Holy Crap

I had no idea this thing still existed.

On "Age of the Earth":

See also Counterexamples to an Old Earth.

The Age of the Earth has been a matter of interest to humans for millennia. The subject is still debated today, particularly between young-Earth scientists, who believe that the Earth is only approximately 6,000-10,000 (8 × 103 ± 25%) years old, and most scientific organisations who believe that Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years (4.54 × 109 ± 1%).[1][1] The scientific evidence points to a young age of the earth and the universe, and the biblical creation organization Creation Ministries International published an article entitled 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe, which further argues for the young age of the Earth.

Old Earth advocates rely on one flawed assumption to the exclusion of other evidence, similar to how an investigator may mistakenly rely on one eyewitness's opinion to the exclusion of all else. In fact, eyewitness testimony is proven to be less reliable to than other indicators, just as the assumption by Old Earth proponents that the rate of radioactive decay has always been constant is flawed. In fact, a large number of physical processes, such as neutron capture and fluctuations in solar radiation, can affect the rate of radioactive decay of elements in the Earth's crust and render radioactive dating measurements unreliable with errors up to 5%, depending upon the specific methods used.[2] Even so, such an error will not cause a calculation of the age of the Earth based on radiometric dating to be off by up to five orders of magnitude.

A test to quantify openmindedness:

1. Do you resist admitting the possibility that a conservative approach to education is far more effective for students than a liberal one?
2. If it were proven to your satisfaction that some idea you've been using to bolster a political argument was false, would you keep using that idea in your argument?
3. Do you resist admitting that something you accepted for over a decade is, in fact, completely false?
4. Do you resist the possibility that Hollywood values result in significant harm for those who believe in them, and to innocent bystanders?
5. Do you think it is impossible that increased gun ownership reduces the rate of crime?
6. When President Ronald Reagan told Mr. Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall, would you have thought that it was politically impossible for the Berlin Wall to be torn down?
7. Did you think, or still think, that the Strategic Defense Initiative ("Star Wars") is impossible?
8. Do you think that it is impossible that the Shroud of Turin is authentic?
9. Do you think that there must be a purely material-based explanation (such as magnetism) for remarkable homing and migration behavior of birds and butterflies?
10. Do you think that it is impossible for the speed of light in the Earth's atmosphere to have been measurably different in the past?
11. Do you think that it is impossible to measure openmindedness?
12. Do you think that evolution[2] must have occurred?
13. Do you think that is impossible for the power of 2 in Newtonian gravity, whereby the gravitational force is proportional to 1/r2, to be more precise with an exponent that is slightly different from 2, such as a gravitational force proportional to 1/r2.00000001?
14. Do you resist admitting that some things taught to you in school are completely false, and even known to be false by some responsible for the material?
15. Do you deny that some widely required theories of science, such as the theory of evolution, may actually impede the progress of science?[3]
16. Do you deny that the imposition of socialism and same-sex marriage on a nation could harm its competitiveness at international events like the Olympics?
17. Do you refuse to consider the possibility that "experts" may not have all the answers, and that the best of the public may have valuable insights to which experts are blind?
18. Do you think that if you read parts of the Bible years ago as a child, you can claim to "have read the Bible" and that you have no reason to read it regularly now?
19. Do you believe that because the Earth's orbit and rotation are what they are now, they are guaranteed to remain stable for billions of years?
20. Do you refuse to consider the possibility that Hebrews might have been authored by Jesus?

The above questions can be asked, and one's closed-mindedness can be scored based on how often they answered "yes" above. Answering more than half as "yes" reflects acute closed-mindedness.

That's what passes for intellectual inquiry and insight from our friends way over there on the far end of the spectrum - except I get a bad feeling sometimes that maybe it's not considered all that far out.  When I talk to some people, they seem to accept this nonsense; or at least have it in their minds that this is nothing more than a difference of opinion.  And the main problem I have with that thinking is that an awful lot of  "conservatives" are not willing to leave it as a matter of differing opinions - they're actively seeking to turn this shit into law.  And the people who shrug and give me the standard "comme ci, comme ça" response are the ones doing nothing to counteract it.

The KrugMan Speaks

Dispatches from Derpistan.

Paul Krugman, NYT:

Josh Barro has made a very useful contribution to policy discussion by adapting the term “derp” for a certain kind of all-too-prevalent stance in economic debate, which Noah Smith somewhat euphemistically describes as “the constant, repetitive reiteration of strong priors”. In other words, people who take a position and refuse to alter that position no matter how strongly the evidence refutes it, who continue to insist that they have The Truth despite being wrong again and again.

Nobody can get off into the weeds like a Nobelist, but Krugman works hard to make it understandable for me, and the parts of what he says that I can understand are almost always pretty great.

Are We All Indians Now?

Nope - sorry - this isn't going to be a rant blasting The Lone Ranger.  I've heard lotsa bad things about it, and maybe I'll get to have some fun with it later, but right now I just  don't care much about some dumb movie.

This is about what's happened to the economic boom in India.  You remember - the one that Lil Tommy Friedman told us was the very model of this new fabulous economic system in which everybody becomes a plucky entrepreneur and go on to reap the riches of Croesus as we all thrill in "the race for the top" blah blah fucking blah.

From William Dalrymple at New Statesman, about a new book dealing with what's gone wrong:

...The economic boom, which began in 1991 and took off in the late 1990s, provoked a miniboom of New India books, some far better than others. First off the blocks was Gurcharan Das, a former CEO of Procter & Gamble, whose India Unbound in 2001 became an international bestseller and made a convincing case that the future was India’s: all that was needed was further deregulation and a stripping away of the economic coils – the “licence Raj” – that were tethering the Indian elephant to the ground and the country’s future as an economic superpower was assured.

You caught that, right?  Deregulation.  Git da gubmint out da way.

But of course, The Mustache of Understanding wasn't at all alone in his thinking.  And btw: these guys are never alone in their thinking - the herd is everything for these guys - as long as they're all wrong together, they never have to admit they have their heads all the way up their wealthy benefactors' asses.

Anyway, the thing goes on at length about how everybody was totes agog over the prospects of China and India overtaking the US as the world's economic superpower by mid 21st century.

But guess what?

Their thesis is simple: India’s failure to equal the success of China’s hyper-development is due in large part to the failure of the state to provide “essential public services – a failing that depresses living standards and is a persistent drag on growth”:

Inequality is high in both countries, but China has done far more than India to raise life expectancy, expand general education and secure health care for its people. India has elite schools of varying degrees of excellence for the privileged, but among all Indians seven or older, nearly one in every five males and one in every three females are illiterate . . . India’s health-care system is an unregulated mess. The poor have to rely on low-quality – and sometimes exploitative – private medical care, because there isn’t enough decent public care. While China devotes 2.7 per cent of its gross domestic product to government spending on health care, India allots 1.2 per cent.

So here's one take-away:  We were perfectly content to do fuckloads of business with China, even though we needed to be reminded to "hate" the Chinese government because of all the free stuff they kept giving their citizens under their dirty commie regime.  (they definitely have some pretty bad shit coming their way because of some of the fucked up government building projects, but that's a slightly different angle)

Meanwhile, the Indians were far more to our liking because they were doing it according to the Uncle Miltie Friedman formula - plus of course, if they could find jobs in Mumbai, maybe they wouldn't all be over here owning all of our 7-11 stores.

When Government is shut out completely;  when the people who are supposed to be doing the governing in a system of self-governance aren't allowed to do any actual governing, then we're volunteering for nothing less than to wear the chains of an old-style aristocracy from the 18th century that the flag-wavers and chest-thumpers keep telling us we're supposed to be so proud of having thrown off.

What the fuck, Murica!?!

Our Mr Brooks

If I may take just a bit of license with David Brooks's piece in NYT:

Those who emphasize process have said that the government of President Mohamed Morsi almost any Republican-dominated government was freely elected and that its democratic support has been confirmed over and over. The most important thing, they say, is to protect the fragile democratic institutions and to oppose those who would destroy them through armed coup.

Democracy, the argument goes, will eventually calm extremism. Members of the Muslim Brotherhood Tea Party (or any of their Christian Nationalist minions) may come into office with radical beliefs, but then they have to fix potholes and worry about credit ratings and popular opinion. Governing will make them more moderate.

Those who emphasize substance, on the other hand, argue that members of the Muslim Brotherhood GOP's Far Right Wing are defined by certain beliefs. They reject pluralism, secular democracy and, to some degree, modernity. When you elect fanatics, they continue, you have not advanced democracy. You have empowered people who are going to wind up subverting democracy. The important thing is to get people like that out of power, even if it takes a coup.

In the end, even a Master Propagandizer like Bobo flies himself into the ground.

big hat tip = driftglass, cuz all I'm doing here is paraphrasing the best Brooks Buster in all of Blogistan.

Today's Pix

It's All Bigger And Better In Texas

The fun-lovin' is bigger, and the BBQ is better, and the bullshit is deeper.

From The Daily Texan:

A plurality of Texas voters aware of SB 5 were opposed to it, according to a Public Policy Polling telephone study conducted last weekend.

SB 5, brought forward in the first special session, would have imposed stricter state regulations on abortion. About 28 percent of voters opposed SB 5 while 20 percent supported it, and 52 percent of the 500 Texas voters surveyed by the study were not aware of the bill.

Once we get done fussin' about what a crock of moralistic authoritarian pig slop this is, we need to remember a coupla very important things:

First, this won't do a lot to prevent abortions - it won't drive down the demand for abortions.  It'll only make the procedure a lot more dangerous for everybody.

Second, this won't prevent (eg) Sydney Perry (or any other woman of sufficient means) from getting on a plane and flying to wherever abortion is still safe and legal, should she ever be in need of some help in that regard.  This stoopid thing will only impact the "lower class"; people who don't have the influence, power or money necessary to access the full menu of healthcare options. 

hat tips = Blue Gal and Democratic Underground

Are We There Yet?

There are no atheists in foxholes, and there are no Climate Change Deniers carrying axes and chainsaws on the fire line.



I know a goodly buncha people who still say Climate Change isn't a real thing because the Gloomy-Doomy predictions haven't materialized.

How 'bout 2 dead homeowners in Colorado?  And how 'bout 19 dead firefighters in Arizona?  Do ya wanna talk about the 285 dead because of Sandy last year?  Tragedy enough for those 400 or 500 families, but that's the proverbial drop in the bucket when we know the World Health Organization attributes 150,000 deaths per year to AGW/Climate Change.

Do you really need to be ass-deep in alligators before you realize you've wandered into the swamp?

Shit got real quite a while ago, kids - we're just starting to see the beginning of the horribleness.

An awful lot of us have to do some serious cramming to get ourselves up to speed on this.  And the first thing is that we have to understand that we're well past the point of being able to prevent the 2-or-3-degree rise in average temperature that triggers the catastrophe, so we have to work now on dealing with it as it happens.

Bill McKibben 'splains it all (btw, try to ignore his highly annoying quirks - the guy's in desperate need of some Presentation Coaching):

This New Economy

The notion that an economy must be allowed to follow "the natural order of things" is just so much hogwash.  Have you watched any 'Nature' shit on TV lately?

Here's what I think is a pretty fair metaphor for Freddie Hayek's system operating under the Animal Instincts school of thought:




Here's another one - where the baby critter is still alive as it's being eaten:




And another:




Just one more?



So, seriously?  That's how you want the businesses in your neighborhood to behave?

You want the mortgage banker to see you as nothing more than his next meal?

You want your insurance companies to collect premiums your whole life while you make practically no claims, only to be told that the rules have changed, and now that you need to get some of that back in the way of covering your recent misfortune they just won't be able to help you?

You wanna go back to when the used car guy could pull any manner of shit; could lie his ass off and sell you a pile of junk and you couldn't do a goddamned thing about it cuz you were sucker enough to buy it in the first place?

When you know about the constant state of Rip-Off-itude that seems to pass as Standard Operating Procedure in Business and Politics and Government etc, and you shrug it all off, and you say things like, "Well, gee - it's just human nature for people to get a little greedy and selfish", you're saying you couldn't possibly go to the trouble of standing up and demanding that people stop acting like a bunch of fucking animals.

We are so fucked if we don't start changing this shit.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, Over

I'm gone for a lousy two-and-a-half days, and the governor of Virginia magically morphs from Ol' Vaginal Bob to a cartoon version of Juan Peron!?!  (Actually, at least Evita had a kind of charm and a feel for real people, which is apparently totally lacking in Maureen McDonnell)

Bob and Maureen are the models of behavior that the vast rightwing conspiracy wanted us to believe Bill and Hillary were 15 years ago.

And you know it's bad when they call this guy in for a chat:

High-powered Washington lawyer Emmet T. Flood was in Richmond at the Executive Mansion Tuesday to speak with McDonnell, administration officials and others as the governor attempts to navigate the legal and political waters that have engulfed the last year of his term and threaten to swamp his legacy.

Flood’s presence underscores the gravity of the governor’s legal challenges.

I don't like throwing around phrases like Crooked Politicians, but we've evolved a 'system' that seems to breed exactly the kind of High-Polish Asshole that we were supposed to be trying to prevent from holding power in the first place.  This McDonnell guy and his cronies are close to becoming caricatures of themselves.

And finally, the feeling I get from somebody like Maureen McDonnell is that she thinks we all owe her something in exchange for her being willing to stoop so low as to be of service to the people of Virginia.  Her air of entitlement makes my eyes water and stings in my nostrils.

Let's check in with Doc Maddow for some help knitting it all together:

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Lewisburg, PA

OK, so I didn't get any blogging done while I was gone.  I was too busy being away from it all and just hangin' with muh boy Nick (Luke's big brother).

But here's a nice picture:

While everybody's paying attention to the kids playin' their hearts out in the All-Star game last nite, I'm gawkin' the sky.

The Luke-Man had 5 points total in 6 games - including a big one today - and the Pats eked out a Golden-Goal win this morning (against a big gun team that blew us out yesterday) to take the B Division Title.  Way to go, Patty Boys.