Mr Deity On Evolution

Dearest Dr Carson

This one's been making the rounds:



Just wanna home in on the PC Police bit.  First, there're good reasons for Godwin's Law, and even better reasons for the First Corollary (whoever mentions Nazis first loses).

But second, there're actually some pretty good reasons for what these jag-offs call "PC".  And I'll put the main reason to Dr Carson in the form of a question:  Dr Carson, if somebody walked up and called you a 'nigger', would you at least consider kicking him in the nuts for being the racist asshole he obviously is, or would you shake his hand and congratulate him for having the great courage to be such a stalwart Freedom Fighter?

Today's Tune

Today In Absurdity

Ms Forlano mentions something about mammography and a recent study that the authors have said suggests annual screening isn't as vital as we've been told.  I haven't found a lot about that study, so I'm kinda talking out my ass here, but when you're trying to make a judgement call on practically anything medical ya gotta look at the outcomes first, and then work your way back thru all the treatment options.  Outcome is what matters, and evidence - what you can prove - is what has to drive those treatment decisions.

The study, which included nearly 90,000 women ages 40 to 59, is the latest to question the value of routine mammography. The researchers found the same number of women died of breast cancer over 25 years, regardless of whether they underwent yearly mammograms or not.

I'm always gonna start from a skeptical viewpoint. eg: The Cancer Treatment Industry has a dog in this fight, so there's some probability for us to see at least a little self-promotion on their part when they push back.

Of course, it's all a shitload more complex than that.  Take a ride thru The Placebo Effect some time and tell me it didn't make you just a tiny bit dizzy.  (Try this one too)

The more we learn, the more we understand how little we know.

Today's Pix

 

  

Logical Fallacy #5: The Slippery Slope

Per Wikipedia:

In logic and critical thinking, a slippery slope is a logical device, but is usually known under its fallacious form in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any rational argument or demonstrable mechanism for the inevitability of the event in question. A slippery slope argument states that a relatively small first step leads to a chain of related eventsculminating in some significant effect, much like an object given a small push over the edge of a slope sliding all the way to the bottom.[1] The strength of such an argument depends on the warrant, i.e. whether or not one can demonstrate a process which leads to the significant effect. The fallacious sense of "slippery slope" is often used synonymously with continuum fallacy, in that it ignores the possibility of middle ground and assumes a discrete transition from category A to category B. Modern usage avoids the fallacy by acknowledging the possibility of this middle ground.

The argument takes on one of various semantical forms:In the classical form, the arguer suggests that making a move in a particular direction starts something on a path down a "slippery slope". Having started down the metaphorical slope, it will continue to slide in the same direction (the arguer usually sees the direction as a negative direction, hence the "sliding downwards" metaphor).

Modern usage includes a logically valid form, in which a minor action causes a significant impact through a long chain of logical relationships. Note that establishing this chain of logical implication (or quantifying the relevant probabilities) makes this form logically valid. The slippery slope argument remains a fallacy if such a chain is not established.

A Tune For Teacher

hat tip = JR

Death And Taxes

Wanna get a good close look at where all the money goes?

Here it is.

A few screen shots:

Today's Wingnut

Steve Swanson via RightWing Watch, via Addicting Info:



Almost right from the start, Mr Swanson tries to bring the warning home; basically saying, "If I were the devil I'd buy Disney..." to make that standard leap-of-stoopid: Gay is bad; Disney is Gay; and so Disney must be bad.

BTW - it wasn't all that long ago that Disney was one of the mainstays of the Christianists' version of USAmerica.  But then, of course, Disney went all shove-the-gay-down-our-throats by recognizing that gay money spends really good too, and there's a lot of it, so let's try not to treat the customers like shit - and that's what ruined it for everybody.

BTW #2 - with all the Princess Fantasies and the show tunes and the pixie dust, aren't Disney and Teh Gay just kinda the perfect fit?  Seems like the classic no-brainer if you know anything about bidness.

Anyway, how do we know Swanson isn't the devil?  Satan's supposed be all wily and sly, and really good at fooling us into thinking he's the good guy so he can get us to do all those horrible things that Swanson says Disney's doing - seems maybe Swanson's actually implying we should do something to gay people and then blame Disney for it(?)  Gets a little complicated.

Just wonderin'.

Saying Good-Bye

Say Something --A Great Big World w/ Christina Aguilera

We Lost A Good One

...when Richard Jeni killed himself - 7 years ago today.

Music For Monday

The Last Of The Mohicans --Luca Stricagnoli

One CPAC Thing Only

Attendees at the annual "conservative" fap-fest they call CPAC (Corporatized Panderers And Clowns) had a fine time over the weekend.

Two things:

First, the word is that the Casual Encounters section of Craiglist (for hookups and one-night stands) went crazy with traffic in and around the beltway, and the big hits were of the m4m variety.  To wit (via Addicting Info):

CPAC looking for discrete fun – m4m – 26 (Prince George’s County)

Staying in town for the conference. Looking to get my rocks off. discretion assured. Versatile looking for a masc man in his 20s or 30s.

--and--

CPAC 24 m4m NSA – m4m (CPAC)

It is that time again and I want to have some NSA fun after the speechesI want to fuck your mouth while I sign you up on the health care market place.I want you to be the gipper and go down on my jelly beans. I want to be discrete

The author at AI does note that some of these could easily be jokes, but even if they are, ya gotta know that some closet case at CPAC will likely take some of them perfectly seriously, which points up the ridiculousness of the anti-people policy positions of "the conservatives".

Second, here's a picture tweeted by a guy named John Hudak (Brookings Inst - so, a grain of salt on this one as well) that he says shows the "crowd" at the "Minority Outreach" panel discussion at CPAC, about 10 minutes into the session:

There is simply nothing of substance in anything the GOP has to say about how people-friendly they are or want to be.  You may have noticed they don't talk much about the big tent anymore.  It seems an awful lot of them don't feel they even have to pretend that's what they want.  And it's getting harder not to believe that their positions on issues like Immigration and Voter ID are all about an effort to establish minority-party rule.

Stand Up And Scream

Things Goin' On --Lynyrd Skynyrd



Have you ever lived down in the ghetto?
Have you ever felt the cold wind blow?
If you don't know what I mean,
Won't you stand up and scream?
'Cause there's things goin' on that you don't know.

Too many lives they've spent across the ocean.
Too much money been spent upon the moon.
Well, until they make it right
I hope they never sleep at night
They better make some changes
And do it soon.

They're goin ruin the air we breathe
Lord have mercy.
They're gonna ruin us all, by and by.
I'm telling all you beware
I don't think they really care
I think they just sit up there
And just get high.

It's Gotta Stop

How stupid do we have to be?  How bad does it have to get before we know that it has to stop, and it can only stop when we stand up and make it stop?

If you have the stomach for it, look at these pictures closely, and then tell me you don't understand how men and women in uniform are all fucked up in the head when we finally let them come home.  Why can't they just chill out and relax?  Why do so many of them look away - sometimes they seem embarrassed or even ashamed - while we're falling all over ourselves trying to convince them how grateful we are when all we can do is recite a few meaningless cliches about service and sacrifice that we heard on TV or we saw on a Facebook post?

There's no such thing as a Non-Combatant, and there sure as hell ain't no Un-Wounded Warriors.  What we've been doing for the last 15 years; the damage we're doing - purposefully - to an entire generation of American kids, as well as populations around the world - I guess all I can say is that every one of these asswipe TheoCons better hope there's no god after all, cuz he's gonna be pretty fuckin' pissed at all this shit.

Thinly Veiled

They don't call it influence-peddling, and they sure as hell don't call it bribery - they don't even call it lobbying any more - and before too much longer, they won't have to call it anything because we won't be able to see it.  The whole rotten thing will be scrubbed and sanitized to the point where not even the people participating in the scam will be able to recognize the stench of their own corruption.  Remember, we have great capacity for rationalization; bordering closely on self-delusion.



BTW - it's Russia TV.  So grains of salt are in order.  That said, sometimes the most honest criticism comes from your fiercest rival.

Here's the Link to Republic Report

Today's Pix

Logical Fallacy # 4: The Fallacy Fallacy

From Wikipedia:

Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false.[1] It is also called argument to logic (argumentum ad logicam), fallacy fallacy,[2] fallacist's fallacy,[3] and bad reasons fallacy.[4]
Fallacious arguments can arrive at true conclusions, so this is an informal fallacy of relevance.[5]

Form[edit]:

It has the general argument form:

If P, then Q.

P is a fallacious argument.

Therefore, Q is false.[6]

Thus, it is a special case of denying the antecedent where the antecedent, rather than being a proposition that is false, is an entire argument that is fallacious. A fallacious argument, just as with a false antecedent, can still have a consequent that happens to be true. The fallacy is in concluding the consequent of a fallacious argument has to be false.

That the argument is fallacious only means that the argument cannot succeed in proving its consequent.[7] But showing how one argument in a complex thesis is fallaciously reasoned does not necessarily invalidate the proof; the complete proof could still logically imply its conclusion if that conclusion is not dependent on the fallacy:

All great historical and philosophical arguments have probably been fallacious in some respect... If the argument is a single chain, and one link fails, the chain itself fails with it. But most historians' arguments are not single chains. They are rather like a kind of chain mail which can fail in some part and still retain its shape and function.  --David Hackett Fischer, Historians' fallacies[3]

Making The Case

...with the case being that "conservatives" and DumFux News are all about the hyper-partisan politics and not about the policy at all.

From Media Matters (hat tip = Democratic Underground):



Another straightforward conservative, being all rational and pragmatic.  And of course, that's just crap all day long, because Chuckles Clownhummer said very nearly exactly the opposite when Russia invaded Georgia in 2008:

What is to be done? Let's be real. There's nothing to be done militarily. What we can do is alter Putin's cost-benefit calculations.

I wonder what changed.

Today's Reality

I don't watch "reality TV" because it's anything but reality.  I guess I should say I don't watch much of it.  I do feel the need to check in on it once in a while - partly because I have teenagers who watch way too much of that shit, and partly because ya gotta take a peek at whatever passes for "the popular culture" once in a while.

So anyway, the Kardashians and the Robertsons and all these other over-privileged addicted-to-themselves attention whores have absolutely nothing to say and nothing to do unless they first go as far outa their way as possible to find something to piss and moan about; and once they find something to get bitchy about, they go even farther outa their way to make sure their friends and family members are the ones they scuffle with over it.  BTW: they keep it "in the family" because the writers and the producers (and most importantly, the marketeers) have told them that's what the rubes viewing public want to see.  Nobody's that dysfunctional without being Deliberately and Purposefully Dysfunctional.  So that's pretty fucked up right there, but knowing it's what we asked for is even more fucked up.

Anyway - take all that and go one tiny step farther, by overlaying it onto what we see in politics practically every day.

Why does Walt Putin need to fuck with Crimea?  And why do Huckleberry Fauxbutch and Grampy McDumfuck then have to work so hard trying to figure out how to take the caricature of Obama as the feckless dictator who rules by Executive Order whenever he calls the GOP on obstructionism, and turn him into a dithering stumblebum who couldn't lead ants to a sugar bowl because he won't immediately launch all the nukes when Putin decides to wiggle his dick at somebody in western Asia?

There's plenty that's both real and wrong about what's happening in and around Ukraine.  I just wanna see a lot less of the fake shit.  Show me more of John Kerry stepping on his dick with a track shoe scolding the Russians about not invading countries for bullshit reasons - that was real and fun - and really funny.