Apologies Demanded

What the heck is the Medieval Warm Period?

2009-11-08T14:54:00.000-05:00

I really don't know. I am skeptical of any "science" used to assert its existence/occurrence and especially so regarding "science" composed to disprove it.

NOAA Paleoclimatology Medieval Warm Period - 9^th to 13^th Centuries "it appears that the late 20^th and early 21^st centuries are likely the warmest period the Earth has seen in at least 1200 years"
- Influence of Dramatic Climate Shifts on European Civilizations That is more historical and presumes a certain sort of setting and then describes the vikings without disuputing environmental conditions. Which is not to say that there is not a page for
"The climate of a region is typically defined by its monthly mean temperatures and annual (total) precipitation however... direct observations of these variables did not begin until the 1600's."
Medieval Warm Period Rediscovered | The Resilient Earth "The bottom line? Once again the climate models used by the IPCC and other climate catastrophists are shown to be inaccurate, incomplete and not up to the job of predicting future climatic conditions."
RealClimate: Weren’t temperatures warmer than today during the “Medieval Warm Period”? "This is one of a number of popular myths regarding temperature variations in past centuries."

I am obvious skeptical to all propositions of anthropogenic global warming or catastrophic climate change, in part because skepticism should be our default position regarding all information or discussion involving massive changes in unseen elements and aspects. Assertions of the future climate are based on presumptions of paleoclimatalogical knowledge and I rarely believe such assertions of knowledge. In fact my hesitance to declare or accept dogmatic authority in climate sciences for the sake of sociopolitical doctrine is based on lack of trust in knowledge of long-term climate patterns and therefore the lack of real ability to dismiss something.

It should be easy to see what agenda anyone has.

flying tiger hidden I-don't-care

2009-11-07T03:05:00.001-05:00

Happy Birthday to me

2009-11-06T14:38:00.002-05:00

I turn 28 years old.

The Undiscovered Country indeed.

Now, for the math inclined... is this going to be my 29th year of life that I have started, or my 28th? There is a correct answer.

keep your laptop password protected

2009-11-05T09:26:00.002-05:00

felines are susceptible to H1N1

2009-11-04T17:06:00.001-05:00

See Jonah Goldberg at The Corner

Not Good News [Jonah Goldberg]
Cat gets swine flu.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A cat in Iowa has tested positive for H1N1 swine flu, the first time a cat has been diagnosed with the new pandemic strain, the American Veterinary Medical Association said on Wednesday.

The 13-year-old cat apparently caught the virus from one of the people living in the house, the group said in a statement. It has recovered and does not appear to have infected anyone or anything else.

Pigs are the original source of the H1N1 virus and it has been found in several herds, as well as in a pet ferret. Ferrets are especially susceptible to human influenza viruses.

"Two of the three members of the family that owns the pet had suffered from influenza-like illness before the cat became ill," Iowa Department of Public Health Veterinarian Dr. Ann Garvey said in a statement.

"This is not completely unexpected, as other strains of influenza have been found in cats in the past." Both the cat and its owners have recovered from their illnesses.

From a reader:
Bugs that go interspecies have more variants, higher mutation rates, or both. Which means this particular virus might readily go from the makes-you-miserable-for-two-weeks to the kills-millions-outright version faster than we can adapt.

This makes me a bit unhappy for more than one reason.

everything is more awesome with lightsabers

2009-11-04T13:05:00.002-05:00

more here

this kitten has not been possessed by Demoncrats

2009-11-04T12:45:00.002-05:00

Apparently the not-Godless feline has faith in America and in Americans.

Bruce Willis - Devil Woman

2009-11-04T09:32:00.001-05:00

Bruce Willis, singing Devil Woman at Sin City Premiere

Cliff Richards - Devil Woman

2009-11-03T10:35:00.000-05:00

Cliff Richard - Devil Woman (1976) - music video ripped obviously ripped from VH1 back then VH1 still played music which may have been from the 1990s

Official YouTube video - Devil Woman - Cliff Richard
Official YouTube video - Wired For Sound - Cliff Richard
Official Cliff Richard Channel

"from the 40th Anniversary Concert" performance by Cliff Richard

the federal government has a role to tell me and children how to excercise

2009-11-03T00:16:00.000-05:00

I confess to being made REALLY DANGED ANGRY that I millions of other taxpayers are paying our money for http://smallstep.gov/

How does that qualify as a Constitutionally-declared function of government?

Rush Limbaugh versus Chris Wallace

2009-11-02T01:24:00.002-05:00

Chris Wallace may be Right of Center but he is always fair and does not hesitate to challenge anyone in an interview. He is the true spiritual air to Tim Russert and that David Gregory is a heathen for even presenting himself as someone to believe he deserves to host Meet the Press.

Ronin starring Jean Reno and Robert DeNiro

2009-11-01T23:52:00.005-05:00

I never understood how Jean Reno never shared billing with Robert DeNiro (at least not on the covers of the American stuff, such as the VHS and DVD) when anyone who has seen the movie could tell you it is a buddy picture. In other countries it appears that Jean Reno received some more of his due.

"my brother works at...."

2009-10-30T19:16:00.001-04:00

Don't use you anecdotal stuff with me buster!

funny internet babies

2009-10-30T03:32:00.000-04:00

Ted Rall versus Barack Obama

2009-10-30T01:56:00.001-04:00

One vicious leftist against another, the President of the United States.

Steve King versus Roger Goodell

2009-10-29T21:40:00.001-04:00

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) Exposes Commissioner Goodell as a Weasel

In an October 28, 2009 House Judiciary Committee hearing, Congressman Steve King questions NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell on comments he made regarding Rush Limbaugh.

Is Healthcare a privilige or a right?

2009-10-29T01:25:00.001-04:00

Healthcare is neither a right nor a privilege. It is a commodity and an increasingly rarer one.

Rush Limbaugh on Jay Leno Show

2009-10-28T17:39:00.003-04:00

steampunk R2-D2 and C-3PO

2009-10-28T17:14:00.001-04:00

I have wasted my life - Flightpattern by Gwen Vanhee

2009-10-28T17:09:00.002-04:00

Flightpattern, by Gwen Vanhee, is a hand drawn audioresponsive video exploration made with Adobe Flash (actionscript). Gwen says: “A custom-coded brush (actionscript) is used to draw the imagery. While drawing all data is recorded to be rendered (frame by frame) afterwards.”

H/T to Jason Permenter, who apparently has it figured better than I

Mark Krikorian versus the Southern Poverty Law Center

2009-10-28T13:29:00.002-04:00

The Southern Poverty Law Center deviates from a collection of drama queens at the best of times and at the worst of times (which is the more normal state of being) it is a collective of fraudulent actors who often engage in donor fraud. Yet

for some reason it's taken seriously by the MSM and even government agencies, so I can't avoid it. A couple examples this week of how ludicrous the SPLC's charges of "hate" are. James Taranto at the Wall Street Journal wrote yesterday "In Defense of Carol Swain" in reaction to the SPLC smear-meister Mark Potok's claim that "Carol Swain is an apologist for white supremacists." Taranto does a good job of assessing the issue at hand, especially remarkable from the WSJ given the fact that Carol is an immigration restrictionist, though that's not what was at issue.

Mark Kirkorian, an policy specialist on immigration summarizes some ways that the SPLC is just full of themselves, pretentious, and casting out insults and accusation as to what hate is, where hate is, how it is such of "the Right".

I have had my dealings with the SPLC in the past. They placed my student organization in their "Hate" group list and this was reported widely in Michigan. I thought we should sue for libel. The idiot "leader" of that stupid student organization decided to indulge the ideological bigotry and do as much as he could to incite them, provoke them, and fit a sort of image. The SPLC offers forth the conceit that organizations are "hate groups" and that then they are "recognized". The list, written by Leftists who genuinely despise their ideologically opponents, is generally recognized by blind unthinking morons for a genuine directory of harmful folk who do harmful things on the basis of race, sex, gender, and religion. The conceit, the lie, is reinforced by having genuinely nasty folk on the list, but the fact remains that we do not need the SPLC to tell us that a KKK chapter consists of cross-burning racists. Essentially the SPLC uses the existence of real "hate groups" to libel their ideological opponents. They also stalk harmless (albeit in some cases loud-mouthed) college students. Of course the history of the Young Americans for Freedom is filled with some well-meaning folk and in its earliest incarnation was a force for good against the Communists. In the last functional incarnation among many states it lacked a mission and I do not think the National organization has existed since before 2006. The image and reputation of YAF has generally, since 2004 or 2005, been let in the hands of morons. The stupid people play into the hands of vicious slanderous jerks that wish to censor people that think differently, and can effectively suppress expression of Conservative thought and muzzle Right-thinking speech by casting them as the sort of people to whom no one would listen. Mark Krikorian notes FAIR. Taking from FAIR

In the eyes of the law, there is no such thing as a “hate group.” It does not exist in federal statutes. It is a term entirely concocted by the SPLC. Moreover, the SPLC itself has no concrete definition. While lacking any useful specificity, the SPLC nonetheless deliberately uses this highly charged term to achieve political ends and to create an illusion that there is a surge of dangerous groups operating in America in order to increase the SPLC fundraising. In the process, the truth gets lost, reputations are damaged, and meaningful discourse on immigration policy is muted.

In other words the group creates its own need. It asserts that there are bears in the woods and that only the SPLC may be the magic rock to hold them off. Catholic Family News summarizes the SPLC tactic of guilt by association as the Politician's Logic to prove that a "dog is a cat" to prove to people that there are more racists and hateful hostile groups than there really are and thus prove a continuing need for the Southern Poverty Law Center to exist.

Now I must insist that he primary reason that the SPLC has the hate list is not a general dedication to a vein of leftism. The primary goal is not to censor or de-popularize right-wingers, Conservatives, or any ideological opponent. I mentioned donor fraud. The primary purpose of the list is to create a supposed reason for the group to exist and that reason for the group's existence is what is told to donors. In other words the SPLC exists as a front group to collect money, purportedly to support work against "hate groups". Technically "hate groups" do not exist as any legal entity, and thing technically recognized by genuine law enforcement organizations or under legal statutes and the "work" against these groups can best be summarized as blogging and sending out e-mails. The fact is the money is not used to fight on behalf of American decency. Aside from the operating costs of the group the money is used to line the pocket of folk like Morris Dees among others. Perhaps I oversimplify. Wikipedia claims they act as lawyers against racists and such. I take again from FAIR merely to emphasize my point that the purpose of these lsits and crusades is

to create an illusion that there is a surge of dangerous groups operating in America in order to increase the SPLC fundraising.

It is all about the money. The left-wing advocacy and right-wing demonizing really is just a great benefit for them but it is not the point. As the point of Fox News and CNN is more to make a profit than to inform, and the purpose of Comedy Central is to generate profit rather than make people laugh, and we all know that MTV is not about having music on television, the SPLC exists to generate money for its evil masters.

While discussing the disgusting individuals, Mr. Krikorian notes instances where the letists highlight as decent normal, common sense policy as some sort of race-centered hateful thing. Naturally I have my own research and insights into the SPLC, but it is from Mark Krikorian that I derive the SPLC's attack on FAIR as well as the Federation's response. FAIR published a guide to SPLC's tactics and motivations as well as the debate of immigration itself. The best truth?

I feel like taking a shower after writing about the Southern Poverty Law Center,

which makes sense because the groups muddies the waters through which civil discussion swims. I despise that they make it more difficult to fight actual racism.

the 45th Anniversary of Ronald Reagan's "At Time for Choosing" his Barry Goldwater speech

2009-10-27T19:24:00.002-04:00

This speech remains incredibly relevant as the forces which we must overcome still exist and so many Republicans implicitly dispute the words that Ronald Reagan, then only a citizen activist, spoke 45 years ago today.

I don't question that we must "dispute" the contents of the speech because only in discussion can we bring to light that so many of the solutions, at least in a philosophical vein, to today's problems were evident even in the middle of the 20th century. Ronald Reagan might as well have been envisioning the ideals and ideas of President Barack Obama because despite what people may think about his "change" and vision for the future these are not new ideas but old aspirations that people have rejected and (others) supported for decades.

Then again most Americans do not have a real sense of history or a knowledge of civics. Most Conservatives or Republicans do not realize that we need not summon up the spirit of something new to face new modern obstacles but see that the First Principles still matter. We should certainly bring this to light. Those such as I do not reject President Obama as a person but have rejected his politics for 45 years and more. I merely wish that we could exhibit this for all.

You and I have a rendezvous with destiny.

Indeed we do. When I first read the speech out of the anthology Tear Down This Wall I was amazed at how prescient Mr. Reagan was and then I realized that he was speaking against them not merely because he was looking forward but because he addressed contemporary issues. The lesson, I suppose, is that we must remain vigilant.

Now there will never be another Ronald Reagan. People at every Presidential election since 2007 went either looking for "the next Ronald Reagan" or proclaiming/exclaiming that his or her candidate "is the next Ronald Reagan." I stood with my brain silently screaming as a young woman told another "I truly believe Mitt Romney is the next Ronald Reagan." Whatever one thinks of Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter or any Presidential candidate of 2008 or the ones for 2012 each man is his own man. We should hold a candidate's principles up to the light of the principles of Ronald Reagan, certainly, but we cannot agree with everything that a man says; we should leave room for disagreement on some issues and be able to say that a man is adequate to run for an office or to fill the room. If we wait for the perfect candidate, make "the perfect the enemy of the good" then we simply will die waiting for the Best Conservative Imaginable as our philosophical opponents just have their way politically and legally.

Ronald Reagan may be dead and his Presidency may long since have passed into history but the principles, First Principles, remain and stay as true as those principles upon which the American nation was founded and are as immutable as gravity, although we must refresh the memories of our contemporaries. Even if the Spirit of Reagan will not inhabit a politician, a statesman, or a candidate, it still remains as an example to follow, as best as possible, if not perfectly.

The National Center for Public Policy has the text of the speech here.
The University of Texas has the text here.
Fordham University's Modern History Sourcebook contains/presents the text here.
You can download the video of the speech from Google Video.

UPDATE 2008-10-28 12:44 PM: For some reason Rush Limbaugh is only celebrating this on Wednesday, October 28th and doesn't mention any of it on the 27th on the website or the newsletter.

why didn't someone tell Glenn Beck that he spelled it wrong?

2009-10-27T18:40:00.001-04:00

Glenn Beck Can't Spell - watch more funny videos

Seriously. Just a camera man? An editor? A writer?

Fred Thompson supports Ed Hoffman

2009-10-27T15:11:00.002-04:00

If I had time I would make this "Good Americans versus the New York Republican Party" but I lack the time.

If you can vote in New York 23rd Congressional District and are a genuine Conservative, conservative, however you capitalize, now is the time. You sit this one out you let the Republicans push whatever unprincipled fool on you that they want.

The partisans are wrong this time. Newt Gingrich is wrong. Michael Steele is wrong. Tell them that.

the truth usually matters more than a stated mission or cause

2009-10-21T14:37:00.003-04:00

standard link dump fun

In 1989 William F. Buckley described the impact of the murderous Mao Tse-tung on China and gullible people.
Martin Gardner made math fun for many children. He turned 95 years old two days ago; he is not dead.
CNN interviewed the Yes Men liar and rewards bad behavior. It would not be the first time.
Victor Davis Hanson briefly runs through the President's mismanagement of Afghanistan.
Leftist blogger Roger Pielke, Jr. explains how he was minimized and marginalized by his Leftist blog counterparts for a minor disagreement.
There is a special election for New York Congressional District 23, the Congressional seat, I am sure. It involves two Leftists, one of which is a Democrat who has enough strategic sense of ripping on the Republican Leftist for being too far left. There is a Conservative Republican running as the third candidate, endorsed by New York's Conservative Party and all New York Conservatives should support this Conservative for the sake of principles, as does Fred Thompson. Newt Gingrich supports one of the leftists. National Review states clearly that the Republican Party is wrong. We need o abandon blind partisanship and support a candidate who believes what we believe, in the rare cases that we have the option to do so.

Certainly we believe in standards of truth, rather than labels, no?