defense ministry in Baghdad.
Yours sincerely
Simon Jenkins
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dave Price to Simon.Jenkins
More options 11:32 am (9 minutes ago)

This information is exactly what was provided to the Armed Services Committee. Your ignorance is astounding. How can you call yourself a journalist when you are so totally unaware of such basic facts?

I don't know what you were "told in Baghdad last week." I rather suspect it is merely what you wanted to hear.

This information comes directly from the Pentagon briefings, which you would know if you had bothered to read the link. Since you are apparently incapable of even that most minute level of jounalistic effort, I have copied the summary below.

Again I must insist you stop libelling our troops' efforts to train Iraqis to protect their nascent democracy. Your conduct is shameful and offensive to all freedom-loving people.

Two days ago, Lieutenant General David Petraeus, the recent commander of Multi-National Security Transition Command in Iraq [the man responsible for training the Iraqi security forces], gave a detailed briefing on the state of affairs in the training program and the progress of the Iraqi Army [well worth reading in full]. He summarized the status of the Iraqi security forces and defined the meaning of the level designations.

There are now over 197,000 trained and equipped Iraqi security forces. As folks have noted over the past week, that should be close to 200,000 by the referendum in the middle part of this month. There are over 115 police and army combat battalions in the fight. Most — about 80 — are assessed as fighting alongside our forces. That is level three, by the way, in this discussion of levels of readiness. Over 36 are assessed as being "in the lead" — that's the term for level two — including the one that is assessed as needing no coalition assistance whatsoever; i.e., fully independent. That does not mean, by the way, just fully independent operations, it means it doesn't need anything from the coalition. And again, it is not surprising that there are very, very few of those. Of those 36, a substantial number — some seven just in Baghdad alone — have their own areas of operation and, of course, that obviously includes a large number of level two units.
General Petraeus provides some examples of how Level 2 and Level 3 units participated in combat, despite not being "fully operational."

More than 10 Iraqi battalions of the 3rd Iraqi Division, the Border Force and the Police Commando Division were operating in western Nineveh province during the fighting in and around Tall Afar. Sixteen Iraqi battalions from several different divisions — police and army — are now fighting in Anbar province with our forces. Now, the bulk of those are in eastern Anbar province in the Fallujah/Ramadi area, but a number are also now out in the western in those three operations that are being conducted out there. Some of these are level two. There are actually some that are level three. An Iraqi Police Mechanized Battalion — level three, by the way — now helps coalition forces secure the Airport Road. Three Iraqi battalions, all level two — one, by the way, is a former level one that was just reassessed as part of the process — those three secure Haifa Street, which was known as "Purple Heart Boulevard." And Iraqi security forces, as I'm sure you all know, now control the holy cities of Najaf and Karbala and a number of other locations.

Regards,
--Dave

The Carnival of the Caregivers, this week's best in medical blogging, is up at Hospital Impact.

The latest Storyblogging Carnival is up at Back of the Envelope.

The latest Carnival of the Vanities is up at Baboon Pirates.

Have fun reading y'all!

The inimitable Ayn Clouter has some comments on Brent Scowcroft's 50 years of peace.

Some will think I'm being mean with this, but I'm not. As a south sider, I always loved the Sox, but in my heart of hearts I wanted the Cubbies to do good too. Seriously, I always did. So with gentle-hearted love, I re-post this immortal Steve Goodman song:

By the shores of old Lake Michigan
Where the "hawk wind" blows so cold
An old Cub fan lay dying
In his midnight hour that tolled
'round his bed, his friends had all gathered
They knew his time was short
And on his head they put this bright blue cap
From his all-time favorite sport

He told them, "It's late and it's getting dark in here
And I know it's time to go
But before I leave the line-up
Boys, there's just one thing I'd like to know:

Do they still play the blues in Chicago
When baseball season rolls around?
When the snow melts away,
Do the Cubbies still play
In their ivy-covered burial ground?
When I was a boy they were my pride and joy
But now they only bring fatigue....
To the home of the brave
The land of the free
And the doormat of the National League!"

He told his friends "You know the law of averages says:
Anything will happen that can
(That's what it says)
But the last time the Cubs won a National League pennant
Was the year we dropped the bomb on Japan!

The Cubs made me a criminal
Sent me down a wayward path
They stole my youth from me
(that's the truth)
I'd forsake my teachers
To go sit in the bleachers
In flagrant truancy!

And then one thing led to another
and soon I'd discovered alcohol, gambling, dope
football, hockey, lacrosse, tennis!
But what do you expect,
When you raise up a young boy's hopes?
And then just crush 'em like so many paper beer cups!

Year after year after year
after year, after year, after year, after year, after year
'Til those hopes are just so much popcorn
for the pigeons beneath the 'L' tracks to eat?"

He said, "You know I'll never see Wrigley Field anymore
before my eternal rest
So if you have your pencils and your score cards ready,
I'll read you my last request!"

He said, "Give me a double header funeral in Wrigley Field
On some sunny weekend day (no lights!)
Have the organ play the National Anthem
and then a little 'na, na, na, na, hey hey, hey, Goodbye!'
Make six bullpen pitchers carry my coffin
and six ground keepers clear my path
Have the umpires bark me out at every base
In all their holy wrath!

It's a beautiful day for a funeral,
'Hey Ernie lets play two!'
Somebody go get Jack Brickhouse to come back,
and conduct just one more interview!

Have the Cubbies run right out into the middle of the field,
Have Keith Moreland drop a routine fly!
Give everybody two bags of peanuts and a frosty malt
And I'll be ready to die!

Build a big fire on home plate
out of your Louisville Sluggers baseball bats,
And toss my coffin in
Let my ashes blow
in a beautiful snow
From the prevailing 30 mile an hour southwest wind!

When my last remains go flying over the left-field wall
Will bid the bleacher bums adíeu...
And I will come to my final resting place, out on Waveland Avenue!"

The dying man's friends told him to cut it out
They said, "stop it! That's an awful shame!"
He whispered, "Don't cry,
we'll meet by and by
near the Heavenly Hall of Fame!"

He said, "I've got season's tickets to watch the Angels now,
So it's just what I'm going to do"
He said, "but you the living, you're stuck here with the Cubs,
So it's me that feels sorry for you!"

And he said, "Ahh play, play that lonesome losers tune,
That's the one I like the best"
And he closed his eyes, and slipped away...
...and what we got is the Dying Cub Fan's Last Request!
And here it is:

Do they still play the blues in Chicago
When baseball season rolls around?
When the snow melts away,
Do the Cubbies still play
In their ivy-covered burial ground?
When I was a boy they were my pride and joy
But! now they only bring fatigue
To the home of the brave
The land of the free
And the doormat of the National League!

Nick Gillespie notes that the popular press has been wildly exaggerating again.

How many years is it we've been hearing now about the new fashionable drug "epidemic?" It was crack when I was growing up. But then in the late 1990s I started hearing non-stop about something called "crank," which I didn't realize until later was just a slightly less pure form of the familiar old drug, crystal methamphetamine.

By my reckoning we've been hearing about the huge growth industry of methamphetamine labs and users throughout the nation for at least five years.

So how big is the epidemic? in 2003, 607,000 people—or 0.3 percent—copped to using meth. In 2004, it was 583,000—or 0.2 percent. That's of people who've used it even one time in the last month. Wow, that's some wildly out of control epidemic there.

None of this is to say methamphetamines are good for you, or you should use them. But don't we all get just a little tired of media scaremongering on things like this?

And why do people find basic math like this too hard to grasp? More important, why do reporters and news editors find it too much to grasp?

Oops. Michael slipped.

In the meantime, here's a classy photo:

Here's hoping next year's better for the Cubbies... 97 years and counting.

(Photo courtesy of long-suffering Cub fan Black Five.)

Damn it.

Heather Bare, known to many in the blogosphere as "Momma Bear," has passed away.

There are those who say that someone you know online can never be a real friend, but that's a lie. We exchanged barbs and jokes in comments many times, and chatted many many times through instant messaging, often joking, sometimes arguing, always friendly.

In the early days of the blogosphere, Momma Bear was one of the original crew dubbed as part of the "League of Bellicose Women," along with her co-blogger Kathy Kinsley. They were women who eschewed the stereotype that women were soft and cuddly "anti-war" and men macho "pro-war." During the early days of the war I made sure to read her and Kathy's site almost daily to get a cure from the sexist drivel about women's supposed dainty sensibilities and fluttery tendency to get the vapors at the idea that people might actually, y'know, get hurt or something in a war.

She was an American through and through, but was proud of her Scottish heritage and loved helping our mutual friend Andrew Ian Dodge with his writing and his terrific cross-atlantic blog, Dodgeblogium. She was also a maverick, a woman well into her 70s who'd been using computers since a time when women were almost never found in the field, becoming an expert on them when many of us were children who hadn't even seen our first computer yet.

Kathy has a tribute to Momma Bear here. Andrew has a tribute to Heather here.

Gary Metz notes evidence that Al Qaeda acts openly and with impunity in Iran.

Does the political will exist in this country to do anything serious about it? I shake my Magic 8 Ball and it says, "outlook uncertain."

I'd call that optimistic.

Believe it, baby!

Today is my birthday and so far I've spent it stuck in business meetings. But I'm not complaining - I'm glad to be working. It keeps me focused and grounded to reality.

I am officially 39 years old. Instead of navel gazing, I thought I'd take this opportunity to talk about something that has absolutely no bearing on the War on Terror, the health of the US economy, the future of the Middle East or the argument for/against Intelligent Design. The 1970's.

Some of you young'uns may not recall the '70s, while others (I'm thinking about you, Arnold) may remember them fondly.

Personally, I think the 1970's sucked big-time. The 1970s meant avocado everything - appliances, interior walls, even shag carpets. Serial killers became a national obsession - Ted Bundy, Son of Sam, the Zodiac Killer, with the occasional Manson Family member hitting the news. Vietnam gave us Jimmy Carter - the worst president of the 20th Century if not the history of the Republic. Terms like Inflation and "Misery Index" were added to the lexicon, and America was paralyzed by a few dozen Iranian students holding 50 hostages.

But there were bright spots. Star Wars comes quickly to mind, as does the Atari 2600. In football you had the arrival of Terry Bradshaw and Roger Staubach; in hockey you had the retirement of "Mr. Hockey" Gordie Howe. In baseball you had the Big Red Machine led by Pete "I belong in the HOF" Rose and the Oakland A's. Hammerin' Hank Aaron beat Ruth and retired as the King of the Sport shortly after.

Music-wise Punk Rock began to shake things up with bands like the Sex Pistols and in America, the Dead Kennedys. On the lighter side Bowie grooved, Skynyrd growled, and New Wave pogoed into the '80s with skinny ties and Devo hats.

I'm curious to learn what memories others have of the '70s.

The anti-Semitic forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion has been in the news lately. The Protocols is one of the most pernicious hoaxes around. According to rotten.com, which explores all that is rotten in the universe:

The Protocols of the Meetings of the Learned Elders of Zion serves a crucial role in the personal growth of any heartfelt anti-semite. The book is a long diatribe, exposing the nefarious tactics and goals of a clandestine multinational Jewish cabal that secretly rules the world (in partnership with the Freemasons). It's a must-read for any self-respecting opponent of Zionism...

...Its function is to provide a plausible excuse for a bigot to trade in his existing Jewphobia for overt racism. Most screwballs only tackle this monster after they've already plodded their way through The Turner Diaries and a few dozen photocopied hate tracts. For this reason, it doesn't matter that The Protocols was and is a pathetic hoax. Once a nutjob decides to believe the book is genuine, nothing you can say will ever change his mind. He wants to believe.

The appearance of the Protocols at the official Iranian pavilion at this year's Frankfurt Book Fair (in violation of German law) was noticed by German Author Matthias Küntzel and reported by blogger Zombie.

The virulent anti-Semitism of the Protocols also appeared in my email box a few days ago, one of the many mailings I've recieved since singing up with an Arabic/English translation site. It read:

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent. The Merciful

UNIVERSAL CRISIS OF PEACE & SECURITY: RESPONSIBLE WHO?

This morning [October 19, 2005] our beloved Br. Atasi recited Surah Bani Israel [also called Al-Isra] in Fajr prayers. When he reached to Verse # 4: "We decreed for the Children of Israel in the Scripture [Al-Kitab]: Ye verily will create corruption on the earth twice, and ye will become great tyrants". It immediately occurred to my mind, "why two times only?" What about the "Jewish Conspiracies for the last two hundred years? What about the demolition of Ottoman Empire or Khilfah? What about the "creation" of the State of Israel? What about "The Protocol of Elders" and their dream of controlling the world? I could not reconcile for a while that why Allah (SWT) has mentioned transgression committed by Jews on earth only for two times and why He ignored their "conspiracies" and mischief that they are constantly committing for the last two thousand years after their Second overthrown from Palestine in 78 AD at the hands of Romans? I, then, realized that Allah (SWT) gives only correct statement and whatever is in the Qur'an is nothing but truth. It is our lack of understanding and imperfect vision about the development of world events and the "obscured period" that are beyond the sight of our mortal eyes and limited knowledge...

..At the first place, the Jewish people enjoyed enormous protection in every Muslim State from Baghdad to Cordoba. They were the finance ministers and exchequers of accounts of the Caliphs of time at many places. Under Ottoman Caliphate entire finances were controlled and governed by them, resulting only in enormous debt. So they were happy but torpedoed the Caliphate and ruined its economy. This was their "reward" in return for Muslim's hospitality.

In the Western societies of Europe they were hated like anything and forced to live in Ghettoes. They worked more intelligently. Here in the predominant Christian societies, Jewish people adopted a different strategy and ultimately succeeded at all fronts. They introduced secret associations, societies and clubs like "Free Masons" and "Lion Clubs", spread their branches throughout the Muslim and the non-Muslim world in Asia, Europe and America, enticed the Christians and Muslims both to be their card-holder members , carrying a lot of prestige, favor, benefits and facilities, especially while traveling abroad. The top notch of each society was made its member. [The writer too was offered its membership in EP but I thankfully declined]. Its strength lies in its secrecy, method of enrolment, the oath of allegiance and who is its "Master"?

These associations and Clubs played instrumental in "enslaving" the Christian world and Jews gradually master-minded all the nerves centers of Europe and America...

...The entire universal crisis that we see today around the world, especially in the Muslim world, is the creation of Christian world who "hate" Islam and Muslims as per their old tradition of Crusaders. They are bent upon to subjugate it by coining different false pleas, concocted war slogans, inventing preemptive war-phobia, dirty slogans of "Clash of civilization", mockery of importing freedom and democracy to Muslim world while supporting the despotic rulers in each country, all in the name of "War on Terrorism". The leadership both of Church and political Institutions are responsible for this mess and, therefore, must be blamed totally for the insecurity of human race. Jews are somewhere only instrumental when their interest is in jeopardy.

...more

* Dawah is defined as "Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom (hikmah) and beautiful preaching and argue with them in ways that are best." (Surah An-Nahl 16:125)

In the most important news since the passing of the referendum, the Sunnis have now officially capitulated to democracy.

"We call upon all Iraqis to participate actively in the elections and not listen to calls for boycotts because they are harmful," the new alliance, called the Iraqi Accord Front, said in a statement.

Will this end the violence? No. Will it increasingly de-legitimize it? Yes.

The fact this announcement was made shows the sea change in Iraq since January, when no Sunni group dared endorse the electoral process, let alone run, for fear of being targeted by the terrorist/Baathist factions. Look for a lot of stumbling blocks in the months ahead, including things like repeated Sunni threats to quit the legislature once elected, assassinations of MPs, blatant corruption, and of course in the background the everpresent media doomsaying regarding the whole enterprise of Iraqi democracy.

The dogs will bark, but the caravan of freedom and democracy will move on. The Iraqis will increasingly handle their own security (and U.S. troops will begin to depart), the Iraqi media will play a larger and larger watchdog role, liberal institutions like women's rights groups will sprout and grow, and the predictions of civil war will join the discredited memes of theocracy, stolen oil, and Arab unfitness for democracy in the dustbin of history.