I thought autoclose would happen tonight. But…happened earlier. New open thread. đ
858 thoughts on “Happy T-Day Early!”
Comments are closed.
I thought autoclose would happen tonight. But…happened earlier. New open thread. đ
Comments are closed.
Falls under “define a madman”.
“In large-scale studies, of the Danish population, virtually all of the upward drift in intelligence test scores is accounted for by the rising performances of the lower half of the distribution.”
.
That’s still consistent with the possibility this is a pregnancy healthcare and childhood nutrition improvement which would tend to help the lower end more. As far as I know they haven’t figured this out.
.
One of the curious parts of intelligence heritability is that there is a regression to the mean on both sides. Very smart people have less smart kids and very dumb people have more smart kids. I suppose it’s like height, you can’t just keep getting taller forever by breeding tall people.
Tom
And even functional nuclear families.
WRT to diagnosing whether a 14 point difference in average IQ between groups is due to genetic or something else it doesn’t matter whether the Flynn effect is is due to a shift in the average with the distribution shape being unaffected or if it’s change in one tail or the other. If the whole argument is about a shift in the average, clearly 14 points in the average can be due to something other than genetics.
.
(Though, if the difference is lifting the bottom, that likely argues more strongly against genetics affecting the mean. Because it affects that there are some nongenetic factors that can dramatically lower IQ and if fixed, are imporant enough to be seen in a shift in the mean.)
As environmental variables that limit IQ are solved, the differences between meaningfully different genetic groups will become more clear. It will effectively remove noise in the measurement. The gap should become smaller but more statistically significant assuming both play a role. Perhaps the difference between some groups will be near zero.
.
The differences between groups are more evident in the tails. It may be easier to identify these differences by examining the extremes, although smaller numbers in the tails make them more vulnerable to other effects.
.
The centers of overlapped distributions may be 5200:4800 but the tails may be 100:1 depending on where you look. There is definitely overrepresentation of some groups at the high end of many proxies for intelligence (success that correlates to IQ tests). The same questions for exactly why remain.
.
The best golfers come from wealthy families in economically developed countries for obvious reasons. Barrier to entry.
.
Chess grandmasters per capita:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EnvcjjCXIAgpBM4?format=jpg&name=large
.
IQ by country:
https://new-iq-test.com/all-images/Articles/iq_by_country.png
.
One could claim this example is instead an artifact of wealth or economic development, but chess is cheap. One could also claim wealth and economic development advantages are due to the intelligence gap. Round and round we go. The game’s popularity per country plays a role, no doubt.
.
There is no specific burden of proof here for either genetics or environment. The best way to get answers is to increasingly isolate the effects. My impression is the academy doesn’t want to look anymore. As the movie Gattaca explored, people aren’t going to be comfortable with attempts at genetic pre-determination.
Tom Scharf,
“My impression is the academy doesnât want to look anymore.”
.
For sure. To even suggest there is a genetic component in differences in average intellectual ability between groups is contrary to the fundamental philosophical/religious beliefs of the left…. and the left rules academia. You might remember the abrupt firing of Larry Summers from Harvard when he suggested the possibility that there could be an inherent difference between men and women in math ability at the highest levels of achievement, just one of three or four possible causes that he listed. Even suggesting that possibility got him fired almost instantly. No, the academy most certainly is not interested in looking.
Tom Scharf
Chess is cheap. But time to play chess may not be a cheap. Still, it’s not golf. I mean… I know my mom’s attitude toward chess was “why would you play chess when you could be vacuuming the floors?” (The result was honestly not vacuuming the floors. But chess would definitely have been interrupted by nagging. She did encourage reading and sewing despite the latter resulting in increasing the need to vacuum floors.)
Yes. And yes. But also, even if the academy wanted to look it’s hard to do large enough scale separate effects experiments on human populations. So you end up with very small experiments and lots of data torturing that could go either way.
.
The only hope in the long run– and it’s the long run–is the DNA guys.At least for now they are more independent from political pressure than socialogists etc.
The nightclub shooter in Colorado is now broadly reported to be “non-binary”, which I guess means he is gay or trans, but nobody is saying exactly what he is. Which is just weird. MSM headlines that the shooting was obviously caused by a conservative hating on LGBTLMNOPs will now disappear. What the MSM won’t ever do is report on how it was possible this obviously troubled guy, with a long history of unstable, nutty behavior, ended up with multiple guns. You see, the MSM only wants to report that crazy shooters are conservatives….. they can’t be anything else… like a crazy gay man, or a crazy Bernie Sander’s supporter shooting conservative congressmen. Honest, balanced reporting of facts ruins the narrative.
Lucia,
“….at least for now…”
They will be subjected to enormous pressure if any of their work begins to point to a genetic component in differences between racial/ethnic groups. As surely as night follows day.
The media does their hit-and-run reporting, then the truth comes out after the lie has been established.
Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election.
A police officer was killed on Jan. 6.
The Wuhan virus did not escape from a lab.
Hunter’s laptop was Russian disinformation .
Joe Biden was not a part of and did not profit from Hunter’s influence peddling.
Trump colluded with Ukraine to falsely accuse Biden.
The “classified” docs in Trump’s possession contained nuclear secrets.
There was no fraud in the 2020 election.
And on and on.
SteveF (Comment #216527)
November 22nd, 2022 at 3:18 pm
They did have Paxlovid and do not recall them complaining about side effects. On second thoughts the term immunocompromised might not be entirely correct in describing their conditions. One was recovering from a hip replacement and the other has heart and nerve issues.
Trump is worse than a madman. I would have sympathy for a madman. He is a loser.
If the Republican establishment continues to play nice to Trump he will either get the nomination and lose or run as an independent and the Republican candidate will lose.
The Republicans being gutless as most politicians are, should have by now come down hard on Trump and effectively kicked him out of the party. They are obviously worried about those voters who voted for Trump because he was Trump and confused (I hope) his character flaws for some kind of new age politician who spoke his mind (such as it is). The Republicans need to find out if the more ardent Trump supporters are philosophically attuned to their party or are merely obsequious fans of Trump. If they find out that support for the party depends on those voters for winning some elections by turning away Trump at least they would have shown that their party stands for something.
It may also be useful to examine what are single generation differences and multi-generational differences. Single generation differences may be entirely direct environmental effects (malnutrition, etc.), where muti-generational differences may be mostly due to both culture and genetics. Culture has multi-generational memory just like genetics. These may sometimes get conflated, but who is to say genetics doesn’t also effect culture?
.
Eskimos aren’t likely to ever dominate global soccer, so there is also a case to be made for mutli-generational environmental effects in some cases.
.
Soccer has a low barrier to entry. Europeans and South America are dominant in soccer and it is a 100 year trend. Definitely multi-generational. Genetics? Culture?
.
I played soccer in WV and it wasn’t even a varsity sport then, more like a club. We had an exchange student from Mexico and he was our star player, he said he was quite mediocre to Mexico standards. We played an international tournament in DC and it was truly embarrassing how large the gap was. Maybe the word humiliating is better. One could be forgiven for thinking another hobby might be in order if success was personally important.
.
It is inconceivable we would close that gap inside a generation regardless of genetics and effort, not to mention not very many soccer pitches in the mountain state. Now all high schools have varsity soccer and there are 10x more soccer fields in WV. I’m sure they still suck relatively, ha ha.
.
That’s the thing, it is like closing a gap exponentially, the other side is also getting better but at a slower rate. 6 year old’s play soccer in the US now and the US qualified for the the World Cup. We aren’t going to be competitive to win though. There are many more generations before that can happen.
.
Alternately long distance running very likely has strong genetic factors and once the African runners were lifted out of poverty they became dominant.
.
This is all to say that the presence of multi-generational differences may suggest genetics, but it isn’t definitive. It gets messy.
I bid you all a fine and delicious Thanksgiving!
[In advance]
Tom Scharf,
I do not think soccer is important enough in the USA to ever attract the kinds of talented athletes that it attracts in other countries. Talented athletes go into other sports…. so the USA is unlikely to ever have much of a chance in the world cup unless soccer becomes a lot more popular in the future. Soccer moms bringing their kids to practice on Saturday morning makes for nice TV ads, but that is not going to compete with countries where kids live, breath, and eat soccer 24/7 from the time they are out of diapers… and some still in diapers.
.
I would not hold my breath waiting. I watched most of the USA/Wales game…. and I had to roll my eyes. Country of 3 million vs a country of 320 million! So sloppy. So sad.
mark bofill,
A happy Thanksgiving to you and yours.
I can see genetic research of IQ over groups of people being of interest to science, but I do not see it having any practical value or impact. Real question: what would it change, other than how we might think of it in scientific terms, given various potential outcomes. I am all for DNA research and have contributed my genetic identity and information about my health, eating habits and traits to that purpose. For areas to do genetic research, IQ would be low on my priority list.
On the other hand, in terms of genetics, be it IQ or any other traits, or economic class or parentâs backgrounds, I do see potential benefits arising from individuals thinking of themselves as mainly individuals and not so much part of some of those classified groups with their fates mostly tied to how they are classified. One can become controlled by the classifier no matter the good intentions involved or from where the classifier comes.
Obviously, there are many group classifications which can identify one as, for example, a chemist, ball room dancer, libertarian etc. that does not, or even make the effort, to address the individuality of the grouped person and make implications about it by way of group association. Those classifications are necessary and neutral about individuality.
If enough people think of their own individuality, they will think in those same terms about other people first and any group attachment becomes more incidental.
Mike M,
To pick just one: “A police officer was killed on Jan. 6.”
.
No, it was worse than that. The headline was “Police office beaten to death by insurrectionists using a fire extinguisher!”
.
Not just 100% wrong, willfully and knowingly wrong, and designed to advance a political agenda. What really happened: no fire extinguisher, no beating, no physical abuse of any kind. The guy had a massive stroke long after he left and went home, then died from his stroke. His medial history was withheld, of course, but off the record: he was a stroke victim waiting to happen. There is nothing which connects his death to what happened on January 6. That was all hidden by officials and by the MSM until it could no longer be suppressed.
.
They are utterly evil, shameless partisans, without a shred of honesty among them.
Out of 435 congressional districts, how many have 100% of the vote counted? According to Real Clear Politics, none. Huh. I suspect a software glitch at RCP. Or is there some other reason?
Ken Fritsch,
“Real question: what would it change, other than how we might think of it in scientific terms, given various potential outcomes.”
.
Linking genetic differences to specific capacities would change EVERYTHING!
.
The rational always used to justify discrimination against some groups to favor “under-represented groups” is and has always been that this discrimination somehow compensates for past discrimination, or the discrimination somehow makes up for the ‘systemic racism’ claimed to exist everywhere in the USA.
.
If clear, hard genetic data shows that it is crazy to expect people of native american descent to have the same proportional representation in advanced math because relatively few have the genetic makeup to excel at advanced math, then the whole edifice of affirmative action falls, because it would be indefensible. That is, you then have to judge people “not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character”… and their ability to do the work involved.
Mike M,
RCP never reports more than 99% counted. Not sure why. I guess they are afraid someone will pull up last minute before certification with a sack of uncounted ballots.
The last uncalled race in California’s 13th district now stands at 96% reporting, and the republican holds a 0.4% lead…. exactly the same 0.4% lead as he has since ~50% of ballots were counted. So almost certainly he will win within the next couple of days, flipping a Democrat seat to Republican…. and making the net seat change in California for the 2022 midterms = zero.
.
Apparently Kevin McCarthey knows California well enough to confidently predict a Republican majority the day after the election. Nancy Pelosi? Not so much.
.
So it will be 222:213 Republicans:Democrats. I am betting on McCarthy as speaker, but with some rules changes to force “normal order” on all legislation… no last-minute back-room deals with Democrats, with no time left to review the bill.
“I respect China’s achievements which are tremendous over 40 years. I think it’s a role model for many countries but I think also we should leave it to each country to make it’s own decision what system it wants to adapt and I think we should be very careful in imposing systems but the Chinese model is certainly a very attractive model for quite a number of countries.” – Herr Klaus Schwab
.
What part of the Chinese model are you referring to? Virtual slave labor? Ethnic concentration camps? Forced organ harvest? Dictatorship? Authoritarianism? “Do as we say, not as we do” credit scores or lose your “privileges”? Exploitation of the resources of other countries? Huge GHG emissions?
DaveJR,
IMHO, Klaus Schwab is very close to an idiot. “Globalism” does that to your mind.
SteveF, Larry Summers was really removed because he had suggested doing an empirical test of affirmative action in admissions.
Ken Fritsch, the effort to drive out Trump is not about Trump. Mitch McConnell worked to end the tea party conservatives that was annoying them in primaries. This was before Trump. Spending $9 million to attack a Republican candidate who was running against Lisa Murkowski was not about Trump, even though the Republican was endorsed by Trump and Murkowski voted to convict Trump in his impeachment.
There are issues including free trade and immigration, where the Republican establishment is at odds with many Republican voters. Mitch McConnell wanted Blake Masters to lose, along with Dan Bolduc in New Hampshire.
The establishment is not particularly interested in debating affirmative action, abortion, or gun control either, and this has nothing to do with Trump, who is probably more in agreement with them than with the base, but managed to win because he understood politics better than these supposed experts.
Today:
“Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley called Russia’s campaign against Ukraine’s electrical grid a “war crime.”
.
Odd definition of war crime.
.
I rather think putting the lights out is a pretty standard target in war. If it continues (and I strongly suspect it will until all of the Ukraine is in darkness) the Ukrainians might be wise to consider ending the war via negotiations, something they have steadfastly refused to consider until now. The Russians are now doing exactly what I thought they would do long ago, so not much of a surprise.
MikeN,
“Larry Summers was really removed because he had suggested doing an empirical test of affirmative action in admissions.”
.
Link/proof?
SteveF (Comment #216557)
November 23rd, 2022 at 3:28 pm
Steve, what you are referring to in your post as a problem is government getting in the way of decisions that need to be and should be made by private individuals and groups of those individuals. In my view genetic research, no matter the outcomes, will not change the thinking or actions of those who think the government should have that power. If people judge individuals on character and skill sets, as you say, I do not think genetic testing would be a judgement criteria. When you have a particular individual in mind a genetic knowledge of that individual’s group alone will not tell you much at all about that individual. All these attributes are on a bell shaped curve.
Non-binary is a “don’t identify as anything” category. It’s a go to description for people who want to fit in without identifying as “normal” because it covers everything at any time.
MikeN (Comment #216563)
November 23rd, 2022 at 5:14 pm
You appear to want to make this Trump against the establishment whereby in my view Trump would be considered part of that establishment by my definition. As I said previously I see his character flaws being mistaken for being outspoken against what some might consider the establishment. As it turns out he is outspoken and in crude ways to anyone who disagrees with him in the slightest. Denying his election loss makes him a double loser and it was a losing proposition for most of the candidates who denied in order to get his backing in the primaries.
I do not see how anyone can defend what Trump did after the election and particularly his actions dealing with the official electoral tally on Jan 6, 2021.
Ken Fritsh,
A specific individual in mind? Heck no! You are preaching to the choir, Reverend. I have always 100% supported evaluating each individual honestly and without any prejudice based on their sex, race, ethnicity, or personal beliefs. That is not what we now have. Instead we have a bizarre system of racial, ethnic, and gender prejudice which admits, hires, and promotes based on a series of “social justice” inspired quotas. It is plainly illegal to discriminate this way under the civil rights act, yet it continues and only worsens over time. The SC has a chance to put on the brakes a bit. I hope they do.
.
pYes yes, private actors ought to be able to be as prejudiced as they want, but that is not what the law says. What is more, any school, business, or individual who accepts Federal funds ought to be held to account if they want to continue receiving Federal funds of any kind.
Understanding root causes leads to better policy and better solutions. At this point a leading thesis is basically that the failure of some schools in Brooklyn and Chicago is due to alleged racism in WV and AL through the mechanism of systemic racism. I’m 110% for treating everyone as individuals in education, that is the exact opposite of what is happening in government policy discussions.
.
It is OK in my view to take note of performance gaps between groups to examine whether there are real problems that can be fixed. Things like funding gaps can be identified and corrected. What is lacking now is actual reasonable proof of what causes performance gaps. Some areas cannot be examined or discussed. This leads to ineffective policy and wasted money.
All the smart people you knew in high school … were they also smart in middle school and in grade school? The smart kids consistently stayed smart the whole way. It’s natural educational talent, just like athletic talent. I call this genetics, but maybe that word is too toxic, use whatever word you want, a gift from God, whatever.
.
What I see now is willful blindness to the fact that some kids get better results * in education * because they are more talented and/or work harder. There is no denial of talent in almost every other performance measurement such as athletics. It has gotten absurd to the point of parody.
.
There is a movement to remove all performance metrics from education. SAT optional, eliminate dual tracking, grade inflation, min 50% test scores, lotteries for selective high schools, remove basic graduation test for high school, etc. It’s a clownish mirage. There is very little visible pushback.
Kenneth
He is definitely a part of the establishment.
Yep. A big loser. A whiny loser. Just. Like. Hilary.
.
If he’s nominated he will lose again. Because he is now a loser and will remain one.
First, wishing all the Blackboard denizens a happy Thanksgiving!
SteveF (#216559): “So it will be 222:213 Republicans:Democrats. I am betting on McCarthy as speaker, but with some rules changes to force ânormal orderâ on all legislation…”
The rules changes you cite seem to be compromises (due to the narrow majority?) — but the 222-213 edge is just what the last Congress had (albeit with the Dems on top), and there didn’t seem to be much compromising in that chamber over the last 2 years. So perhaps you could elaborate on why you think rules changes will occur.
I agree that government policies that attempt to compensate for discrimination in the past are wrong-headed and counter productive. Further, in some cases those policies have spilled over into the private sector where the goal appears more to be placating government with virtue signaling than understanding root causes or even talking about them.
Tom, my observation of students, like yours, was that those who were early smart ended up later smart. I also noticed that those students took education more seriously and worked harder doing it. Those students also mostly had parents who were involved in the education process and their children’s success in that area.
I also observed students who did not do well in school and mainly because their interests were not aligned with the educational system. To me a number of them were every bit as intelligent as those doing well in the educational system. Some of those poorer educational performers went on to have very successful careers in areas not requiring a high level of educational success. A few were considered geniouses in their specialized areas of work.
I agree that a way out of this dilemma is to have conversations about topics that are now forboden by political correction or concessions to wokeness. For example, one very seldom or never hears about the importance of parental involvement in the educational system from politicians or the MSM and current problems related to the lack thereof. Part of that problem arises from the left wing proposition that public schools should play an ever increasing role in student lives at the expense of what has long been considered in the domain of the family. As I recall this goes back to Marx.
HaroldW,
The issue with ‘normal order’ is that conservative republicans in the House think McCarthy will bypass all normal procedures and cut last-minute back-room deals with Democrats which then will not be subject to normal hearings or normal debate. IOW, they think McCarthy will follow Pelosi’s playbook: “You have to pass the legislation to see what is in it.” They want to actually review all proposed legislation, and be able to offer amendments, before any votes. That will make behind-closed-doors compromises that freeze-out the most conservative Republicans much more difficult.
.
This does to some extent tie McCarthy’s hands…. that is why the conservatives want the proposed rules change and why McCarthy opposes it.
Happy Thanksgiving to all.
.
I hope that you enjoy your day.
SteveF, thanks for that. I hope the new speaker does not emulate Pelosi in any way.
Interestingly, this article suggests that a united Democratic contingent might unite with some centrist Republicans to choose a Speaker other than McCarthy.
The Ukraine NASA FIRMS fire map and NASA Black Marble night lights map have been useless for about two weeks now. Ukraine has had heavy cloud cover this entire time. To confirm this, I use a new tool [toy] that allows you to look satellite atmospheric data in near real time as well as recent history; ZOOM EARTH. Itâs free for nowâŚ. https://zoom.earth/
HaroldW,
Funny how there is absolutely no room nor need for the tiniest compromise when Democrats have control, but suddenly compromise is desperately needed ‘because the country is so divided’ as soon as Democrats lose control.
.
It won’t happen. Since the Senate will pass no significant legislation the House agrees to, nor vice-versa, the Republican House will have plenty of time for calling the Biden administration to task for all its willful malfeasance and unlawful rules and actions, not to mention general incompetence. Fauci is wise to leave now. Others would be wise to do the same. Biden’s blatant corruption will be exposed when the House gets all his bank records and he has mountains of unexplained income. That won’t make a bit of difference to Democrats, but independents may be a little surprised.
HaroldW (Comment #216578): “this article suggests that a united Democratic contingent might unite with some centrist Republicans to choose a Speaker other than McCarthy.”
.
What SteveF said.
.
Not a single Republican will vote to turn control of the House over to Democrats. But if the Democrats really want political accommodation, there is a way forward. Moderate Democrats could support McCarthy for Speaker and promise to provide him with a counterweight to the more extreme elements of the Republican caucus. Such a deal might produce legislation that might actually have a chance in the Senate.
.
But it won’t happen. The Dems will do what they have done in the past: Vote as a bloc against anything that does not have majority support in their caucus. That will force McCarthy to kowtow to the most extreme elements in his caucus so that the Dems can claim that all Republicans are extreme.
The Hill piece that HaroldW cited claims that “the Constitution provides an opportunity to choose a Speaker who is not a member of the House”. That is not so. The most that can be said is that choosing a non-member as Speaker is not explicitly prohibited. I think the conventional wisdom is that is implicit that the Speaker be a member of the House.
Now that I think about it, it is obvious that the Speaker must be an elected member of the House. To claim otherwise would be to claim that, in theory, the President could be elected Speaker. Or King Charles. Or Vladimir Putin. Obvious nonsense.
Mike M,
“But it wonât happen. The Dems will do what they have done in the past: Vote as a bloc against anything that does not have majority support in their caucus.”
.
Of course. Democrats are even more terrified of being ‘primaried’ out of office than are Republicans; the threat from the left is loud, explicit, and continuous: “If you ever compromise with Republicans we will put a real Democrat against you in the primary.” Unless a true ‘moderate’ plans on retiring before facing primary voters (a set with zero members AFAICT), no Democrat will EVER compromise on substantive legislation. They just can’t compromise and expect to remain in office. Of course, there is a fuzzy mirror image of this on the Republican side, but except in the most conservative districts, the threat from primary elections for Republicans is not nearly as grave as for Democrats. Republicans from a very conservative district have to do something truly egregious (like Liz Cheney) to lose a primary.
Apart from the abortion issue, which often seems to come out not as extreme as democrats indicate, what is an “extremist republican”? I know what an extremist democrat wants, race and gender based hierarchy, neutering of the constitution, abortion as extended contraception, cash handouts for everyone, and generally putting the US and its citizens last, but what do extremist republicans want?
Mike M,
“…the President could be elected Speaker. Or King Charles. Or Vladimir Putin.”
.
Demented vs. insane vs. evil…. I vote for none of the above.
Dave JR,
“….but what do extremist republicans want?”
.
No abortions… ever, with criminal prosecution to follow, no race/sex/ethnic preferences of any kind in admissions, hiring, or promotions, drastically reduced Federal spending, eliminate the Department of Education, drastically reduced funding for NATO, withdraw from all global warming agreements, get rid of the UN in New York, complete privatization of Social Security….. I could go on. Some perfectly sensible with broad public support, some wildly out of touch with the preferences of voters. Unfortunately, like ideologues of all types, the most extreme Republicans don’t give a hoot about what policies will gain the support of the voters…. and prefer to ‘lose with dignity’ than win. Unless Republicans wise up quickly, “surprise” election results like 2022 will continue. Message to Republicans: don’t field incompetent candidates who offend the voters in their districts, don’t ever make stupid proposals, and don’t endorse policies the public clearly rejects.
.
Perfect examples of why Republicans could remain the minority party forever:
.
Rick Scott, preparing a policy summary for all Republicans, includes a plank for eliminating Social Security and replacing it with a private program. Scott is so dumb that he doesn’t recognize that proposal spells near certain electoral loss almost everywhere. Other Republicans immediately disavow Scott’s nutty proposal, but lots of damage to the Republican brand is already done. “See, the Republicans really do want to take away your Social Security benefits!”
.
Lindsey Graham offered a bill that outlaws abortion nationwide after 15 weeks, shortly after the SC said the Federal government should not be involved at all in abortion legislation; giving Democrats all the ammunition they needed for the 2022 election to claim Republicans want to ‘eliminate abortion everywhere’. Seems like Graham may actually be less mentally competent than the new Senator from Pennsylvania, who suffers brain damage from a stroke.
.
Trump endorsed candidates were almost universal in 1) never having run for elective office, 2) mouthing Trump’s endless insistence on the 2020 election being stolen, 3) way out of step with the voters in their districts/states on multiple issues, 4) woefully underfunded because Trump refused to provide support for his hand chosen candidates from his giant campaign war chest. Most lost, and lost badly.
Below are listed in table form the differences of mean denial rates in 37 immigration courts over the periods of the latest Bush, the Obama and the Trump administrations with t values showing that the differences are very significant. The means required very small adjustments after accounting for 8 independent variables. The means were weighted by the number of cases decided by each court. The presidential comparison were done so that the difference was always positive.
The 2 years of the Biden administration did not allow for a statistical analysis but the mean of the last 2 years of the Trump administration versus the mean of the two Biden years shows the mean denial rates for Trump at 0.653 and Biden at 0.518. It should be recalled that there is a carry over effect from one administration to another as it might affect the court decisions in that there can be a lag in the administrations showing their preferences on immigration and/or the DOJ changing the judges(lawyers).
The table was my attempt to use html code to construct it at Luciaâs site and am uncertain how it will look.
Presidents Difference t value
Bush-Obama 0.121 14.8
Trump-Bush 0.102 5.5
Trump-Obama 0.223 12.4
SteveF (Comment #216589)
November 25th, 2022 at 10:46 am
SteveF, I think the issue of losing propositions by Republicans is more complicated than merely going against voter preferences.
First of all Republicans need to realize that they are not playing on a level playing field. Their general political philosophy even though not that far away from the Democrats in many cases, and to my regret, is an anathema to the current intelligentsia of which the MSM is a big part. They have to make better arguments than the Democrats and acknowledge that that is the case. Political fairytales and exaggeration will work or at least never be criticized when done by Democrats but will be skewered if done by Republicans.
Republicans would do better by making reasonable arguments and factual accounts of the problems associated with big government before proposing fixes that the general public only sees through the lenses of the MSM and academia and thus does not fully understand. They would need to set an example of using measured and intellectual arguments that oppose the current intellectual thinking on political matters. Being politicians first and foremost, that is probably not going to happen. Second best would be, at least, to understand and quote from intellectuals who can intelligently discuss the problems of big government and ways of avoiding these problems.
I believe that Scott was not proposing to privatize social security but rather suggesting that those taxpayers whose non payroll tax is zero pay more for Social Security and Medicare. None of that would fix the long term problems of those entitlement programs or even point to the problems that exist. It was a weak political talking point that the MSM ran with and Biden exaggerated. Scott does not have the intellect to formulate deeper talking points and needs to follow what those who do might propose.
After all is said and done a careful analysis will show that the intellectual arguments are where the battle of political ideas originates. It flows down from there to the politicians and voters. It certainly does not start with the political process. The biggest problem in my mind is what follows when political ideas fail. Do we continue down the same path or do we acknowledge the failures and change course? So far in the US it has been the former.
SteveF (Comment #216589): “Rick Scott, preparing a policy summary for all Republicans, includes a plank for eliminating Social Security and replacing it with a private program.”
.
I am skeptical. I do not recall seeing anything of the sort in Scott’s policy statement.
Ken Fritsch,
Yes, the actual Scott plan was to sunset all federal laws 5 years after enacted…. which would of course include social security and every other law. That was more than enough to give the Democrats a “Republicans are going to repeal social security” talking point. But even if you are willing to give Scott a break on Social Security (I am not), the entire idea of sunsetting every Federal law after 5 years (not 25 years, not 50 years, 5 years!) is insane, unworkable, and frankly, only a fool would ever propose it. What is more, since since one Congress can’t impose it’s will on the next, Congress would just put a catchall clause in every bill: “The sunset requirements of the xxxx sunset law do not apply to this legislation.” Scott’s proposals are stupid on many levels, and theny definitely hurt the Repuiblicans.
.
I agree that Republicans need to calmly and clearly make better intellectual arguments, grounded in solid data. They rarely do, and many of their candidates (including most of Trump’s picks) seem wholly incapable of making any reasoned argument at all.
.
Republicans did pick up 8 (and probably 9) seats, but we should remember that 8 of those seats came from redistricting in Florida (4 seats) and court imposed redistricting in New York (4 seats). The rest of the country was a wash. The Democrats in NY shot themselves in the foot when they turned down every compromise the Republicans on the “independent” redistricting committee offered. The court imposed redistricting actually did eliminate most gerrymandering, perhaps costing Democrats control of the House. With just a few more Trump endorsed candidates, the Dems would likely still have control of both houses.
The only mention of Medicare or Social Security in Scott’s plan:
It does say:
Seems pretty extreme to me, but it also seems obvious that can not apply to something like Social Security.
.
It is hard to find the plan. My source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Scott#cite_note-208
The link in note 207 is to a pdf file with the plan.
âCongress can pass it againâ
Yeah, right. I need some of what heâs smoking.
Besides the points raised above, I seriously doubt that general sunset legislation that applied to all previous federal law would make it past the courts. If term limits on both houses of Congress requires amending the Constitution, then it seems likely to me that so would a general sunset provision.
Mike M,
I cringed at almost every word in that document. ‘Tone deaf’ is too kind. Every subject is presented in the most extreme, strident, and divisive possible way. Many of his proposals have already been ruled unconstitutional by the SC, and I am sure they would be again…. were they ever enacted, and they won’t be. If a bunch of
dirty-trickster Democrat strategists wanted to create a document to pass off as Republican, and designed to damage Republicans in an election, that document would be a pretty darn good effort.
.
No wonder most every other Republican ran away from it. Rick Scott won two elections in Florida (first for governor, then for the Senate). I voted for him both times, and he won by a small fraction of one percent both times…. he just barely (barely!) got in. As governor his tone was nothing like the tone in that document, and if it had been, he would not have won the Senate election. I don’t know who the real Rick Scott is, but I really don’t like the one who wrote that document.
Mike M,
The reason that the document is hard to find is that Scott had the good sense to pull it from his website. When his “plan” was first released I sent him an email explaining that I very sincerely thought he had lost his marbles, and if his real objective was to guarantee Democrats would hold the Senate, he was doing a bang-up job.
.
Up till then I had gotten lots of loving emails from Scott’s office. After my email: not a single one, and no reply, save for an automated “thanks for contacting Sen Rick Scott”
âChairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley called Russiaâs campaign against Ukraineâs electrical grid a âwar crime.â
I remember reading the same thing about the US when it was bombing power plants in Serbia, but not from people within the military.
Kenneth, my point isn’t that Trump should be renominated, but that the people who are trying to keep Trump out want to keep a lot more than out than Trump. The same policies with another candidate would be unacceptable to them.
I am also skeptical that they want DeSantis to be the nominee.
Instead they are trying to split the conservative vote to bring in a third candidate.
MikeN,
“Instead they are trying to split the conservative vote to bring in a third candidate.”
.
Maybe, but that is not likely to work. DeSantis checks every box for conservatives, and is both focused and plenty smart to boot. If he runs (and it is not certain he will), I think he ends up beating Trump in the primaries. Of course, Tump (being Trump) could decide to throw a tantrum and run as a third party candidate, guaranteeing a Democrat (any Democrat!) wins in 2024. Which would prove only one thing to me: Trump is the biggest a$$hole in the history of US politics, winning that title easily over all others.
Mike N,
“… but not from people within the military.”
Those people were nothing like throughly modern Miley. Miley knows bombing electrical infrastructure is not a war crime, but he would never say so. He wants his job for as long as possible.
SteveF,
I don’t much care for Sen. Scott’s document and it did not do much good and possibly some harm. But I put more blame on McConnell. A significant part of what went wrong is that Republicans never said much about what they were for or what they would do. At least Scott tried to do something about that. Without his document, the Dems still would have told plenty of lies. There should have been a proper plan (and I don’t mean McCarthy’s) that candidates could have run on. Then Scott’s wouldn’t have mattered much.
.
If you stay silent, the loudmouth ends up speaking for you.
I see nothing wrong or threatening about this part of the plan. It is rather irresponsible to bury one’s head in the sand and not think ahead more than the next election cycle. The discussion and strategy should be to get the politicians to look at the entire problems of deficit spending going into the future. The liberal/progressives proponents of deficit spending from academia will say will just wait until there is crisis and then some minor tweaks will fix the problem. I would say let us talk about those minor tweaks and let us talk about unfunded liabilities of the governments and not only those of the federal government but of the state and local governments.
MikeN (Comment #216599)
November 25th, 2022 at 6:26 pm
MikeN, I think you are putting thoughts in people’s heads. From what I hear it is not the policies they disagree with but the spokesperson for them when it is Trump. There are disagreements within the Republican party that were there before Trump. Tariffs are one item. Spending would be another. Trump was not against spending huge amounts during the pandemic. Before the 2020 election he was exhorting the party to “go big” on spending.
If I wanted to make a reasoned somewhat intellectual argument about a political issue, the last person I would chose to do it would be Trump. He could make and has made a good/great idea seem like a con job.
Also how much of the Trump fund from contributions from people did Trump make available to even those candidates he backed and in comparison to what McConnell provided. Trump is only for Trump and further is a big pr-ck about it.
MikeN
I have no idea why you think this. I agree with Ken Fritsch. You are dreaming up what people think.
.
Trump had some good policies, some bad ones and some indecipherable/incomprehensible ones. If another candidate keeps the good ones and pitches the bad ones, that’s great.
.
I also agree with Kenneth that Trump is only for Trump. It’s been evident a long time, but this past election made it even more evident. They guy is now a whiny loser who loses. If he gets nominated he will lose again. Let’s hope he loses sooner than that and does not get nominated.
Trump is a clown and everyone can see it, that’s the problem.
The OSINT people at ORYX continue their effort to identify and catalog documented russian material losses. Yesterday they added 26 items. Among the list the russians lost nine tanks including one modern, top-of-the-line T-90M and three relics from the 1960s. They have a big backlog so there is no telling when all this stuff was lost. https://twitter.com/Rebel44CZ/status/1596268931509268480?s=20&t=E0mWvWFXTuxVytgxl7Vd9Q
Ken Fritsch,
“I would say let us talk about those minor tweaks and let us talk about unfunded liabilities of the governments and not only those of the federal government but of the state and local governments.”
.
Nice idea, but politicians who have the power to spend (and tax) almost never talk about unfunded liabilities. Recognizing long term realities, like unsustainable spending and unfunded liabilities, might restrict short term politically motivated actions, like giving away half a trillion dollars to buy the votes of recent college graduates (at the expense of people who did not go to college). The people who should be talking about unfunded liabilities are mostly academics, and they have all drunk the poisoned koolaid of leftism. So I think there is little likelihood of avoiding future problems by examining the long term problems the country faces. That is not how the left operates.
The irony of CNN reporting negatively on China’s double down on zero covid measures. They’re just trying to save lives, China says! Sounds familiar… It’s amazing how lives can have such variable amounts of value, from negative to almost limitless. The boot may stomp on your face forever, but at least you’ll be alive, assuming you don’t complain about the boot, anyway.
From British MOD ⌠russia is disarming nuclear missiles and firing them at Ukraine as decoys!
â(2/4)Open source imagery shows wreckage of an apparently shot-down AS-15 KENT air launched cruise missile (ALCM), designed in the 1980s exclusively as a nuclear delivery system. The warhead had probably been substituted with ballast.â
â(4/5) Russia almost certainly hopes such missiles will function as decoys and divert Ukrainian air defences.â
â(5/5) Whatever Russiaâs intent, this improvisation highlights the level of depletion in Russiaâs stock of long-range missiles.â
https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1596389927733927937?s=61&t=oCS5148X6zuO-ZeibzKc_w
SteveF (Comment #216609)
November 26th, 2022 at 7:18 am
SteveF, someone has to start the conversation or at least make the attempt. There are a small minority of intellectuals who are capable of pointing to current problems and suggesting changes. The problem there is having or finding a sounding board with a large public audience or least the attention of academia.
I am encourage by what I see as a potential at the intellectual level and at the public level whereby polling shows an increasing lack of support for government in general as it is represented by politicians.
What I see as discouraging is that failures of government are either ignored or poorly explained and too often are addressed by doubling down. The more cynical approach of letting failures pile up until a majority sees the light could alternatively end with actions that make the problems worse.
Ken Fritsch,
Sure. We can start the conversation.
.
Federal government spending is financed by a combination of taxes, debt accumulation, and monetary inflation (“printing”, or more accurately, synthesizing money, which the Federal government immediately spends at the current value of the money, before the effects of inflationary increase in money supply reduce the value of money). Monetary inflation also adds to government income via falling real value in accumulated government debt and via pushing people into higher tax brackets.
.
With all the fiscal advantages inflation gives to the Federal government, it is not at all surprising that rapid inflation of the money supply is the go-to option whenever there is a ‘crisis’ (see for example the effect of the covid crisis on monetary inflation: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/CPI_vs_M2_money_supply_increases.png).
.
Federal deficit spending, which is beneficial to some people, is at the same time harmful to others. People who are in debt at fixed interest rates benefit enormously when the real value (purchasing value) of that debt falls. People who lend at fixed interest (whether to people or to government, at relatively low/zero risk) rather than invest in productive enterprise (with associated risk), get hammered. Employed people are inevitably pushed to higher tax brackets,and lose real purchasing power over time, even as their income rises due to inflation. Pensioners without inflation escalators (an old fashioned pension retirement plan) get destroyed; Social Security benefits are protected.
.
So which behaviors are rewarded and which are punished? Taking financial risk is rewarded, reducing financial risk is punished. Taking financial risk with other people’s money is even more rewarded. Debt business financing, were it can be done at fixed rate, is rewarded, retention of profits to finance business is punished.
.
There are no free lunches, of course. Many of the rewards and many of the punishments from inflation are transitory; that is, the economy will adjust so that interest rates ultimately reflect underlying inflation. But the duration of those transitory effects can be decades, and cause real distortions. People who went heavily into debt (eg. to buy that multi-million dollar ocean-front house a few years back at 3% interest) are benefiting enormously from 8% – 9% inflation – which is very likely to continue for a couple of years – while those who financed those debts are screwed. The Federal government (with many trillions in low interest rate bond debt) benefits the most; those holding that Federal debt are screwed.
.
If the voting public could understand clearly the harmful effects of deficit spending, there might be some political pressure to change it. But alas, there is probably a large majority who either don’t understand the consequences of deficit spending or see it as a way to provide larger net wealth transfers to “more deserving” individuals to press for reductions in deficit spending…. I mean, just ask Alexandria Occasional-Cortex. I see no easy way to change this.
.
There has been a large net increase in wealth over the past 50 years (just compare cumulative inflation to the increase in GDP to see this), but this increase in wealth is in spite of the distortions caused by inflation, not because of inflation. Inflation only distorts/changes where the increase in wealth ends up.
Ken Fritsch,
One other thought on inflation: There are two principle functions of money:
.
1) Facilitate economic transactions, and
2) Act to effectively carry wealth, in a liquid (spendable) form, forward through time.
.
Inflation complicates both. But changes in the rate of inflation make the second function almost useless. I would argue that this causes distortion of economic choices, including driving wealth toward investment in stocks and in non-liquid assets (Bill Gates is the largest landholder in the USA!) rather than low-risk financial assets. Prices of assets are therefor inflated.
SteveF, I have already surmised that you are attuned to the problems that you have addressed here, but my concerns are getting a discussion going to a wider audience.
Inflation is a good example of people not realizing that it is, in effect, a very regressive tax on the population and hurts most those who have to spend their incomes mainly for subsistence and most importantly is caused by government actions.
Many in academia who should know better do not attribute price inflation to the Federal Reserve inflating the supply of money. It is somehow attributed to whatever is available in order to point the finger away from government actions. As you noted governments with large debts (and that is most governments) benefit from inflation and artificially low interest rates that eventually creates price inflation. To think that government would not have a hand in creating this situation which is to their benefit is either willful ignorance or just plain ignorance. The latter would mean that a lot of supposedly intelligent people are just plain ignorant, at least with regards to inflation.
Government deficits do not directly cause inflation but by the Federal Reserve attempting to keep interest rates low to ease the pain of financing deficits money inflation is created which eventually leads to price inflation.
The other myth/misconception about business cycles is that the Federal Reserve is attempting to ameliorate the cycles when in fact it creates them.
Where deficits become untenable is when interest costs on the borrowings become too painful to maintain. This is where the Federal Reserve will soon reach a point of decision with price inflation and high interest rates. Will the Federal Reserve be found with no cloths or will the charade continue?
Ken Fritsch,
I suspect the Fed will come under a great deal of political pressure to relent as increased interest rates drive the US economy into an extended (and deeper) recession. I fully expect the fed will succumb to that pressure, and will not keep increasing rates much after the beginning of 2023. The Fed should have increased interest rates a long time ago… starting some time in early 2021 would have reduced the current inflation rate. But they didn’t, so now the economy is going to suffer a deeper recession than it might have.
Elon Musk claims new users at an all time high and hate speech that shot up initially is back down to baseline. There is no independent confirmation of this, but it is significant if true.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1596718851097755648?s=20&t=JBuGSyO0KndT0qUmqkbjOg
One thing I can confirm, I was able to request the lifting of my previous suspension [It was under a different sign in]. We shall see.
Some independent support for Musk’s claim:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/11/26/the_data_show_twitter_is_far_from_dying_148523.html
If tons of people on Twitter are saying Twitter is dead then … wait a minute. I find the entire Twitter death watch thing pretty entertaining. A bunch of Twitter addicts openly rooting for its demise is kind of weird, you can just feel their disappointment that it isn’t dead yet.
.
Of course they declared the world was ending when Musk “threatened” to buy Twitter, then declared he must be forced to buy it once he changed his mind, then right back to the world is ending when he bought it. It is such a hilarious snapshot of completely dysfunctional American culture.
“Letâs hope he [Trump] loses sooner than that and does not get nominated.”
.
I support Trump over many other conservatives due to his resistance to special interest pandering. But his downsides have always been self control in relying too much on instinct and not enough of forward thinking.
.
Outreach to conservative celebrities, especially minorities, is great but not without doing homework. He should never accepted a dinner with Kanye West or anyone else that has exhibited mental instability.
.
“Ye” West brought uninvited guests with him, including someone I had never heard of: Nick Fuentes, who apparently is a cross between David Duke and Alex Jones. Fuentes attended the Charlottesville 2017 rally as well as making a speech at Jan 6 calling for taking back the government “by force if necessary.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Fuentes
âHello, Weâre writing to let you know that your account is now unlocked. Weâre sorry for the inconvenience.â …Email today from Twitter support!
Thank you, Elon. It took less than 24 hours to unlock my âPermanently Suspendedâ account.
Background: This account was permanently suspended during the Bubba Wallace NASCAR noose fiasco. I committed the Twitter Mortal Sin of posting a picture of the actual garage door pulldown cord with a loop tied at the end âŚ. with the caption âNot a Nooseâ. The cord, loop and knot not only was not a noose, but did not have a slipknot componentâŚIt could not be used as a noose. [This was not the first time I had been suspended; I was a repeat offender, so this one was permanent.]
Tom Scharf,
“If tons of people on Twitter are saying Twitter is dead then ⌠wait a minute.”
.
No, it is not dead. There is real economic difficulty for Twitter, since the woke mob has pressured half the advertisers to stop advertising. I expect when the world does not actually end, and Twitter continues to function normally (and Twitter users actually grow in number… Hell, I am tempted to join for the first time ever), a lot of the advertisers will come back. The good news for Twitter: most of the dead wood, responsible for almost everything that was wrong with Twitter, is actually gone. There will be the three-month severance pay for a huge number of former employees (5,000 times $10,000 times 3 = $150 million) to cover, but after that, their operating costs will be drastically lower, so maybe Twitter can reach profitability within 6 months or so.
.
I am reminded of a company I consulted for many years ago. They were grossly overstaffed in the production areas (at least 50% more people than they actually needed); they had substantial losses which were not getting better. When the needed cuts of ~50% were finally made… after much pulling of hair and gnashing of teeth…. the production manager said “I don’t know how we can continue operating!”. Six months later, he said “The operation has never been so smooth or efficient.”
.
It is the 80:20 rule…. ~20% of the employees do ~80% of the productive work. Musk for sure knows this, and is happy to get rid of most of the dead wood (many of whom would work to sabotage the company if they remained employees).
Russell, congrats. I also appealed my suspension and got reinstated a week ago. My sin was to be posting about the furin cleavage site and other genetic indicators pointing to SARS2âs lab origin, along with Zhengli Shi covering up that 3 miners died in 2012 after exposure to bat guano in a cave. Shi made at least four expeditions to the cave in the years after the samples from the sick miners were sent to her lab. It was inexplicable other than that there was a gathering in secret of coronavirus technology for non altruistic ends. The most important scientific question that Shi and the American virologists that were funding her wanted to know was if the SARS1 virus jumped from a civet cat to human as originally thought or if the virus had made a direct leap from a bat virus. Dr. Ralph Baric, Shiâs research partner from Univ NC, specifically says this in a 2016 podcast presentation. The motivation behind the NIH supplying the WIV humanized mice and Baricâs technology for making chimeric sars viruses was to answer this question definitely. Baric was silent when SARS2 broke but then signed a letter in May 2021 supporting an investigation into the lab origin possibility. His silence was most certainly influenced by the SARS2 virus having the furin cleavage site that no other sars-like virus has yet was discovered to be a key in other viruses in ability to infect humans and other mammals.
.
But what had to be the shocker to Baric was learning in late 2020 that Shi knew the answer to the central investigation question: the ability for a sars virus to infect humans, was answered in 2012 by Shi but not shared.
.
Shiâs Nature paper introducing SARS-Cov2 in Feb 2020 disclosed the WIV had another close virus to SARS2 named by Shi RaTG13. It took months for virologists to figure out that this virus was originally named batcov4991 in a 2016 paper that obscured its origin or the dead miner story. The paper also covered up that there were 7 other sars-like viruses isolated in that cave. This only came to light in a Dec. 2020 addendum by Shi in Nature to try to partially acknowledge her omissions that were discovered by Twitter users. Shi has yet to publish the code for those 7 viruses and only revealed them due to their mention in a paper that was submitted pre-covid but held for publication for 2 years.
.
Twitterâs explanation for banning me without notice of how to appeal in Jan 2021 was that they thought I was a bot. This was several months prior to the change in scientific consensus on the lab origin of SARS2 being a conspiracy theory.
After showing that statistically significant differences in asylum denial rates exist between a number of the immigration courts in the US after controlling for important independent variables, I have looked at an individual court in Arlington, Virginia in an attempt to determine statistical differences between judgesâ denial rates for asylum. That court had a mean denial rate close to the national average, consistent percentages of nationalities among the judges and a range of judgesâ denial rates.
The Syracuse TRAC website linked below provides data for individual judges on denial rates, nationalities involved in the judgeâs cases and the portion of the judgeâs cases that have lawyer representation. As it turns out the best fitting model for all courts in the period of interest (2017 to 2022) had denial rates depending exclusively on nationality and representation. Democrat votes for the city of the courtâs location and standard deviation amongst judges was not used because obviously it would be the same for individual courts.
The nationality and representation variables were used to adjust the denial rates for individual judges so that the comparisons were looking strictly at differences between judges. The adjusted denial rates where then differenced from the mean of all judges in the Arlington court. That mean and its distribution was assumed to be the expected mean and distribution if no biases existed in the judgesâ denial decisions. The standard deviations of the mean denial rate and the judgeâs denial rate were combined in quadrature. The combined standard deviation was divided into the denial rate difference to obtain t values. The results are listed in a table with the judge number, the t value and whether the t value showed significant difference from the mean at a probability less than 0.05.
I am attempting to use html to put the table in this post and get proper alignment. If it is difficult to read, I will use a link to it by way of imageshack. In conclusion the results show some large and statistically significant difference between judges that strongly indicates very different readings of the law by these judges.
https://trac.syr.edu/phptools/immigration/asylum/
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/240x199q90/c/r/924/rHFoxb.png
Lucia, do you know if html code works in putting a table into a post at your site. I have tried twice now and used code for alignment but the table contents do not align. I well could be doing something wrong because I do not use html much.
Tom Scharf (Comment #216620)
November 27th, 2022 at 12:16 pm
Twitter is really no different than a number of tech firms who have had to layoff workers and lots of them. The Federal Reserve with easy money was their friend and now its their enemy.
I have read that tech workers in general in Silicon Valley were not required to do much work.
Kenneth,
Over time wordpress has added “security” features that seem to involve stripping out html. As admin I may be able to reformat after you enter.
I didn’t know I was sharing space with so many Twitter refugees.
.
According to what I read Twitter’s policies were extremely carefully thought out after years of hard work by a highly qualified team that examined multiple angles and ensured lots of nuance was allowed in all arguments, especially controversial topics with lots of uncertainty. At least that was what the Washington Post tells me. They also said Musk made many members of the “Trust and Safety” team cry with his heartless actions, apparently somehow believing Musk does not value their work.
.
I’m sure writing a moderation algorithm at the billions scale is pretty hard, an arms race between AI bots and AI moderation. It also looked pretty evident that bias was present in the humans.
.
Google search also puts out some biased results on controversial topics that looks like it has human intervention. This is their right, but that is truly a slippery slope. Everything looks like a nail when you get to hold the moderation hammer. Once moderation becomes holistic and hidden then bias inevitably follows.
.
There is only ever going to be tradeoffs, open the moderation gates wide open and every place turns into a sewer.
Tom,
Good one! That was pretty funny.
Ron Graf (Comment #216624)
Congratulations on your Twitter reinstatement. It appears your transgression was one of serious scientific disagreement, while mine was because of my childish harassment of Liberals.
Tom Scharf (Comment #216630)
âI didnât know I was sharing space with so many Twitter refugees.â
My email in reply to my Twitter banishment was âIâve been thrown out of better joints than this beforeâ [a statement that is literally and figuratively true].
Now that I have two active accounts again I will use one to have fun and annoy Liberals⌠try to push the limits to see just how wide open Musk is letting it become.
One interesting sidelight on all the OSINT being posted is that the independent bloggers use their extensive contacts on the ground and satellite photo resources to expose newly constructed russian defenses and hideouts. Here is a recent example⌠Newly constructed russian defensive construction is geolocated and outlined on recent aerial photos. Local resident video and pictures show the construction and enhanced sat photos show what the final construction looks like.
I assume the Ukrainians follow up on these leads for targeting. Link:
https://twitter.com/DefMon3/status/1596507771519741952?s=20&t=TADoXxUcDeZq6PMfaKbidg
If you give progressives the ability to sensor non-progressive views, no matter the subject, sensor they will, without hesitation and without apology. If you give conservatives the ability to sensor non-conservative views, no matter the subject, they won’t sensor, but will argue against non-conservative views. That is the difference which makes the left a threat to liberty, always and everywhere.
Lucia, I was more interested in whether I was coding correctly. I can always link to my table.
What I really need is a place online where I can check my coding.
Russell, all you need to do to annoy liberals is cite facts, history and logic.
.
SteveF, you should put your comment in a tweet or somebody should.
There was an article in the WSJ news section this morning that helps make my point about how MSM manages to overlook/ignore the basic problems related to government policies/actions.
The article talks about what the writer considers the causes of inflation without once mentioning the Federal Reserve or any other government agents and rather talks about the supply chain and the war in Ukraine. It also mentions the Covid-19 pandemic as an indirect cause without mentioning that it was the government shutdowns that were the root cause of problems related to the pandemic.
The author deals with inflation and the problems arising from the pandemic as though impetus of both were beyond human control and nothing to do with government.
Ken Fritsch — you can check HTML syntax validity at https://validator.w3.org/
There’s an option to validate an HTML fragment (as opposed to an entire document), which would seem correct for a post here.
Edit: Just tested, and HTML table formatting (tags table, tr, td) is ignored in posts.
If you let people post random HTML code in forums somebody will inevitably write some clever malformed code for âplease re-enter your password hereâ and scrape passwords. SQL injection was hugely abused for hacking in a similar way. Some forums allow rich text entry with limits but it is highly parsed. Mostly it is just a pain to allow it so everyone gives up and goes text only because most HTML coders just arenât skilled enough to understand security. You get Unicode if you are lucky.
WordPress has fancy editors, but I personally think they add little actual value and the abuse of it becomes rampant quickly. âYou are a jerkâ Font Size = 999.
https://www.formget.com/wordpress-text-editor-plugins/
Thanks, HaroldW and Tom. That was useful information.
HaroldW, that validator link gives great error messages – and I had a few.
The new trial balloon being sent up:
.
Sympathy, and Job Offers, for Twitterâs Misinformation Experts
Seeing false and toxic information as a potentially expensive liability, companies in and outside the tech industry are angling to hire people who can keep it in check.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/28/technology/twitter-misinformation-experts-hiring.html
“The trust and safety field barely existed a decade ago, and the talent pool is still small, said Lisa Kaplan, the founder of Alethea, a company that uses early-detection technology to help clients protect against disinformation campaigns. The three-year-old company has 35 employees; Ms. Kaplan said she hoped to add 23 more by mid-2023 and was trying to recruit former Twitter employees.
Disinformation, she said, is like âthe new malwareâ â a âdigital reality that is ultimately going to impact every company.â Clients that once employed armed guards to stand outside data rooms, and then built online firewalls to block hackers, are now calling firms like Alethea for backup when, for example, coordinated influence campaigns target public perception of their brand and threaten their stock price, Ms. Kaplan said.”
.
Alert! Somebody on the internet is wrong.
.
Yes, broad internet censorship is required to protect against legal liability and profits. Every company is one misinformation tweet away from bankruptcy. Experts are needed, now! Every internet utterance must be quickly policed or Armageddon will come. They are seeking very opinionated people who waste their entire day on social media, aka experts.
.
I suspect what they really want is to monetize special access to censorship. Facebook et. al. will sell Trust and Safety support contracts to companies for brand management.
Tom,
I’m sure Twitter employees are experienced in writing algorithms to detect “typeX” information on a platform. The skills to do that are the same whether “typeX” actually is disinformation, true, false or whatever. If a customer wants reputation management, they want to detect potentially harmful stories even (possibly especially if they are true.
.
It’s actually a valid and useful skill set companies should want to have working for them.
.
Some companies may be a few true-information tweets away form bankruptcy!!
.
The big problem at Twitter and Facebook etc. is that the skill-set wasn’t necessarily aimed at “mis” information and it had a potential to be deployed in a biased way on a “generic speech” platform.
.
This isn’t as important for a company– they want to know someone claims to have found mouse poo in their packaged foods whether or not the claim is true. In one case: look into it and correct it. Maybe pay off the person complaining United broke their guitar before they write “united breaks guitars” before the song goes viral.
in the other case get in front of the false story.
âThe trust and safety field barely existed a decade ago…”
.
Yes it did. It was called “public relations”. “Trust and Safety” is just another, more Orwellian, description for the same thing.
United loses kids too. I sent my kids to my parents which connected through DC and they were supposed to be escorted to the connecting plane. They had someone who barely speaks English do the job and my 9 year old was tugging at her and pointing telling her the plane was leaving, but she was dismissed while the employee talked endlessly to her friend. Plane missed, finally caught the last flight past midnight. Parents were terrified.
.
Same airport, a connecting flight got canceled and they told me no hotel or meals because it was weather related. I said “I’m in the middle of a flight!”. They said “You shouldn’t have got on the first flight”. Real story. I was in line waiting and they tried this BS with everyone in line and doled out compensation only to those who knew the rules. By that time I knew the rules and caused the required scene. They scheduled me for a 10 pm flight the next day, “the only one available”. I ended up driving a rental.
Everyone has travel problems, but United is terrible in my experience.
Tom Scharf,
“Plane missed, finally caught the last flight past midnight. Parents were terrified.”
.
For this and several other travel horrors associated with minors traveling without guardians, I don’t let airlines get involved. I’m headed to Brazil in 9 days to pick up my 14 YO daughter; I wouldn’t ever trust an airline to get her safely to the USA. The peace of mind of traveling with her is worth the extra money for airfare.
Tom Scharf,
“United is terrible in my experience.”
.
Mine also. But as an adult traveler, you can tolerate some unpleasantness to gain a lower air fare. The biggest trouble with United is that almost the entire staff seems disagreeable (and nasty), and especially the international crews, who tend to be a lot older and even more cranky and disagreeable. I always get the feeling they wished you were not there, so they wouldn’t have to do anything. I avoid United except where the cost differential is worth the hassle and unpleasant ambiance.
My exact same experience, the employees all seem unhappy and grumpy.
The US is unveiling the first unit in next generation of stealth strategic bombers this week:
âWASHINGTON â The Dec. 2 rollout of the B-21 Raider will mark the worldâs first glimpse at a bomber that manufacturer Northrop Grumman and the U.S. Air Force see as a generational leap in aircraft technology and development.â
I haven’t seen a lot of hype, but this may be a major step forward in aircraft designed to secretly deliver nuclear warheads anywhere on earth. Manufacture of 100 bombers is planned.
https://www.defensenews.com/industry/techwatch/2022/11/28/northrops-b-21-is-almost-here-whats-next-for-the-stealthy-bomber/
After showing that the Arlington, Virginia immigration court had 15 of 25 judges denial rates vary from the mean denial rate of the court by statistically significant amounts and with some very significantly, I did the same analysis of the Atlanta, Georgia court and again compensating judges denial rates by the mix of nationalities in their cases and the portion of cases not having lawyer representation. The Atlanta court had a very high denial rate 94% and like the Arlington court had a very consistent mix of nationalities across nine judges. Actually, the national mixes of both courts were very much the same, and although a formal analysis was not made, a quick look readily surmised that mean denial rates of these 2 courts would be statistically very significantly different.
I will list the t values of the differences in denial rates for the Atlanta court which were calculated as described for the Arlington court.
t-values:
0.834661 0.929056 0.920917 0.954339 0.969564 0.496019 0.877888 0.929778 0.906806
It is readily seen that there were no statistically significant differences in the denial rates for the Atlanta court and in fact none even close to being significant.
I need to look at more courts and the judges denial rates within an individual court and the nationality mixes, but from these 2 courts I would judge that, as is supposed to be the case, the cases were close to being randomly assigned. That the standard deviations of a courts judges denial rates increases with lower mean court denial rates that were found for busiest 40 or so US courts held very emphatically between these two. One would have to conclude from these results that the courts judges with the highest denial rates are reading the law much more closely and/or the same than those where the courts have lower denial rates and a greater standard deviation of denial rates amongst the judges.
I will pile on United with my story of being the escort for my two minor granddaughters a few years back. I was recovering from a leg injury so my granddaughters would walk ahead of me and then wait for me to catch up. This was O’Hare airport where the walks can be long.
They were flying back to MN and I was not. I was required to be with them until their plane departed. There was some escort paperwork required at the airport and thanks to my oldest and tech savvy granddaughter that part went fairly well. We got to the designated gate about 4 PM and were shortly told there was a gate change which just so happened to be at the other end of the terminal. More limping waiting and catching up.
The weather was OK for flying out of O’Hare but the surrounding area had had ongoing bad weather and the flight was delayed many times. In turns out, or least United said, that they could not get pilots and attendants into O’Hare to fly the planes out. What started as a murmur soon built into a crescendo of “I will never fly United again” with some profanities mixed in.
To make a long story not so long my older granddaughter wanted to get back to MN for some event for which I do not recall the details and finally at 2AM and from the prompting of her mother on the phone we went back to my home in Wheaton. Their mother was on the phone all night getting a flight scheduled. The next day we went back to airport and United still had not gotten personnel to fly the scheduled plane. It took them about 5 hours before a couple pilots and attendants nonchalantly showed up at the gate. In the meantime my ear was bended by several of those who stayed in the airport overnight. My granddaughters told me that on the flight back their were some very angry passengers.
Russia is setting up for their winter offensive by targeting rail yards on the west bank of the Niper. Ukraine forces in Kherson look to be pretty well stuck as rail movements from the west to the east are facing both electrical stoppage and missile attacks. Ukraine rail is highly dependent on electrical power to run the engines.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dsmXvCtgdo
Talk about fighting with both hands tied behind one’s back.
Any attack on Mother Russia soil likely to lead to a severe escalation in weaponry being used on Ukraine, short of nuclear as the winds might drift east.
Conventional warfare is so passe.
There was a novel by Harry Harrison, the stainless steel rat, describing the power of the imagination in fighting back.
There was a book, Norstrilia: Cordwainer Smith’s Only Science Fiction Novel describing how to fight back.
The basic promise is to make the other side so uncomfortable with the battle that they will seek peace.
Modern equipment is such that an invading force is very subject to attack on entering unknown ground.
Hannibal in Italy
Russia in Afghanistan.
Booby trap and run, from the border back.
Return and booby trap again.
While the war lengthens and Putin becomes more unpopular.
A few sunk Russian oil tankers would help as well.
Pity no one with a navy wants to help.
Strategically the best plan would be to take out Russian power stations and pipelines with commandos, planes and HE loads way behind the front lines.
Would need a few Harlequins sadly.
My how times have changed! Margarita Simonyan [editor-in-chief of the state-controlled media organization RT russia Today) was on russian state TV yesterday openly concerned about losing the war in Ukraine. She also expressed concern about being tried at the Hague for war crimes. She might be a candidate for falling out of a window.
https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1597465482592153601?s=20&t=jiUbVceurqLRk8hLpXXWPQ
From the USGS:
âAlert Level: WARNING, Color Code: REDâ
Mauna Loa, the largest active volcano in the world, has begun to erupt.
USGS has a number of webpages with information:
Past Week Monitoring Data
https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/mauna-loa/past-week-monitoring-data-mauna-loa
A lot of live webcams
https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/mauna-loa/webcams
Alerts and updates
https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/mauna-loa/volcano-updates
The WHO will protect us from monkeypox, which is a word they say has been used to stigmatize. Henceforth, it will be called mpox. https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2022/11/28/1139403803/who-renames-monkeypox-as-mpox-citing-racist-stigma
They note that some have interpreted the name as suggesting that the disease is transmitted by monkeys. I hope they don’t think about chicken pox.
angech,
“Strategically the best plan would be to take out Russian power stations and pipelines with commandos, planes and HE loads way behind the front lines.”
.
I thought for a moment you were joking, but I believe you may have taken leave of your senses.
.
Bombing Russia with planes would likely cause a nuclear war. Significant damage by commandos within Russia would lead to nuclear weapons falling on the Ukraine… as a start. OK, Russia would not likely be targeting Australia… at least not at first, but they do have over 5,000 nuclear weapons, so who knows where they might ultimately target. But in any case, I think risking the deaths of a billion or so along with global damage of many tens of trillions of dollars is not a prudent path forward. Yes, Putin is a terrible, murderous thug. Yes, people outside Russia don’t think invading the Ukraine was at all justified. Reaching a negotiated settlement (which is what will ultimately happen, perhaps after a long and costly stalemate) will be unpleasant and will seem wholly “unfair” to Ukraine. None of that matters much if weighed against a billion lives… and the certain destruction of the USA and Europe.
.
The good news is no half-way sensible person, not even the clown-car of incompetents running the show in the Biden administration, is ever going to take your advice.
HaroldW,
“The WHO will protect us from monkeypox, which is a word they say has been used to stigmatize. Henceforth, it will be called mpox.”
.
They are truly giving satirical sites like The Babylon Bee and The Onion serious competition, even if it is unintentional. Nobody should listen to any of the WHO’s woke pronouncements, any more than they should listen to the WHO’s idiotic pronouncements on the origin of covid.
.
Homosexuals should be made aware that the monkeypox virus has spread almost exclusively in the homosexual population, and that it spreads by sexual contact. So unless in a monogamous relationship, homosexuals should seriously consider getting the vaccine against monkeypox. You really don’t want to catch this virus: https://c.ndtvimg.com/2022-06/7vtvmvl8_monkeypox_625x300_09_June_22.jpg
Well you’ve got to hand it to the CCP. The worlds largest totalitarian state, leading the world in brutal control and oppression of the worst kinds, more deadly than covid, no doubt, but our leaders just can’t seem to find anything negative to say about them.
.
“The people are speaking for themselves”. Really? Since when did that stop you from “elevating marginalized voices”, using your “privilege” to speak for those without, promoting freedom and democracy, like you do endlessly for Ukraine? I suppose you’ll be sending off another fact finding mission in a few months time to see if there’s anything you can learn from them about dealing with civil unrest…
.
The complacency surrounding a state of 1.5 billion people that’s essentially fascist in all but name, is remarkable. Germany only had around 70m and one way of dealing with unrest and divesting yourself of excess baggage is to give it a new target.
Ukraine crossing the border of Russia with attacks that kill Russian civilians will result in Russia using WMD’s. Russia using WMD’s will result in Ukraine crossing the border and killing Russian civilians. Things will get quite ugly if this war escalates that way.
.
Crimea should be a fair target.
.
Things aren’t going so well for Russia, so I would expect them to be eager to escalate if given the opportunity. They would prefer to have an excuse and lots of mistakes are made in war. They could run a false flag operation but that is dangerous. Russia should be uncertain if US espionage could expose that.
DaveJR,
“….our leaders just canât seem to find anything negative to say about them.”
.
Many of our leaders think a totalitarian state like China is an example of ‘progress’ toward leftist utopia…. so long as they are in charge. Maybe they should ask themselves how many people want to leave China and live elsewhere compared to how many people want to migrate to China to enjoy the utopia.
It’s a bit humorous to see the usual suspects cheering anti-covid protests in China. I don’t remember them being so supportive of the same thing in the US, not at all.
.
At least the China protesters have a sense of humor. Using blank sheets of paper to send their protest message. Then:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/11/29/world/asia/china-protests-demands.html
“Sometimes, the crowdâs chants were sarcastic. When the police ordered the same group of protesters not to shout slogans protesting Covid controls, they switched to chants supporting them: We want Covid tests!”
.
Here’s 3 members of the news team at the NYT covering the protests in the US in Apr 2020:
The Quiet Hand of Conservative Groups in the Anti-Lockdown Protests
Groups in a loose coalition have tapped their networks to drive up turnout at recent rallies in state capitals and financed lawsuits, polling and research to combat the stay-at-home orders.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/21/us/politics/coronavirus-protests-trump.html
“An informal coalition of influential conservative leaders and groups, some with close connections to the White House, has been quietly working to nurture protests and apply political and legal pressure to overturn state and local orders intended to stop the spread of the coronavirus.”
.
Standard framing bias. One group is young brave freedom fighters, the others are dupes of nefarious opposition forces. No parallels are drawn between the US and Chinese protests, lest people get confused who the good guys and bad guys are here. The Chinese government says foreign influence is behind the protests.
This will be a fun fight to watchâŚDeSantis teaming up with Musk going after Apple! âŚjust in the last 24 hours, this all happened:
Desantis on Apple-
âThat would be a huge, huge mistake, and it would be a really raw exercise of monopolistic power that I think would merit a response from the United States Congress.”
âDon’t be a vassal of the CCP on the one hand, and then use your corporate power in America on the other to suffocate Americans and try to suppress their right to express themselves.â
Musk on Apple-
âApple has also threatened to withhold Twitter from its App Store, but wonât tell us whyâ
âApple should publish all censorship actions it has taken that affect its customers? Yes 84.8% No 15.2% 2,196,276 votes¡42 minutes leftâ
âDid you know Apple puts a secret 30% tax on everything you buy through their App Store?â
The walled garden 30% fee is well known, especially to software developers. Android does similar things, rates vary.
.
Audible only allows credits to be used to buy things in the Apple app. If you want to pay via credit card then you must use the web interface. This gets around the 30% rape and pillage fee for in-app purchases.
.
Apple also charges licensing fees to use the lightning connector, if you don’t buy the Apple chip then you get lower performance. Apple claims it is about “quality”. Apple hesitates to use USB-C connectors for a reason.
.
Apple now locks internal components together with ID’s so you can’t replace a battery or screen through a 3rd party repair facility that uses parts from phones that have been parted out. Apple says this is to prevent stolen phones from being chop-shopped, but this sends everyone in to the Apple Store for a $500 back glass replacement.
.
Apple makes some good products, but they also get away with some vicious and overt anti-competitive practices.
.
Don’t even get me started on the lack of iMessage support in Windows.
DeSantis was right, Apple is in cahoots with the Chinese governmentâŚâŚ
âApple has placed time restrictions on AirDrop wireless file-sharing across iPhones in China after the feature was used by protesters to share images opposing the Chinese government, â â…making it harder to distribute content to strangers en masse. These new time restrictions have been introduced by Apple just weeks after the service was used to spread posters opposing president Xi Jinping.â
I went looking because I figured he had something on them when he said âDon’t be a vassal of the CCP on the one hand, and then use your corporate power in America on the other to suffocate Americans and try to suppress their right to express themselves.â
https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/10/23450967/apple-airdrop-limited-china-goverment-protests
Tom Scharf,
“Apple makes some good products, but they also get away with some vicious and overt anti-competitive practices.”
.
I think Apple products are a lot less cutting edge than they were 15 years ago. That they use their technology to lock people into (super expensive) repairs at apple stores is the kind of thing that would get automakers into heaps of trouble. Apple should be pursued under anti-trust laws until they relent.
SteveF
I think even if they are in a monogamous relationship. The exception is those old enough to have gotten the smallpox vaccine.
Apple and every other company (such as Twitter) has no option but to comply with local laws. If they donât like it then they can abandon a 1.5B person market. As I recall all iCloud servers for Chinese users must be in China and be given access to Chinese authorities at any time. The same for all the other companies. Twitter must comply with ever countryâs speech laws. Itâs a nightmare of compliance for these companies.
.
Everything is China can be monitored by them, by law. If you start using VPNâs to hide your tracks then you may very well get a knock on your door pretty quick.
.
Privacy advocates would be laughed at all the way to border in China. Itâs an oppressive regime, but donât pretend these same totalitarian instincts arenât present everywhere. This is China’s Trust and Safety team. They must be prohibited at a constitutional level.
Tom,
Maybe I don’t understand what you are talking about. I don’t have to pay any fees to develop for Android, zero zilch zip nada nothing. Android Studio IDE is free as in free beer, as is Unity. There are a million billion trillion (okay.. there are several and maybe many) APK stores out there. Some of those are free, or have optional fees. If you list your app through Google Play, you can do so for free, but if you elect to have Google Play handle billing for you or advertising for you you pay a percentage fee. But this is strictly optional – it’s not ‘the walled garden’. It’s more ‘the rented gazebo’ or something.
[Edit: Google Play charges developers a 25$ registration fee. I don’t know if I paid that years ago and just forgot or if it wasn’t in force back when I got my Google Play developer’s account. So – there is that on Google Play. There are still other APK stores that are free.]
In case it’s not clear, the distinction I am making is this –
I could upload my app to Google Play and handle my own in app purchases – I could design the app to connect to my backend websites and credit card processors, I could keep track of my customer’s info and address and orders all on my own. In which case Google gets nothing of my revenue.
OR I can use the Google Play store services and API to handle in app purchases and subscriptions and stuff. I don’t have to manage anything relating to customer info and credit cards and so on – I just magically get paid. BUT Google Play is doing the work, so they take 30% of the booty.
It’s a similar thing with advertising. If I go through Google Play, they get a cut. If I don’t, they don’t. But then it’s my problem to figure it all out.
It’s different for Apple and Google, totally agree. It gets complicated and contradictory in many cases. As I recall Google dropped their fees to 10% for low end apps. I haven’t looked into this for a long time. You can sideload apps in Android and bypass the store completely or use an alternate store, not so with Apple. It’s hard connected to the App store by iOS. Apple Trust and Safety! (This is actually a bit true, much more malware in Android)
.
If you are a mainstream Android app that is there to make money on Android then you are going to use the Google Play store, so the debate is more academic.
.
You cannot bypass paying the Apple tax by simply avoiding payment servers, if you manage to do that (easy enough) then the Apple Store license agreement comes into play and you get thrown out of the walled garden when discovered, perhaps never to be allowed again.
.
You can do things like charge for hardware outside the walled garden and give the software away for free with Apple. You can give away software for free. You can just be a website.
.
Spotify has subscriptions outside the garden and I think what they end up paying Apple is a complicated negotiation between buildings of lawyers. One thing for sure, the only reason Apple relents on the tax is because they are being legally forced to do so.
https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/09/03/spotify-just-got-a-big-boost-from-apple/
.
Apparently the main avoidance technique is to provide “subscriptions” that are paid for outside of the app.
Lucia,
“I think even if they are in a monogamous relationship.”
.
Wait. Are you suggesting they might not be completely monogamous? đ
“This is Chinaâs Trust and Safety team.”
.
Exactly, Tom. Being a little curious as to what happened to our Free Speech lobbies, I decided to take a look at the EFF to see what they thought of all this. Oh boy…
.
They’ve taken the view that defending companies engaging in censorship (aka “moderation” and “curation”) is upholding their first amendment rights, and only by allowing social media companies to engage in censorship will this enable “people with diverse opinionsâthat may be unpopular or aggravating to othersâto speak freely online.”
.
An impressive bit of double think. So, yeah, they sold out like the rest.
Tom Scharf,
“One thing for sure, the only reason Apple relents on the tax is because they are being legally forced to do so.”
.
I think it would be interesting to know how much profit the walled garden generates for Apple. My guess: a significant fraction of all profits. That Apple gets to do this without anti-trust problems is almost unbelievable.
Apparently the App store paid ~$60B to developers last year, so maybe $25B in taxes from developers. Apple doesn’t disclose this or how much their operating costs are. I would suggest it is profitable. I would suggest further that a 5% tax would be profitable. Capitalism at its finest, ha ha.
Sorry Tom. I misunderstood you to be saying that the two were essentially the same thing (‘a walled garden’) when now I think I understand you were saying they both manage to get a chunk of developer revenue by whatever device. I agree with the latter sentiment, sure.
Tom Scharf,
Lots of hand-waving in Apple press releases, but it looks like their free cash flow from continuing operations is on the order of $100 billion for the last 12 months (on sales of about $400 billion), meaning that the walled garden generates about 25% of their profits. Not a bad business model if the authorities allow it to continue.
DaveJR,
“…people with diverse opinionsâthat may be unpopular or aggravating to othersâto speak freely online.”
.
The purest of 1984 ministry of truth nonsense evah! They should be ashamed of themselves, but they are of the left, where shame for doing harm to individuals is not within their range of thought, because they only consider the “greater good” not the rights of individuals.
The USA soccer team has made it to the knock-out round. Their play against England was the difference…. holding a much more talented team to a tie. They have done better than I had expected based on watching them play poorly in their first match.
SteveF
Uhhmmm…. yeah. Cheating happens. This is an icky enough disease and circulating in a specific demographic. I think it’s prudent for those in the demographic to get a vaccine.
.
It’s also possible to get with just ‘contact’, though I suspect that’s not easy. Since I’m innoculated for small pox I’m not to motivated to research whether I need to be even remotely worried about hugging people.
On another happy note: California has not changed the ballot counts for the remaining race in district 13 for (I think) 6 days. This is the district where the Republican is ahead and may flip a seat, meaning that California would exit the election with the same Dem/Rep split as before the election.
.
So three weeks after polls closed, still no ballot count on a close race (which happens to be going against the Dems). They don’t call it the left coast for nothing.
Lucia,
“Iâm not to motivated to research whether I need to be even remotely worried about hugging people.”
.
You are not at risk. Nor am I (we both had smallpox vaccinations). I won’t be hugging many homosexuals, but that is unrelated to monkeypox.
Looks like about 15 million have left Ukraine since the Russian invasion. (https://www.aljazeera.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/INTERACTIVE-Ukraine-Refugees-268-1.png?w=770&resize=770%2C770)
.
That will only increase as Russia continues to target electrical infrastructure over the next couple months. On this pace, there will be relatively few left in the Ukraine in 12 months…. save for those aligned with Russia. Maybe that is Putin’s strategy: make everyone except native Russian speakers leave Ukraine.
“I thought for a moment you were joking, but I believe you may have taken leave of your senses.
Bombing Russia with planes would likely cause a nuclear war.”
–
I specifically stated the opposite.
I did not advocate that.
Nor does NATO.
Beyond Ukraine’s ability.
Any overt action across the Russian border could provoke limited nuclear strikes.
Ukraine is fighting with its hands tied is what I said.
Unable to directly attack the big bully back across the border.
–
What I advocated was a path of making life as difficult as possible for the Russian state without giving the pretext for use of nuclear weapons by the Ukrainians.
This involves civil disobedience, “unauthorized” attacks on the most vulnerable Russian weak points: their power stations, communications, transport and even shockingly their missile sites.
–
It could be done in a more civilized fashion without hurting people if Biden and the rest of the world had enough guts to stand up and say to Russia cease or be cut of as a pariah from the rest of the world.
–
But much easier to let Ukrainians be slaughtered than have your gas and oil and markets disappear for a while.
–
Covid pos Saturday.
Getting better.
Antivirals care of Australian Government.
70 YO
4,[ Four], 4, 4 doses of vaccines in last 18 months with no hint of protection.
At least they gave me some peace of mind.
As does surviving.
SteveF,
People hug in ballroom dance. A not negligible number of the male dancers are gay. Many of those guys are nice. I hug people….it’s a thing.
.
Doug, one of the other students and I talked about “hugging” communities and “no hug” communities. When I did some light opera in Richland, the cast were all huggers. The orchestra? Not so much. Doug said that’s the same everywhere.
Get well soon, angech
angech,
“I specifically stated the opposite.
I did not advocate that.
Nor does NATO.”
.
Please explain your positions more clearly. I don’t pretend to read at 100% comprehension, but really, it would help if you were a little more careful/clear with your choice of words.
.
Ukraine is a relatively small country, still recovering economically from decades of Soviet repression. This is not a sensible hill for Europe or the USA to die on. There is a huge discrepancy in strategic interests in Ukraine: The USA and NATO say, “Sure would be nice if the Ukraine were able to sever ties with Russia and become part of the EU and NATO.” Russia says, “We think Eastern Ukraine and Crimea are as much a part of Russia as Texas is part of the USA. We will never let these regions become part of NATO or the EU.”
.
So yes, Ukraine can’t invade southern Russia and start blowing up pipelines or killing Russian civilians. If you prefer, the Ukrainians are “fighting with one hand behind their back”. Such is life. They need to enter into some very unpleasant negotiations with the Russians, sooner rather than later if they want much of their infrastructure to remain intact. This is not that difficult a problem: there are vastly different political/strategic interest involved on the two sides. The west needs to understand this, or they may well blunder into a global catastrophe.
angech,
Are the anti-virals you got Paxlovid, or something else?
.
I hope you get better quickly.
Angech,
Does Australia face -30C with regularity in winter? Didn’t think so.
.
Going without a way to heat your home in winter is a bit more of an issue in the northern USA and Europe than in Australia.
.
Could-have-should-have? Yes, lots of those. Becoming dependent on Russian oil and gas was a terrible mistake for the Europeans. Even Trump said this explicitly. So I don’t have much patience with the ‘heros’ who now want to fight to the last Ukrainian. Europe and the USA should have recognized early on (like, say, when Russia warned repeatedly and explicitly about Ukraine becoming part of the EU and NATO) that depending on Russian fossil fuels would limit their policy choices. The Europeans laughed (literally) at Trump when he warned them of the danger. I laugh at the Europeans now as they bicker endlessly and pointlessly about exactly how much they are willing to pay for the Russian oil without which their citizens freeze to death….. should it be US$65 per barrel? $67 per barrel? $75 per barrel? So very green, so very virtuous, so very stupid in each of their policy choices….. for decades. Maybe they can burn their forests and windmill blades for heat and reduce their purchase of Russian oil just a bit.
And in other news,
.
Germany surrenders unconditionally to the US for the 3rd time in the last 100 years.
.
Terms of the latest German surrender include stripping German heavy industries and sending them to the US, closing German nuclear power plants, and agreeing to purchase US LNG at a substantial markup over US domestic prices in order to replace cheep Russian natural gas.
Thanks Tom and SteveF.
Having Paxlovid.
Congrats on a World Cup group win and advancement.
Get better angech,
Hopefully you’ll have the good features of Paxlovid and not the horrible taste in the mouth!! Get better.
angech,
It is a miracle drug. Symptoms should be drastically reduced by the 3rd or 4th dose.
The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation, a former free speech lobby) on Elon’s takeover of Twitter :
.
“Muskâs reign at Twitter has already increased risks to usersâespecially those in crisis zones around the world who flocked to Twitter for expression during unrestâby unraveling guardrails against misinformation, harassment, and censorship.”
.
“Musk said in late October that no major content decisions or account reinstatements would occur until the council was formed. He hasnât announced such a council yet exists, but on Nov. 20 reinstated high-profile people kicked off the platforms for hate speech and misinformation, including former President Donald Trumpâwho was let back on Twitter after Musk polled usersâKanye West, and the Babylon Bee, which was banned for anti-trans comments.”
.
To defend free speech, we must censor things we think are “wrong”! My how times have changed in the past 20 years…
.
[Edit]: Oh, and letâs not forget that, according to the EFF, Twitter has a right to free speech so it can âmoderateâ and âcurateâ itâs platform however TF it likes, so why are they criticizing it for using its first amendment rights?
I can’t watch soccer. If it were actually possible to reliably kick a ball where the kicker wanted it to go, then the goal wouldn’t be so large, and yet they still miss it completely most of the time. A ball placed in the upper corners of the goal would always score. But that almost never happens because kicking is so inaccurate, even in penalty shots. Even in high level games, it seems to me that about 1/3 of passes between players don’t go where they’re supposed to. I understand that these are very talented people. Yet to me they all look incompetent.
Watch ice hockey sometime. The goalkeeper nearly covers the entire goal area, and yet they can still score because the players can exploit the relatively small holes that are still there.
He canceled the council because leftist activists won’t stop trying to discourage advertisers from advertising with Twitter.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/22/elon-musk-has-himself-to-blame-for-twitter-ad-woes-activists-say.html
This makes me chuckle. The CEO of the NAACP says they would never make a deal not to try to starve Twitter of advertising. It’s a really odd hill to vow to die on, in my view.
Whatever..
DaveJR,
If you moderate and curate the content, you are no longer a platform, you’re a publisher and should therefore be liable for what you publish. A platform isn’t a person under any definition I can imagine and doesn’t have free speech. A publisher, OTOH, is covered by the First Amendment.
Fact checking is an abomination.
Pfizer was required by the FDA to do a study for the first 90 days of the mRNA vaccine rollout, Dec 1, 2020 to Feb 28, 2021, called post marketing survey data or 5.3.6 data. Instead of publishing it they requested and were granted a 75-year moratorium on its publishing. WTF?
.
A vaccine skeptical doctor was made aware of this by a Pfizer whistleblower and a FOIA request was made for the data and later a suit was brought that successfully forced the production of the data, which has been coming out in small batches since Nov 2021. It is being blocked by Google in searches but available here: https://phmpt.org/multiple-file-downloads/
.
There were 1,223 reported deaths attributed to the vaccine in 90 days according to Pfizerâs count. There were 270 pregnant women. Of those 32 were followed up on for the health outcomes of their babies. They found that 25 were still births or miscarried.
.
Separately, the VAERS vaccine adverse reporting system recorded over 30K deaths directly attributed to the mRNA vaccines. It is widely believed that VAERS represents a ~10% sampling of actual events. That would make the mRNA vaccine about 25% as deadly as covid.
DaveJR
I mostly agree with this. IfI own a platform to defend my free speech I should not be required to make the platform available to speech I disagree with. And the entity who should get to decide who to ban, what comments to moderate should be me. This is not a change since the time I was born.
.
And, btw, while I moderate “lightly”, I do moderate. Some people have been moderated and obvious spam is deleted daily. I do allow people to disagree with me.
.
The problem for Twitter is they are so large. Also, they want to claim to be even handed; it appears they are not.
.
And based on some stories it may be the case the government reached out and suggested things they should moderate. If the latter is true, that is very bad of the government. And a platform should also refuse that sort of thing (at least mostly) and they should especially refuse if the requests are about politically important topics. ( I mean…. yeah I could see moderating people who are literally plotting to overthrow the government. But disagreeing on Covid policy isn’t close to that.)
Ron Graf,
You’re giving VAERS entirely too much credit when you say that 30,000 deaths are directly attributed to the mRNA vaccines. And “it is widely believed”, by whom and with what evidence? I will make the assertion that based on what I have read, VAERS overstates directly attributable deaths by at least an order of magnitude. Prove me wrong.
“and yet they still miss it completely most of the time”
.
There is that six and half foot athletic guy standing in front of the goal with the Mickey Mouse gloves that makes it a bit harder.
.
I can tell you with certainty that the accuracy of passing at the World Cup level is astronomically good. I certainly know what inaccurate passing looks like.
.
Everyone is kicking to the corners of the goals from anywhere but very close distance and getting the ball past the goalkeeper is very difficult. Soccer is much more interesting to watch if you have played it, but I agree it is likely a bit boring for an outsider. High level soccer often involves “walking” the ball up the field with a lot of passing that is not very interesting, so the fans drink and sing. A pack of barely competent 8 year olds playing can be more exciting.
.
Soccer, like a lot of sports, is a victim of its rules legacy. Lots of sport’s rules seem quite arbitrary (e.g. the size of the golf hole). If they removed the goalkeeper or eliminated the offsides rule then there would be much more scoring. As it is though scoring is very difficult and an inferior team can get lucky and win a game which creates quite a bit of drama.
.
I really only pay attention to soccer during the World Cup, but the final is usually the most watched sport’s game on earth.
I checked on the lost pregnancies claim and found the 5.3.6 data on the first released batch of data in Nov 2021. On page 12 there is the following:
.
I see that the 270 represents pregnant mothers reporting an adverse event out of 42,086 adverse events. The 25 out of 32 claim was made because it was assumed the 238 were unknown outcomes. But one might assume that a large portion of the deaths got captured versus the no further reporting cases.
Edit: Out of 270 pregnancy events 28 fetuses died, 1 was normal and 5 were unknown outcome of fetal issues and 238 were unknown outcome of mother’s issues.
.
DeWitt, it is had to imagine how the VAERS could be over-reporting deaths. These were mostly healthy first responders and government employees in the first 90 days.
.
DeWitt,
“A platform isnât a person under any definition I can imagine and doesnât have free speech. A publisher, OTOH, is covered by the First Amendment.”
.
That has always been the rub. These companies want to limit what can be said on their platforms for purely political reasons, but not be held liable when users post actionable liable. The danger seems to me that not putting a stop to politically motivated censorship on what are obviously platforms (not publishers!) could lead to almost unlimited intrusion: your email service could monitor and block the content of your emails if they disagreed politically with their content. Your VOIP service could monitor and block conversations they disagree with politically. It is nothing more than the worst policies of the CCP implemented here in the States.
.
Individual states are pushing back with laws against on-line political censorship (notably Florida and Texas), and while most have been blocked by Democrat appointed judges, the cases are making their way to the SC. Unfortunately, I don’t think the SC has the stomach to actually end politically motivated censorship, even though I think they should. With Dems in a position to block any legislation limiting politically motivated censorship, ever more ‘woke/left intrusion’ on individual opinions will not just be tolerated, but strongly encouraged.
DeWitt wrote: “If you moderate and curate the content, you are no longer a platform, youâre a publisher and should therefore be liable for what you publish.”
.
Right, but of course the law doesn’t seem to have this distinction as far as social media is concerned so companies can essentially say whatever they like by manipulating their users content but bear no liability for it.
.
I have no words to describe the disgust I feel to see a free speech lobby defend the “first amendment rights” of multibillion dollar corporations to dictate what free speech the little people are allowed to have and then turn around and say “but you’re allowing the wrong people to express their first amendment rights.” I wonder where all their money comes from these days…
Tom Scharf,
“As it is though scoring is very difficult and an inferior team can get lucky and win a game which creates quite a bit of drama.”
.
Probably unwelcome drama, since it allows an inferior team to advance by random chance. The offside rule keeps far superior teams (faster, more talented, more accurate, better strategies) from wining nearly as much as they should. You have to wait for a defender to arrive before you can try to score? Only in soccer.
.
I am reminded a little of US Open golf course conditions: almost impossibly difficult, such that completely random “rub-of-the-green” events (like a terrible lie for one player and a good lie for another… even though they hit their shots to within inches of each other) ultimately have an over-sized influence on the outcome…. and wholly unexpected winners are quite common. The more random ‘noise’ is involved in any sport, the less likely the most talented players win. Some call that exciting. I call it ridiculous.
“To defend free speech, we must censor things we think are âwrongâ!”
.
Yes, I am seeing some really bizarre defenses of overt censorship as “free speech”. The argument is better defined as the right not to listen, or no right to an audience. Platforms should allow people to be blocked individually by other individuals. Turning this on its head and saying certain * arguments * need to be * completely * blocked to everyone is the exact opposite of free speech.
.
It is disappointing that so many will tie themselves into Gordian knots to convince themselves that suppressing their out group’s speech is acceptable. What is always the case is the people with the cultural power to shut down speech express these ideas. This is universal, the Moral Majority on the right wanted to suppress speech, Qatar is banning rainbow armbands, etc.
.
It is a battle over cultural boundaries. We don’t allow pedophiles to have free speech, there are limits. Some people want to draw those lines right at their tribe’s boundaries, because they are “right” about everything and they know it. Yawn. The default needs to be actual high tolerance and a very high bar for banning.
Ron Graf,
I didn’t say that VAERS was over-reporting deaths. I said that your assertion that all those reported deaths were directly attributible to the vaccine was a massive exaggeration. Correlation does not prove causation.
15% to 20% of all pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion; some references say 25%. The discrepancy may be due to many spontaneous abortions taking place before the woman has even confirmed she is pregnant.
.
The rates for women who contracted covid don’t look at all out of line. There is some evidence covid can damage the placenta (especially late in pregnancy) and compromise the fetus, although the frequency may not be very high. There is no evidence the virus can cross the placenta and directly infect the fetus.
Ron Graf,
“Out of 270 pregnancy events 28 fetuses died, 1 was normal and 5 were unknown outcome of fetal issues and 238 were unknown outcome of motherâs issues.”
.
Please. The 238 “unknown” were almost certainly normal pregnancies and births. Nobody is going to report normal births as ‘adverse events’. There is zero evidence of exceptionally high spontaneous abortions when COVID is contracted.
.
“It is widely believed that VAERS represents a ~10% sampling of actual events. That would make the mRNA vaccine about 25% as deadly as covid.”
.
Utter nonsense.
No change in vote totals (still 96% counted) in California House district 13… the last uncalled House race. So it has been a week without any change in vote total. Under California law, the district has until December 8 to report final results. Looks like they have no interest in finishing any sooner. The Republican is ahead by 0.4%, and if he wins, he flips a Dem seat. Maybe that doesn’t have anything to do with the long delay.
Many World Cup playoff games end up in penalty kicks (this is breaking a tie by 5 members of each team taking a penalty shot after regular time and a playoff period). This is a terrible way to decide a very important game. Higher scoring would limit that.
AT&T is not allowed to censor content on their land line or cellular telephone platforms because they are defined as a “common carrier”. Essentially the government has allowed them the ability to connect to people’s houses, use right of ways for lines, been given local monopolies, etc. and part of that effective agreement is they are not allowed to choose their customers. Railroads, ferries are also common carriers.
.
There used to be telephone spam (telemarketing), but eventually a national Do Not Call capability was added to prevent this. This was a close legal battle as telemarketers argued they have a first amendment right to call anyone they wanted on a common carrier. It was easily outlawed on cellular and fax because it cost the user money. Telephone limits was decided on the federal district court level as a reasonable limit on commercial speech and Congress had given the FTC explicit authority to do so in 2003. The government was not restricting speech, the individual was by placing their number on the do not call list (opt-in was critical I assume). The customer chose not to listen to that class of speech.
.
There is a push to control social media companies like this, but it is mostly a round hole, square peg in my view. Social media companies are closer to newspapers than telephone companies. One can argue that Twitter is such a public square monopoly that it is a common carrier but I don’t think so.
I should clarify that arguments that pedophilia should be legal are within free speech boundaries (cannot be suppressed by the government), but is an example of something that would likely get banned by private social media platforms. Denying the holocaust is another example. People will have different lines.
Ed Forbes Comment #216655, thank you for this post:
âUkraine forces in Kherson look to be pretty well stuck as rail movements from the west to the east are facing both electrical stoppage and missile attacks. Ukraine rail is highly dependent on electrical power to run the engines.â
It got me interested in the subject. It turns out, you couldn’t be more wrong.
Part of it is the will of ordinary Ukrainian workers:
âDespite Russian forces repeatedly destroying infrastructure, keeping the trains running on time has been a massive propaganda victory and morale boost for Ukrainians. Railway workers have paid a heavy price. Known as âIron People,â nearly 300 have been killed since the start of the conflict.â
https://adventure.com/iron-people-railway-workers-ahe-ukrainian-resistance/
Part of it is in smart advance preparation:
âWe usually keep several diesel locomotives in the depots in all the regions, just in case. If everything gets shelled they can pick up a train and continue on diesel power. Right now, we luckily still have more or less enough (electric) energy to continue operating with the electric powered locomotives, but if a catastrophe happens, we have some diesel-powered backup trains. In other cases we will have two trains run as one with one locomotive and then split up for the final mile.â
https://www.railtech.com/all/2022/11/22/running-trains-amidst-the-war-in-ukraine-we-are-hell-bent-on-making-trains-run-on-time-in-times-of-chaos/?gdpr=accept
Part of it is the spirit of the Ukrainian people:
âKherson was liberated from the Russian forces on 11 November. The railway station in the city was among the first to be supplied to the electricity networkâ
-10 days later the first train arrived from Kyiv:
âOur train to Kherson brings life back to town. With tears, but tears of happinessâ
https://www.railfreight.com/railfreight/2022/11/21/first-train-to-kherson-brings-happy-people-and-parcels-to-liberated-city/?gdpr=accept
Also worth reading:
âThe defiance of Ukraineâs railways and how they #KeepRunningâ | Financial Times
https://www.ft.com/content/93cc9d24-4131-4bdd-8b21-14faca36b211
The idea of the First Amendment and free speech is to keep the government out of what people say to one another. Having the government get involved in what private individuals or groups of private individuals have to allow in their private spaces when it comes to speech appears to me, just like free speech, is a matter of keeping the government in a free society out of an area where it does not belong. Unfortunately, there are all sorts of rationalizations to get the government involved and it comes from across the political spectrum. Not allowing someone to invade my private space or that of others is not censorship.
I can see where a concerted and not so concerted effort towards a blog or any other website where a barrage of posts and exchanges could sabotage and ruin that entity and in effect destroy an individualâs or group of individualâs private property. I see some of that at Judy Curryâs Climate etc where posters with countervailing opinions post incessantly with off topic and personalized comments that add nothing to scientific discourse. They would appear to be merely wanting to take up space and make the site less appealing to those who really might want to gain and share knowledge. There are also some whack jobs on the other side who probably unknowingly are doing the same.
Tom Scharf, âSoccer is much more interesting to watch if you have played it, but I agree it is likely a bit boring for an outsider.â
To me the interesting part of soccer games is watching the grass grow.
Russell, looking at the speed of Ukraine redeployment from Kherson (very slow), I think I can safety say that there is more than just a bit of propaganda involved in these statements.
.
We will see how much propaganda is involved by how just how fast the Ukraine tank brigade in Kherson is redeployed. Time will tell all.
EU Pres Accidentally slips Ukraine Casualty Numbers | Bakhmut Fall could cause Domino Collapse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C57zzVYGW-s
.
[ Bakhmut Front ] Ukraine lines collapse south of Bakhmut as Russia forces captured 4 vital towns
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXDAZBzXPNA
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_z3ynX–Ag
.
Ukraine Faces Bakhmut Defeat EU Commission President Ursula Speaks of 100k Ukrainians KIA in the War
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxkZlUNYqf0
Tom Scharf,
The many missed goals in soccer that Iâm referring to have nothing to do with the goalkeeper. The ball either goes over the goal or to one side or the other. Not surprisingly to me at least is that it still happens with penalty kicks. Of 100,000 penalty kicks since 2009, about 7% either go wide or bounce off the posts or crossbar. Less than 18% are blocked by the goal keeper. 75% score. In ice hockey itâs somewhat over 30% of penalty shots in the NHL score.
Ken wrote: “Not allowing someone to invade my private space or that of others is not censorship. ”
.
But not allowing them to when I want them there, is.
Btw, a lot of the problems with free posting on boards have been around since at least USENET days. What amounted to roving gangs would descend on a site and flood it with posts. And then there were flame wars. The newsreaders used to read posts usually had the capability for what was called a killfile so you didnât download posts from people you didnât like. The WSJ comments now have something almost equivalent in a mute feature.
DaveJR (Comment #216726)
November 30th, 2022 at 4:01 pm
Not allowing in my case was not allowing as my private choice.
If the not allowing is by a private party it is protecting private property rights where the party has ownership. If allowing or not allowing is by government force it is in the former case a violation of private property rights and in the latter case it is censorship of free speech, i.e. the government should not be involved except where protecting private property rights or freedom of speech might require government intervention. There should be no contradictions of private property rights and freedom of speech.
I’m going to go ahead and be skeptical of claims of upcoming “domino collapses”. Bakhmut is definitely a bloody fight on both sides. The only people who know the Ukraine casualties are Ukraine and I don’t think they are sharing.
DeWitt,
They have a stat for that, itâs Shots, and Shots On Goal (on target). For high end soccer that is about 33%. Players can aim at the center and have it saved 99% of the time by the goalkeeper.
.
Missing the goal on a penalty kick is the ultimate sin, especially in a shootout.
.
Mostly the problem is that it is chaos and panic as the defenders are on you very quickly. You must act fast, much easier for defenders to kick it out of the goal area.
.
Many goals are off deflections and rebounds. With a competent goalkeeper you need to be either very close or hit the ball very hard to get it by in elite soccer.
.
This type of goal from Mexico today is rare, basically a goalkeeper error. Shooting from that far out is just giving the ball away usually, sometimes you might get a rebound off the post though. That ball was hit very, very, hard.
https://youtu.be/0GKEHoKN7Yc?t=152
.
⌠and the amount of skill to do this from Brazil last week ⌠crazy.
https://youtu.be/j0s8GFVTwGc?t=228
.
They do miss most of the time though.
DaveJR,
I don’t know for sure what you are trying to say. But if we go to “real property” domain, my neighbor Alan not allowing my neighbor Joe to use Alan’s property is Alan’s right. My feelings about that are irrelevant.
.
Then in the freedom of speech area: if Alan edits and publishes an anthology of poetry but won’t put Joe’s poem in it, that’s Alan’s right. Forcing Alan to put it in violates Alan’s freedom of speech. Once again, my feelings about that are irrelevant.
.
I don’t have to buy Alan’s book of poetry. My feelings about the omission (or inclusion) of Joe’s poem can affect my decision to buy or read the anthology. But my views on what belongs in Alan’s anthology are irrelevant. (If I want to write my own anthology, I can do so.)
.
If you have a special argument about Twitter being different, you need to actually make one and explain why it’s different from Alan’s book of poetry. It may be possible to do make a good argument but you have to make it. Because the right of private individuals to not speak has long been recognized as part of freedom of speech under our constitution. It doesn’t and shouldn’t go away just because you might not like the way Twitter behaves.
It’s not a legal argument, it is what should a fair system at Twitter look like. Can it be made to work somehow?
.
I think the argument is mainly that Twitter purports to be a public square, and many defenders of the old system claim they are being unbiased and representative of fair debate. This is what the Trust and Safety team will tell you, that they uphold the values of free speech.
.
Do they? No. They are biased, mainly in their human based decisions around what they see as protected classes of people, which leads to free speech except for protected areas of argument. This then slowly morphs into banning many controversial areas, which is what many people want to talk about and find “engaging”
.
What is happening at Twitter now, moving to less moderation, is unusual. The censorship regime usually only goes one direction. Alex Jones one day, Trump the next, and then the NY Post. Musk is likely correct he needs to fire the entire team to change that culture.
.
The trans debate is an example where there is active real controversy that should not be walled off. The Babylon Bee naming a transgender woman “Man of the Year” got them banned. This was some kind of rule of intentional misgendering, but ad-hominem personal attacks are like 99% of Twitter.
.
There are also a huge number of a-holes that will just wreck any discussion in bad faith and this has ruined just about every site around. Most comment sections have closed for valid reasons.
.
But these are a Venn diagram with overlapping circles. There is no way to make it work completely. Realistically the site has to be small enough that comments can be individually moderated to make it work.
The government may not use private actors to do that which is forbidden to the government. If the government offers rewards to a platform for censoring certain speech, that is a violation of the First Amendment. If the government threatens to punish a platform for not censoring certain speech, that is a violation of the First Amendment. If the government colludes with a platform as to which speech is to be censored, that is a violation of the First Amendment. The last of those three has been done and Biden is implying that he will do the second.
.
A publisher can promote or suppress any opinions that they wish to. But a publisher can be held liable for what they do publish.
.
The government has granted social media certain privileges; specifically, immunity from liability for what users may say. As I understand it, that privilege was granted specifically for the purpose of promoting free speech. So I think that a strong case can be made that social media, especially the major platforms, are common carriers.
.
The owners of a company might own the streets, sidewalks, parks, etc. When it comes to speech in such public parts of the company town, the owners must obey the same rules as a civil government. So sayeth the Supreme Court.
Tom Scharf,
I once watched the finals of the Brazilian national ‘foot-volley’ championship… live on the beach. In foot-volley two players on each side have to use the same ball contact rules as soccer for a beach volleyball match. It was nothing less than shocking to see what the players could do with no hand-ball contact at any time. That “amazing” goal in the video you linked was duplicated ~10-20 times in a typical foot-volley match. Helps to start playing soccer when you are under 5, and dedicate your entire life to it.
It’s definitely easy to root for Brazil.
Tom Scharf
If they purport to be a public square and that their moderation is “unbiased” they should be. I don’t think their moderation was unbiased vis-a-vis red-vs-blue leanings. The might have thought so, but I don’t think it was.
Well… plenty of people didn’t “trust” that team to be unbiased and didn’t feel they could air certain views without fear of being banned.
Yes. And “safety” was interpreted as “making sure certain people didn’t get their feelings hurt rather than making sure no one was in physical danger.
.
Yes. They “hurt” certain people’s feelings which the “safety” team deems “unsafe”.
.
But there are other ways to deal with this. Like giving users control of who can follow them (which already exists). You could give more proactive control similar to facebook- like.
MikeM
Or some other unique thing that needs unique rules. They could modify the rule granting protection against liability to apply if moderation is sufficiently light. (The problem is we really DO want to be able to moderate bots.)
lucia (Comment #216737): “Or some other unique thing that needs unique rules. They could modify the rule granting protection against liability to apply if moderation is sufficiently light. (The problem is we really DO want to be able to moderate bots.)”
.
Yes, there would need to be rules. I would rather see rules made by Congress than by the courts.
.
I don’t see why there would be an issue with banning bots, other than that they might be hard to identify.
.
I would think that there would be no issue with banning obscene and abusive language, other than possible enforcement difficulties.
.
I would think that sites should have the ability to limit topics. “This site is to discuss baseball, no politics allowed”.
.
At the very least, rules ought to be transparent.
lucia (Comment #216696)
“Get better.” Thanks appreciated
Had thee the good features of Paxlovid.
SteveF (Comment #216699) “It is a miracle drug. Symptoms should be drastically reduced by the 3rd or 4th dose.”
About right.
So many life events missed and to be missed from one infection.
–
Anyway, Australia on track to meet USA, just have to get past Argentina.
Best of luck with your next opponent[s].
–
Most pertinent with Musk and free speech is disclosure of working arrangements in the past with the government Facebook and Google.
The Government has always reserved the right to keep sensitive facts that might damage the government from the people. No surprise there.
The question is are they siding with only the winning half of Government?
Again no surprise but tends to look awkward.
Ed Forbes, ISW agrees with you. Bakhmut may be taken by the russians and ISW considers it a loss⌠for the russians:
âRussian forces have continually expended combat strength on small settlements around Bakhmut since the end of May; in the following six months, they have only secured gains on the order of a few kilometers at a time.[1] As ISW has previously observed, Russian efforts to advance on Bakhmut have resulted in the continued attrition of Russian manpower and equipment, pinning troops on relatively insignificant settlements for weeks and months at a time.â
âRussian troops continue to advance toward and within Bakhmut, and even if they force a controlled Ukrainian withdrawal from the city (as was the case in Lysychansk), Bakhmut itself offers them little operational benefit. The costs associated with six months of brutal, grinding, and attrition-based combat around Bakhmut far outweigh any operational advantage that the Russians can obtain from taking Bakhmut. Russian offensives around Bakhmut, on the other hand, are consuming a significant proportion of Russiaâs available combat power, potentially facilitating continued Ukrainian counteroffensives elsewhere.â
My understanding of their pointâŚ.Itâs been a bloodbath for six months. They lost a lot of men and might gain an insignificant snip of territory.
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-november-30
Boy Apple folded quickly!
Elon Musk @elonmusk, 2h
âThanks @tim_cook for taking me around Appleâs beautiful HQâ
âGood conversation. Among other things, we resolved the misunderstanding about Twitter potentially being removed from the App Store. Tim was clear that Apple never considered doing so.â
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1598090996281413638?s=20&t=mvDENLLIyQHAmNlpjBdiCg
Russia-Ukraine War: Bakhmut Is Being (Semi) Enircled, What’s Next?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0oHZOPArs4
angech,
I expect both matches will be difficult. After a shaky first game Messi looks to be on a mission. The Dutch are always strong, and they are technically sharp (rarely sloppy). Anything can happen, but they will be tough matches.
.
Good luck with Argentina.
Ed Forbes (Comment #216742): “Russia-Ukraine War: Bakhmut Is Being (Semi) Enircled, Whatâs Next?”
.
The answer to that would seem to be the waste of more Russian lives and equipment.
ISW: “Russian efforts around Bakhmut indicate that Russian forces have fundamentally failed to learn from previous high-casualty campaigns concentrated on objectives of limited operational or strategic significance.”
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-november-30
.
To date, ISW has demonstrated much better judgement than Ed Forbes.
The bloody Bakhmut battleâŚThis is the only thing Iâve read that makes sense:
From the Washington Post:
âIn bloody battle for Bakhmut, Russian mercenaries eye a symbolic prizeâ
Prigozhin and his Wagner mercenaries are the russian protagonists in the battle. They have been in a political struggle [sometimes bloody] with the conventional russian army for monthsâŚâŚ
âPrigozhin is pouring waves of mercenaries from Wagner into battle, appearing to see political advantage in capturing Bakhmut as a military trophy while President Vladimir Putinâs regular forces are on the back foot elsewhere.â
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/10/22/bakhmut-russia-ukraine-wagner-war/
Matt Taibbi is starting to sound like a conservative!
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/be-it-resolved-dont-trust-mainstream
It might actually be worth listening to that debate.
MikeM, I agree the government cannot censor by using a private party to do its censoring. A powerful government with powers to regulate and punish private parties is in a position to enlist those private parties to do its censoring. This becomes an argument for very limited government and/or keeping a watchful eye on situations where government can use its powers to limit free speech through private parties.
As I recall there have been rulings on this matter that I need to go back and review. I am currently pondering to whom the judiciary would rule against and the form of the mediation. I would afix primary blame on the government.
Evidently first amendment rights are protected with direct government involvement and with a private organization that takes on a government role.
I am not at all sure that the Supreme Court would find a government role for a private party that is under the duress of regulation by the government, even though it would appear to me to be a main means of government to enlist private censors. A ruling that says the government cannot suggest or hint at suppression of speech to a private party that is in a position to suppress would cover what I am referencing here.
Matt Taibbi is pretty much an independent and closer to Joe Rogan / Glenn Greenwald in ideology. He lived in Russia for a while and was very outspoken from the start that Trump Russia Collusion(tm) was a media dream. Definitely worth reading for a different perspective. Very critical of the media and suspicious of big government / deep state.
I would like to say that I think this entire movement to protect peopleâs feelings (hate speech, et. al.) is pretty much a scam. Clearly many people trafficking in this line of thought are in it for promoting their own ideology/tribe and suppressing their out group. Where are the actual victims? Real question. I think suicide rates are higher for certain classes but is this really due to mean people on Twitter? Are there not other rational explanations?
.
Are their trans people who were really hurt by the âMan of the Yearâ meme? This is really just pretty funny. If you are a holder of views that are not in the majority and are emotionally fragile, why would you be within 50 miles of a Twitter ideology debate?
.
I get it that they are trying to fight for acceptance of non-majority views, which is fine. But it is just unfair that it is open season on the majority (attacking white males is basically encouraged and promoted) while simultaneously protecting classes of people and argument against criticism. Itâs not just certain types of criticism either, it is any criticism. Most forms of legitimate criticism are immediately met with an âism or âphobe accusation so the battleground is evacuated. People confuse suppressing debate with winning the debate. I donât see this as particularly helpful for society.
The Intercept: “Left-wing voices are silenced on Twitter as far-right trolls advise Elon Musk”
.
Allow me to reframe: “Voices of the radical Far-left militia group, Antifa, are silenced on Twitter after center-right voices inform Elon Musk of calls for violence and hate.”
.
Just to underline what fine, upstanding, citizens these people are:
.
Twitter: “Someone in Lynnwood, WA, went to the Tesla service center last night and (allegedly) set it on fire only after (allegedly) threatening the pigs with a crow bar and getting tased. They had to call in swat. Fuckin legend.”
.
Personally, I don’t agree with banning these people, they should be free to show everyone the kind of vile individuals they are, but if rules are to be applied, then they must be applied equally.
Tom Scharf,
I think Taibbi, Rogan, and Greenwald are ‘classic liberals’. With the Democrat party stampeding to the left (often trampling each other in the process), that trio may may now seem closer to independent, but I don’t think it is because they changed their views. Before the Obama era, I would guess all three sat in the middle of main stream liberalism. No more.
.
Of course, the same stampede to the left means typical conventional conservatives of 15+ years ago are now believed by Democrats to be irredeemable racists, dedicated Nazis, or both. The very deep political division the USA faces is almost 100% due to the Democrats leaving the mainstream and becoming the party of the academic left… with all the associated nonsensical ‘woke’ rubbish now the guiding ethos of the party.
“Are their trans people who were really hurt by the âMan of the Yearâ meme? This is really just pretty funny.”
.
It was hilarious, which is why Twitter banned them. The left rejects all humor; after all, building a totalitarian paradise is too serious and all-consuming a job to ever laugh at a joke.
I think the current rule is effectively “glorifying violence against others is banned, unless they are Russian”. Writing neutral rules is a lot easier than enforcing them. Prosecutorial discretion is where a lot of hidden bias comes in.
Ken Fritsch (Comment #216747): “This becomes an argument for very limited government and/or keeping a watchful eye on situations where government can use its powers to limit free speech through private parties.”
.
Exactly right.
.
Ken Fritsch: “I would afix primary blame on the government.”
.
Indeed. If the government misuses its power to bully people, then the blame for the result rests on the government.
——–
Ken Fritsch (Comment #216748): “A ruling that says the government cannot suggest or hint at suppression of speech to a private party that is in a position to suppress would cover what I am referencing here.”
.
I would expect that the pressure would have to be explicit. So although the White House saying “We will be keeping an eye on Twitter” is wrong, it would not be deemed a violation of the First Amendment.
SteveF (Comment #216752): “I think Taibbi, Rogan, and Greenwald are âclassic liberalsâ.”
.
Yes, and you can add Bari Weiss, Jonathan Turley, and Tulsi Gabbard to that list.
Bakhmut is a âmeat grinderâ for the Ukraine army.
.
Almost all casualties on both sides are from artillery, and Ukraine is completely outclassed by Russia with artillery.
.
Russia has a very short supply line to deliver resupply to the front where Ukraine has a very long supply line coming from Poland that is increasing becoming fragmented due to Russian strikes on the Ukraine electrical grid that powers the majority of Ukraine railway and by missile strikes on their rail yards.
.
Russia has immense existing stocks of artillery ammunition and large scale ammunition production industries where Ukraine is entirely dependent on western stocks that are becoming exhausted.
.
Ukraine fires more artillery ammunition in 2 days, about 5000 rounds per day, than the US produces in 2 weeks. Russia fires about 20,000 rounds per day. The US has told Ukraine that their rate of ammunition expenditure is unsustainable and needs to be reduced down to 2000 rounds per day.
.
Ukraine supply lines leading into Bakhmut are now in range of Russian artillery, making Ukraine supply even more precarious.
.
One of the stated Russian objectives is the reduction of the Ukraine army. Russian strategy for Bakhmut, in the words of the German high command about the French army at Verdun in WWI, âWe will bleed their army whiteâ.
Tom wrote: “Writing neutral rules is a lot easier than enforcing them.”
.
I agree, but when it’s literal calls for violence (burn down the school) and hate (all white people should die) vs things which, when interpreted in a very specific way, and by a small subset of people, could tenuously be construed as a roundabout call for violence (I’m not sure allowing biological men into women’s bathrooms, simply because they say they are a woman, is a good idea), it begins to look like you’re not even trying :P.
We are now 9.5 months into the 3 week Ukraine war and all the fighting is in the east where a weeks long bloody engagement for an insignificant village is propped up as clear Russian superiority and impending doom for Ukraine. Credibility = zero.
Ed Forbes (Comment #216757): “One of the stated Russian objectives is the reduction of the Ukraine army. Russian strategy for Bakhmut, in the words of the German high command about the French army at Verdun in WWI, âWe will bleed their army whiteâ.”
.
Wasn’t Verdun a French victory? Albeit at a massive cost on both sides. And I seem to recall that Germany lost that war. So it seems to me that it would be unwise for Russia to emulate the German strategy.
There are Supreme Court rulings with regards to police getting around the 4th amendment by having outsiders go in without a warrant. The government reportedly has direct portals to the servers at various companies to report accounts or language they don’t like.
The war in Ukraine will not end based on loss or gain of small towns and cities. It will end when the Ukrainians understand they do not have unlimited support from NATO (AKA 80% USA). It will be painful to negotiate with the Russians, but less painful than having their country’s infrastructure destroyed and a large fraction of Ukrainian men from 18 to 45 killed or wounded.
The Munk debates are excellent. There was one with Mark Steyn and Nigel Farage arguing against two people I’d never heard of arguing essentially against Muslim refugees. The post debate crowd agreed with the other side, but by about 20 points less than when they came in.
Mike, 1:1 losses are a Russian win due to the discrepancy in size between these two states.
.
Overwhelming Russian artillery superiority means losses are not 1:1 as almost all losses on both sides are from artillery. Actual losses are said to be 1:4, or greater, in Russian favor due to the artillery imbalance.
.
Russia spends whatever time is needed to reduce the defenders with artillery before sending in infantry to slowly advance into the reduced positions. Major defensive positions are encircled to force the defenders to retreat and are not generally taken by storm unless the defenders are massively reduced.
.
Russia will win with the destruction of the Ukraine army, not taking ground as such. With the coming exhaustion of western artillery ammunition, the loss ratios will continue to worsen for Ukraine.
SteveF,
I do not accept your assumption that the only possible outcome of the war in Ukraine is a Russian victory, with the only the extent of that victory to be determined .
.
It might come to that. But I think it far from inevitable.
Many examples of the government “working together” with social media companies to combat misinformation (impose censorship).
https://reason.com/2022/09/14/bidens-sneaky-censors/
.
e.g. “And so he did. “Thanks again for taking the time to meet earlier today,” the Meta executive said in a July 23, 2021, email to the Department of Health and Human Services. “I wanted to make sure you saw the steps we took just this past week to adjust policies on what we are removing with respect to misinformation.”
The executive bragged that Meta had deleted objectionable pages, groups, and Instagram accounts; taken steps to make several pages and profiles “more difficult to find on our platform”; and “expanded the group of false claims that we remove.””
.
Social media could instead get advice from academia instead of regulatory agencies to make this legally cleaner. The end result would likely be the same. Social media really shouldn’t even talk to the government at all on the subject of censorship. Regulatory agencies may have expertise but the possibility of improper influence with an implied threat of government retribution is too high.
Mike M,
I have been wrong before (haven’t we all?), but the situation in the Ukraine seems to me a bit like hitting your head on a concrete wall, hoping the wall will break before your head.
.
Putin is a murderous thug, and IMHO, the Russians had no good reasons to invade the Ukraine. But my opinion doesn’t matter at all to the Russians, and the fact the Russians invaded ‘illegally’ doesn’t at all change the calculus for me: Russia has 5,000+ strategic nuclear weapons, is multiple times bigger economically, in population, and most of all, militarily, and they are not likely to ever let most of the Donbas region or especially the Crimea come under Ukrainian control. There are other possible outcomes (eg Putin could be driven from power, or the clowns at the US State Department could provoke a nuclear exchange, destroying the civilized world), but these seem to me of low probability.
.
A terrible outcome is a settlement very much like could have been negotiated in March 2022, but that actually happens in March 2023. Worse yet would be March of 2024, or 2025. It needs to end.
July 2021: Biden Is Trying to Impose Online Censorship by Proxy
https://reason.com/2021/07/21/biden-is-trying-to-impose-online-censorship-by-proxy/
“Biden thinks those “12 people” should be banished from social media because they have played an outsized role in promoting anti-vaccine arguments.”
.
As I recall at least one of these people had their account reinstated based on the perceived government influence. It is an open question what the penalty should be for government attempting this type of influence. Just having their actions undone seems inadequate to stop further attempts.
Tom Scharf,
If the government “suggest” they remove misinformation, what’s next? Force social media to remove stories that the moonlanding was faked? Or the mafia and Castro were behind the shooting of JFK? Or stories about Bigfoot sightings?
.
More seriously: Free speech requires allowing “mis-information” to be published. Of course no private company is required to carry these stories. But the government getting involved in preventing it’s publication is not right– and also very scary.
Biden’s student loan forgiveness program will be going to the Supreme Court in Feb. It has lost so far at several district courts, I don’t give it good odds at the SC with the major questions doctrine and “hiding elephants in mouseholes” as the justices like to say. The system is working.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
I do not want to appear picky but the reference to a group of people above as classic liberals confuses me. Classical liberals were very different than those mentioned. I think the term for those mentioned might be typical modern day liberals as opposed to the modern day progressives.
Ken Fritsch,
“I do not want to appear picky but the reference to a group of people above as classic liberals confuses me.”
.
OK, maybe they are not as ‘liberal’ as we might hope (small government? no!), but they are not the howling leftists that now 100% control the Democrat party.
Mike M. (Comment #216767)
December 1st, 2022 at 1:55 pm
MikeM, what odds do you give Ukraine winning the war and what would winning look like? What would winning cost the US in dollars in support of that?
I have read that reconstructing the damage done to Ukraine to this point in the war as estimates from 700 billion to 1 trillion dollars and an economy in shambles for years to come. Who would pay for this? If you say Russia then explain how Russia would be made to pay for reconstruction. In my view Ukraine would have to invade Russia and win that battle in order to get Russia to pay for reparations.
Tom Scharf,
“It has lost so far at several district courts, I donât give it good odds at the SC with the major questions doctrine and âhiding elephants in mouseholesâ as the justices like to say.”
.
I hope you are right, but fear the case may go the other way. I think the conservatives on the court are tired of having to look over their shoulder 24/7 to make sure nobody is after them. The wording of the law in question (HEROS act) could almost not have been more loose or more easily twisted, and it is a perfect case of ‘progressives’ using existing laws in ways that are 100% unrelated to the original intent of the legislation. This is nothing but an attempt to ‘interpret’ laws in creative ways that allow fundamental changes in national policy with no authorization by Congress. The ‘major questions’ doctrine ought to be invoked and the half $trillion give-away permanently blocked without Congressional authorization. I’m just not sure it will be.
Ken Fritsch,
“…what would winning look like? What would winning cost the US in dollars in support of that?”
.
Both very good questions, and questions that have yet to be asked of the Biden administration. “Spend whatever we must” is not going to fly for much longer. The cost is already at $100+ billion, and the Ukrainians demand (not ask, demand) ever more weapons, ever more economic support, and ever more impossible punitive actions against the Russians. This is not going to end well, no matter the path forward, but the Biden administration seems to be working toward making it end in the worst possible way. It needs to end.
The way to make Russia pay is a global tax on their fossil fuel exports. Not saying that is likely, but that is how it could be done.
Tom Scharf,
“Not saying that is likely, but that is how it could be done.”
.
It can’t be done.
.
2/3 of the world population (at least!) is not on board with that. They will be happy to buy Russian oil (and arms, and rides to geosynchronous orbit, and much more), and happy to enter into bilateral agreements with the Russians that preclude the kind of ‘punishment’ the clowns in the Biden administration imagine are possible. It is a Western fantasy to think the world cares much about the Ukraine… they really don’t. Even in places like Hungary, they don’ care much. The Mexicans? No, the Brazilians? No. The Chinese, Indians, and dozens of other countries? No, no, and no. They do very much care about the price of petroleum.
Kenneth Fritsch (Comment #216775),
Are those rhetorical questions? They sound like it to me.
Mike M,
I think they were real questions. Maybe you could offer answers.
Matt Taibbi, Douglas Murray Dominate Trust-in-Media Debate
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/matt-taibbi-douglas-murray-dominate-trust-in-media-debate/
“However, over the course of nearly two hours, Taibbi and Murray compellingly persuaded over one-third of audience members (39 percent) to abandon their prior allegiance to the position championed by Gladwell and Goldberg.
To date, Taibbi and Murray won by the largest margin ever recorded at a Munk Debate. The result stunned the sold-out crowd of 2,630 viewers normally accustomed to smaller swings.”
Tom Scharf,
Taibbi and Murray had honesty, sincerity, and, most of all, factual reality on their side.
.
But ‘the megaphone’ of the left (AKA the MSM) will continue to blare falsehoods without shame, regret, or correction. Their MO is the opposite of honesty and sincerity…… and facts be damned. It’s all ends justify means.
SteveF and DeWitt, I did a little searching to see what G-scholar had on VAERS for Covid. The first article that popped up.
https://www.howbadismybatch.com/jessicarose.pdf
Georgia’s Republican lieutenant governor went on CNN and encouraged people not to vote for Hershel Walker.
After the Ukrainians took Kherson I pondered where the juggernaut would venture next. Half jokingly I said sever russiaâs land bridge to crimea. I am seeing more talk of that option, now from real military types. Hereâs one:
âWhere Will Ukraine Strike Next? The Three Main Options Available to Kyivâ
https://youtu.be/H47XZc_Yhlg
Interesting history video of the changing political boundaries of civilization in Europe. I suggest you slow the video to half speed.
âThe history of Europe covers the peoples inhabiting Europe from prehistory to the present.â
https://youtu.be/P9YnYRk8_kE
Russell, interesting vid, but interior and Atlantic Europe was populated prior to the Roman conquest. Vast sweeps of populations are totally missing. .
.
I found it interesting that the Huns were shown but no mention on the Celtic nations that predates the âclassical Europeâ which had much more impact on Europe than did the Huns.
.
It is not the history of Europe. The spread of âclassical Europe â perhaps, but not Europe as a whole or even a major part. The areas of modern day Spain and France, among others, were civilized prior to the founding of Roman Republic. Rome conquered the existing, highly technical, metal working civilizations.
.
Itâs worth watching though for the period after about 600ad once it gets past the âclassical â era.
.
Kind of reminds me of a college lecture I attended on âthe hundred years of peace in Europe between 1814 and 1914â
Well, they have my blessingâŚ. â ‘Make Russia pay’: EU moves ahead with confiscation of frozen assets, despite legal pitfallsâ
Distribute frozen russian assets to reconstruct Ukraine. https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/11/30/make-russia-pay-eu-moves-ahead-with-confiscation-of-frozen-assets-despite-legal-pitfalls
Ron,
I started reading the paper, but it didn’t take long for me to say “What?!?” a few times and then search the background of both the journal and the author. The paper is garbage.
.
The ‘paper’ is in a ‘journal’ created by a well known anti-vaxer (who, before covid, objected to the HPV vaccine, among others, and was a paid ‘expert’ in a trial where a woman claimed to have been harmed by the HPV vaccine); the journal appears to exist only to promote anti-vax rubbish. The author of the paper you take text from is another very well known anti-vaxer.
.
I suspect you will find nothing like the ‘analysis’ in that paper in any legitimate scientific journal, that is, any journal not created specifically to promote anti-vax drivel. These people are free to publish whatever nonsense they want, of course, but it is still nonsense.
âUkraine war: Russia demands annexations recognised before talksâ BBC
….russia says âFirst we get to keep everything we illegally stole, then we will negotiate.â Hah! Fat Chance! Sending Ukraine longer range and more lethal weapons should be our response.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63832151
MikeM, my questions were not rhetorical. Those questions that I have are for those who appear to support an ongoing conflict in Ukraine but who from my perspective are not at the same time addressing the questions I posed to you. I thought that either you or Tom would be the most likely candidates to answer those questions.
Tom has proposed a fossil fuel tax on Russian fuel for reparations to Ukraine. I think that many politicians would favor such an approach since it spreads the cost over the multitudes of fossil fuel users. My question would be how that tax would be enforced and would all buyers be willing to go along.
Further if reparations were in the trillion dollar range what tax percent on what volume of Russian fuel exports and over what time period would be required to pay for reparations over a reasonable time for Ukrainians?
Would such a tax be so severe as to approach what Germany faced after WWI and have similar unintended consequences?
SteveF, perhaps you could tell my why this is not an ad hominem argument:
.
Try substituting “climate denier” for “anti-vaxer” to see if you sound like a “climate scientist” of consensus.
.
The “anti-vaxers” here are using CDC data. The natural answer for me would be for the CDC to publish a conflicting analysis from the same data or point to error by the “anti-vaxer.” Why was Pfizer allowed to believe they could hold their adverse event data for 75 years? I await your sensible explanation.
Ron,
To stick my nose in: when someone creates a ‘journal’ to promote their views, they are IMO fundamentally engaging in a deceptive practice. It’s not a real journal, but rather a construction meant to lend a patina of unearned
credibility to the writer’s views. This is sufficient [justification] IMO to prejudice me against the writer out of the starting gate. I don’t particularly care if I am indulging in ad hom against somebody who appears to be a con artist. Doubtless I have made mistakes before and will again, as we all do, but I am prepared to live with that. Particularly since I have no better option.
Shrug.
âLegal risksâ? You mean where the ill gotten gains raised by the confiscation and sale of the assets of the Russian government and its citizens, that are then distributed to the Ukraine government, and where the courts subsequently order said assets to be returned to these harmed by illegal actions? These risks?
There is also $300B of Russian foreign held reserves that are currently frozen. These have pretty large legal roadblocks to get access too.
.
I doubt any of these would be likely. India could be pressured into accepting a global tax, but China won’t. China and Russia aren’t really friends other than their common alignment against the west. If Russia was to use WMD’s then it will be more likely the world will unite against Russia.
.
Otherwise if Ukraine prevails enough to keep most of its country then the west will provide assistance to rebuild but it will be a multi-decade slow roll effort and Ukraine will have to do a lot of the work themselves, they aren’t helpless. Japan rebuilt after their natural disasters, about $190B. This war will hurt Ukraine generationally in every measurable way. Being a neighbor of the Russians is a bad place to be in this world.
.
I don’t think the west has any particular moral obligation to quickly rebuild Ukraine as we did in Iraq, the west didn’t start this war and isn’t actively destroying Ukraine. The argument that we are enabling the destruction by allowing it to continue with weapons delivery is not very convincing to me. We will help rebuild anyway but only at levels the taxpayers and politicians can tolerate.
.
Ukraine will need to be “friends” with the West for this to continue. For example, if Russia manages to install puppet governments in Ukraine then assistance will end.
Ken: “Would such a tax be so severe as to approach what Germany faced after WWI and have similar unintended consequences?”
.
This is the central question. How can the war end without either nation feeling that they were stabbed in the back, which is cited as the main cause for the rise of German radicals in the aftermath of WWI defeat? The answer is that Putin and Zelensky need to be the main negotiators.
.
My solution would be to allow a protected vote among the populations of each oblast to decide where the majority loyalty stands, with Ukraine, Russia or independence. What could be more legitimate?
12.7B covid shots have been given, we are well past the time for early reporting systems. The initial formal clinical trials establish basic safety even more so than efficacy of the drugs. VAERS is pretty important after that to spot the 1 in a million type problems such as cardiac issues with some vaccines. The chances of a significant short term problem with vaccines is zero because the formal trials would have found those. With such widespread use now the normal healthcare systems will spot other things but they would need to be a very low level. There would have to be major coverups across the globe to hide widespread short term problems with the vaccine. Nobody could keep that secret.
.
Itâs possible there are still unknown unknowns with long term effects, perhaps something like Alzheimerâs becomes more prevalent from those who took a vaccine or similar. Billions of doses across the globe for years rules out significant short term problems.
A global tax on Russian oil could work by providing a sliding scale depending on the price of oil. When prices are high, the tax is high. You wouldnât want to destroy the Russian oil industry. The mob doesnât kill people that owe it money because then they can never pay them back. Itâs a basic economics problem.
.
Example of this type of thing, today:
.
EU Backs Russian Oil Price Cap of $60 a Barrel
G-7 must act for plan intended to limit Moscowâs revenue to take effect
https://www.wsj.com/articles/eu-g-7-wait-on-poland-to-advance-with-russian-oil-price-cap-11669983529?st=7bt0kc82dqhdtl0&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
âThe price cap will ban Western companies from insuring, financing or shipping Russian oil unless the oil is sold below $60 per barrel. The U.S. and its allies designed the system in an attempt to cut into Moscowâs oil revenues while keeping Russian oil, a key part of global supply, available on the market. It aims to take advantage of the concentration of key maritime services in the West to try to curb Moscowâs ability to wage war in Ukraine.â
.
âThatâs a nice shipping industry you have there, it would be a shame if something happened to it ⌠perhaps you can pay us protection money to make sure it stays safe”.
Mark: “I donât particularly care if I am indulging in ad hom against somebody who appears to be a con artist.”
.
Valid point, one should give little head to a known prankster yelling fire. Ad hom is a convenient and necessary filter to navigate through information. It’s also an effective way to censor dissent. And remember the consensus holds all the power and needs to quash threats to its credibility lest it be found to be thrown out of power and be labeled foolish or a fraud. it’s messy.
.
Thanks for your respectful observations. There is some defense to ad hom.
Full disclosure: I traveled 40 minutes both times to get the Pfizer jab in March and April 2020. I got the booster last December. I would not go for the booster had I known then what I know now, but I would have gotten the original two shots, probably spread out more.
.
I have not gotten Covid. My brother is a serious anti-vaxxer and did graduate work in histology, genetics and epigenetics. He did not get any shots. He got Covid last summer while in the hospital for a surgery from his roommate. We was asymptomatic at age 63. He got no drugs for covid, just a week in private isolation.
.
I believe in informed consent. I feel the public was not well informed during all of Covid nor given adequate consent during the Biden administration.
Kenneth Fritsch (Comment #216775): “what odds do you give Ukraine winning the war”
.
That is pretty much unanswerable, even by people who know what is actually happening. I don’t see why it is relevant except as something the Ukrainians need to judge for themselves. So it seems like a rhetorical question to me.
.
Kenneth Fritsch: “and what would winning look like?”
.
At a minimum: A stable peace with Ukraine controlling all the territory it controlled before the war. The first part is an obvious requirement for any end to the war and the latter part may well be necessary for the first part.
So what do you think a reasonable settlement would look like? How do you think we can achieve that?
.
Kenneth Fritsch: “What would winning cost the US in dollars in support of that?”
.
A lot. Almost certainly a lot less than we wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan. Almost certainly a lot less than the COVID shutdowns cost us. Almost certainly less than the amount of COVID aid that was stolen. I don’t see why that is relevant since I have no idea how you would go about putting a price tag what would be lost by not helping.
I do not include the cost of rebuilding Ukraine since that will have to be done whether or not we provide assistance to Ukraine.
Kenneth,
Two can play this game.
.
We have repeatedly given Ukraine security guarantees, most notably in exchange for their giving up their nukes. Do you think we should walk away from those?
.
Do you think we should stand up for democracy?
.
Do you think we should stand against aggression?
.
Russia is to blame for the invasion, but we did a lot to move things toward that result by aggressively expanding NATO to the east. So having set Ukraine up, do you we should now just say “sucks to be you”?
.
If we feed Ukraine to the Russian bear, what effect might that have on Russian aggression against other former parts of the USSR? Or on Chinese aggression in East Asia?
Ron Graf,
What mark bofill said.
It is not a journal, it is published propaganda. It exists to promote anti-vax nonsense. What you site is not a scientific paper. It is pure garbage. It is not much different than the ‘283 pregnancies with unknown outcomes’ up thread…. more garbage.
.
The m-RNA vaccines have been administered to multiple billions of individuals, and likely saved millions of lives. In New Zealand and Austrailia, where covid was kept under control by not allowing anybody in before the vaccines were widely administered (~90% of adults, and nearly everyone over 60), covid deaths look to be under 20% of other developed countries. China is suffering right now with endless lockdowns and street protests because their home produced vaccine was much, much less effective than the m-RNA vaccines.
.
If you think nutty anti-vaxers are akin to people who argue against useless, economically damaging policies in response to ‘climate alarm’ then you are completely mistaken. A more apt comparison is anti-vaxers and “sky dragon slayers” who refuse to accept radiative physics; both those groups are in fact nutty. If you can’t see both those groups are nutty, then I can’t help you figure it out. I won’t be spending any more time on this subject.
Ron,
I agree with you regarding consent. I got the shots, I’d do it again, but I did *not* appreciate the strong arm tactics used. Freedom to make the wrong choice is infinitely preferable in my book to some optimized totalitarian hell [In fact, I’ve come to suspect that this is really what freedom is all about; being able to make the wrong choice].
Regarding ad hom and silencing views, well. I’m not Twitter, or Elon Musk. My arm isn’t any longer than anybody else’s. The fake journal publisher is trying to mislead me or is himself misled (this distinction doesn’t really matter to me); this is the ‘first blood’ violation of a friendly, mutually profitable, honest and civilized default approach that I would prefer. I’m not out to silence people, but I’m not going to be stepped on, either.
Anyways. I think I’ve beat this to death.
Mike M,
I agree that funding the war in Ukraine has cost a lot and will cost a lot more if we continue to fund it, not even counting the economic damage the war and sanctions have already caused. I also agree that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were horrible mistakes and wasted a huge amount of money and lives for no good reason (about $3.1 trillion, as best I can figure).
.
Where I disagree is that I think continued funding of war in the Ukraine will not turn out to be anything but a similar waste of money. Yes, the USA (and Europe) made a terrible mistake by rapidly expanding NATO to the east, in spite of Russia’s repeated warnings this was unacceptable to them. Yes, the Ukrainians have been sweet-talked by the Biden administration into believing the USA and Europe will spend the $trillion(s?) needed to “defeat Russian forces and drive them out of Ukraine”. We won’t spend that money, and sooner or later, the Ukraine will recognize this. Even if the USA and Europe were willing to spend $trillion(s?) to support the Ukraine, the Ukraine does not have the manpower to indefinitely stand toe-to-toe with the Russians, and sooner or later they will also recognize this.
.
The USA and European armies are not going to march into the Ukraine and start fighting Russians…. the risk of nuclear weapons being used by the Russians increases to near 100% if that were to ever happen. So there is no plausible path to the “complete military defeat” of Russia in the Ukraine.
.
In the middle east we were mostly fighting against religious conviction…. and we know how that turned out. In the Ukraine, we are funding a war against a country that believes (with religious conviction?) it has a right to limit what it sees as threats on its boarders. The war will, inevitably, end via negotiations, not via battles. Delaying that negotiation is only going to cost western and Russian treasure and Ukrainian and Russian lives.
.
The current stance of the USA WRT negotiations: “We would be happy to start negotiations once Russia removes all troops from Ukranian territory, including the Crimea”. IOW, we will consider negotiations once you accept military defeat. Right…
.
Not to be outdone, Russia now says they will be happy to start negotiations once the USA and Europe accept that Russia has permanent sovereignty over all lands they now occupy. Right….
.
Negotiations are not anywhere near happening, but happen they will, and not under either of the above conditions.
This week in free speech at the SC. 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis. Curious case.
.
Custom wedding website designer refuses to create site for gay marriage couple (or advertise she won’t do it). Colorado (yes, the same state infamous for gay wedding cake case) rules that this violates its anti-discrimination law.
.
The basic issue is goods/services vs compelled speech of an artist. Walmart can’t tell gay people (protected categories) they aren’t allowed to buy things at Walmart, but Walmart doesn’t have to sell gay pride t-shirts. Is website creation a service or artistic expression? The ruling by the circuit court is pretty convoluted:
“It ruled that by offering âcustom and unique servicesâ and declining to provide those services for same-sex marriages, Smith was ârelegat[ing] LBGT consumers to an inferior market,â as those consumers would somehow ânever be able to obtain wedding-related services of the same quality and nature as those that [Smith] offer[s].â”
.
The gay wedding cake case was never really decided, only kicked back for further consideration after it was deemed the local commission had exhibited clear anti-religious prejudice when deciding the case.
.
The bakery was intentionally targeted by people wanting to create a legal case (who wants a cake from somebody who doesn’t want to make it for you?), and I suspect the website case is similar. The SC will need to decide it this time, laying down guidelines on how far anti-discrimination laws can go.
MikeM, it is not a game in my view. I will address your questions in no particular order.
Ukraine has been no epitome of democracy or a republican form of government. When rated for economic and political freedom it ranks right down there with Russia. They overthrew an elected head of government.
There are all kinds and forms of aggression in the world. Where would one start and end. The US is better off being an example of a large nation staying out of conflicts and wars. It would have to defer from its current role of being the world’s policeman and become a mediator.
We need to reduce the power of our own government. Powerful governments tend to more readily go to war.
Security guarantees and expanding NATO are part of the problem of being the world’s policeman. Acting on the problems that has created would in my veiw only make the situation worse. NATO would appear to be a cover of unity that allows the US to cover most of the costs of being the world’s policeman.
The argument of a chain reaction of regression was used to rationalize the US involvement in Viet Nam against worldwide Communism. That did not work out well for the US and the direst predictions did not come to fruition. Aggressors eventually pay the price and I believe Russia is paying a price in this war that will be better realized when the war propoganda ends.
I think being a spectator in a war can allow a view of it as a chess game and overlooking the human suffering it entails with deaths, injuries, distruction of property and dislocation of a goodly portion of the citizens. A lot of the items we discuss here lose their meaning and importance for people living and dying under those dire and horrific conditions.
Tom Scharf,
How long do you think it takes to build ocean going tankers? It is not that long… about a year. The Russians (and others) will waste no time building tankers not operating with western insurance, financing, etc. I think the USA and Europe are delusional if they think this is going to work for very long…. if at all. (see also: https://www.economist.com/leaders/2022/11/30/the-wests-proposed-price-cap-on-russian-oil-is-no-magic-weapon)
.
The price agreed on is about $3.00 per barrel under the current export price (“the Urals price”), so it isn’t going to do much. If Putin cuts exports by 10% (a million barrels a day), global prices could jump much more than $6 per barrel, so actually increase Russia’s net profit from oil exports. So Putin might have no interest in agree to the $60 price ceiling. If Europe suddenly gets no Russian oil, they will be in a big hurt.
I guess the plan is to just sit back and do nothing, Russia invades Ukraine, takes it over militarily (nobody dies that way somehow), then it is peace and harmony from there on out.
.
That is the expectation? Guess what? That plan was already tried in Crimea. It didn’t work.
.
Another alternate history is the above happens, except Russia is emboldened, views the west as weak, moves all their chess pieces to the next border, and invades.
.
Guess what? That is exactly what happened in Crimea.
.
We can try that again. Except the next chessboard is a NATO country (which is really just Russia!). Russia will no doubt feel “threatened” when NATO defends its border. Except this time it will start an all out NATO – Russia war. All the history buffs can then selectively say we didn’t learn anything from the 1930’s.
.
Where do you think Russia would stop without intervention? At Ukraine? Maybe they would, but you need to state that as part of your strategy. My view is Russia won’t stop until they are forced to.
Tom Scharf,
.
“Where do you think Russia would stop without intervention? At Ukraine? Maybe they would, but you need to state that as part of your strategy. My view is Russia wonât stop until they are forced to.”
.
Have to disagree. Russia is not going to invade a NATO country, no matter what happens in the Ukraine. The war has cost Russia a lot of lives and treasure with little or no gain; they won’t be anxious to repeat the same error elsewhere. Oh, and BTW, the USA will probably be a bit more reluctant to engage in nation-building after the debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The passage of the Respect for Marriage Act might make the Supreme Court case moot for the website designer, or an opportunity for the court to set limits on the new law.
Europe will help Ukraine to rebuild by requiring green energy to replace the power plants.
I agree that Russia is not likely to go further NOW, I’m not so confident that would be the case if they hadn’t had a tough fight in Ukraine first. It’s also possible they would have had a tough fight even without western help. Russia might be in the middle of a brutal occupation in that scenario, they had to leave Afghanistan which was only minimally helped.
Mike N,
The law protects non-profit organizations and religious organizations 100% from lawsuits by unhappy same-sex couples. No direct protections for “for profit” organizations. The Court will probably settle the issue with 303 Creative v. Elenis. If the court goes against 303 Creatvive, then dress designers who hate Republicans (near 100%) are going to be forced to make dresses for the next Republican first lady. đ
MikeN,
“Europe will help Ukraine to rebuild by requiring green energy to replace the power plants.”
.
You might apply for a job at the Babylon Bee. đ
SteveF,
Yes, the war will have to end via negotiations. I doubt that either side will be able to force the other to quit, at least not before Ukraine is totally destroyed. But negotiations require both sides to agree, that won’t happen as long as they are hopelessly far apart.
.
Russia is NOT going to simply surrender the land they have occupied. Ukraine is NOT going to turn all that over to Russia. The only hope I see is if Ukraine can regain enough of its territory that what remains under Russian control is almost entirely that which was not under Ukrainian control before the war.
———-
Also: What Tom Scharf said.
Wait.
If gender at birth means nothing… then how do we know when it is a same-sex couple? I think Congress may have just weighed in on the finality of gender of birth.
Mike M,
“The only hope I see is if Ukraine can regain enough of its territory that what remains under Russian control is almost entirely that which was not under Ukrainian control before the war.”
.
I agree that is the expected (and likely) territorial outcome, even if the Ukrainians don’t militarily regain all that territory prior to negotiations. I believe Russia will give up the land areas gained in exchange for 1) certainty of Crimea remaining part of Russia, 2) guaranteed water supply to the Crimea, 3) Ukraine doesn’t ever become part of NATO, and 4) effective ‘political independence’ from Ukraine of the mainly Russian speaking Donbas areas it has effectively controlled since 2014 (even if those regions remain formally part of the Ukraine). There are lots of ways to assuage negative public reaction to a settlement (eg ‘it won’t really be decided until a plebiscite scheduled for 2060’, etc).
.
But I expect those will the the very rough lines of a settlement…. whether very soon or 2 – 3 years from now. Funding reconstruction will be difficult, but I think everyone understands that the longer the war goes on, constantly destroying infrastructure, the more expensive reconstruction becomes. Maybe some combination of a significant contribution from the West, plus a big chunk of the $280 billion in frozen Russian assets, and the lifting of sanctions would do it. Donno. But it won’t continue forever as it is.
Kenneth Fritsch (Comment #216809): “Ukraine has been no epitome of democracy or a republican form of government. When rated for economic and political freedom it ranks right down there with Russia. They overthrew an elected head of government.”
.
Ukraine is a far from ideal democracy, but it is enormously better than Russia. The Ukrainian people forced a redo of an obviously fraudulent election. Just try that in Russia. The Ukrainian people overthrew a government that had lost the confidence of the people. Just try that in Russia. Then they promptly held a new election.The Ukrainian people insisted that the government comply with the will of the people. It is inane to cite that as evidence that Ukraine is not a democracy.
.
Kenneth Fritsch: “There are all kinds and forms of aggression in the world. Where would one start and end.”
.
That sounds like sticking our heads in the sand. I prefer this:
https://thetransom.substack.com/p/ukraine-the-new-right-and-defending?s=r
.
Kenneth Fritsch: “I think being a spectator in a war can allow a view of it as a chess game and overlooking the human suffering it entails with deaths, injuries, distruction of property and dislocation of a goodly portion of the citizens.”
.
I don’t think we should wash our hands of the war because it it makes us uncomfortable. There will be a great deal of suffering and destruction no matter what we do. And we should not ignore the suffering of the Ukrainian people if they are subjected by Russia.
————
I want a stable, lasting peace. Wishing for peace does not produce peace. Refusing to help Ukraine will not produce peace. A cease fire will not produce peace.
The Russian oil shipping limit is just another point of pressure. I don’t know where oil tankers are built but my guess is it isn’t Russia. Building ships for Russia could be prohibited or sanctioned. These type of things and sanctions never really work by themselves (although it can be argued the oil export embargo to Japan worked great in starting the Pacific War). Russia will figure out something, but it will be a pain for them.
.
All of these things combined push them toward negotiations. Even if you had an economic pressure point that could cause an existential threat to Russia, it would be unwise to play that card at this point.
Tom Scharf,
The ‘boss’ of shipbuilding is (surprise!) China with about 27%, followed buy South Korea, Japan, and then minor players.
.
I am sure the Chinese will be thrilled to build tankers for Russia. so you are the owner of a tanker, and Russia (or China, or India) offers you 40% over its value for immediate sale, allowing you to pocket a cool $100 million. What do you do? How do the sanctions purport to stop the sale of a tanker?
.
I am reminded of the famous line from “The Graduate” where Dustin Hoffman’s character (the Graduate) announces to his parents he is going to marry the daughter of the older woman he has been sleeping with (Mrs Robinson). When his father learns that the proposal of marriage has not been raised with the young woman in question, the graduate’s father pronounces the planned marriage a little ‘half-baked’. The plans to punish Russia with limits on its price of petroleum exports strikes me about the same way…. half baked. It is not going to work.
SteveF (Comment #216820): “I believe Russia will give up the land areas gained in exchange for 1) certainty of Crimea remaining part of Russia, 2) guaranteed water supply to the Crimea, 3) Ukraine doesnât ever become part of NATO, and 4) effective âpolitical independenceâ from Ukraine of the mainly Russian speaking Donbas areas it has effectively controlled since 2014”.
.
That is roughly what was reported for the tentative agreement last spring. I can believe it would have been possible then. But at present, I don’t see it. Russia has “annexed” parts of Ukraine. I don’t think they are just going to turn over what they claim is now Russian territory. At least not while Putin is in power and that territory is occupied by Russian forces. Ukraine is going to have to drive them out.
Elon Musk has started what might be the ultimate tweet storm by releasing internal Twitter docs pertaining to the coverup of Hunter’s laptop.
Tom, I completely agree with your comment. And Tucker Carlsen is wrong to take the position that standing against an invasion by Russia is not ours or Europe’s business. However, I feel that the invasion could have been prevented by keeping international oil plentiful by not curtailing USA production and also to slam the NATO door firmly in Ukraine’s face last December in exchange for Putin’s withdrawal from the border. Instead, Biden smiled at Putin and said, “Go ahead, make my day.”
.
My hope is that someone would suggest, (maybe Biden), to allow the Ukrainian oblasts to decide who they want to align with. This is the only solution I see that saves face for the losing side.
.
Mark, thanks for your agreement on informed consent. We never got into that question for pre-schoolers being required to take a shot that gives them near zero benefit and huge lifetime risks.
.
SteveF, you know a lot about a lot of things, which I respect. But there are some things you know little about but think its safe to appeal to authority in the absence of one’s knowledge. I wish that was safe but I have seen enough examples in recent years where the authorities put out misinformation or worse, disinformation, that I do my own research. And if not I stay quiet.
Mike M,
Ya, I read the string of 36 tweets. The most telling was an email from a independent researcher who had spoken about the laptop story with 9 House representatives: 6 Rep and 3 Dems: The Republicans were furious about suppression of the laptop story, and the dems were furious that twitter didn’t moderate all conservatives off the platform. When the researcher pressed them about how that could be consistent with the first Amendment, they said, “the first amendment isn’t absolute”.
.
Of course, we will never know who those three clowns were, since there were about 200 similar clowns in the House at the time who probably share just about the same sentiments on freedom of speech.
Ron Graf (Comment #216826): “My hope is that someone would suggest, (maybe Biden), to allow the Ukrainian oblasts to decide who they want to align with. This is the only solution I see that saves face for the losing side.”
.
Well, they did that 31 years ago. Every oblast voted to be part of an independent Ukraine. The closest vote was in Crimea, where is was something like 3:1, if memory serves.
Ron Graf,
Sure, there has been tremendous malfeasance by those in positions of authority. Always dishonest, and either driven by politics or personal interest…. head of the class is the evil elf Fauci, Mr Vaccine Mandates himself, but there are many others. I draw that conclusion from observation of events.
.
The question of vaccine efficiency and vaccine hazard is not something I have paid no attention to over the past dozen years. My personal negative reaction to flu vaccine (violently ill for 18-24 hours, convinced me that vaccine is not a sensible bet for me; the side effects are certain, while the benefits very uncertain. There is zero reason to vaccinate kids under 10 or so against covid unless they are immune compromised. There is little reason to vaccinate young men from ~14 to ~25, (unless immune compromised) since the risk of cardiac inflammation balances any potential benefits of the vaccine. And several countries have stopped vaccinating men in that age range. But for older individuals, and especially those over 50, the reduced risk of severe illness or death is overwhelmingly more beneficial than any adverse reaction from the vaccines. Billions of people have received the m-RNA vaccines. If there were any significant adverse reactions, these would be widely examined and widely discussed, just as the (relatively rare) adverse reaction among young men was examined and discussed.
.
You don’t need to be a vaccine expert to understand the same people who think the m-RNA vaccines are dangerous think pretty much every vaccine is dangerous. What do you think the odds of that being true are? Or to note that they always publish in non-journals. The sky dragon slayers also “publish scientific papers” in non-journals; there is a reason for that….. they are utterly wrong. Sorry if my dismissal of anti-vaxers offends.
Ron Graf (Comment #216826): “However, I feel that the invasion could have been prevented by keeping international oil plentiful by not curtailing USA production and also to slam the NATO door firmly in Ukraineâs face last December in exchange for Putinâs withdrawal from the border. Instead, Biden smiled at Putin and said, ‘Go ahead, make my day’.”
.
Indeed. Hypothetical question: What we would have done if we wanted to lure Putin into a quagmire in Ukraine? My suggestions:
* Bring back the same foreign policy team that let Russia waltz into Crimea and support rebels in the Donbas without any serious consequences.
* Restrict domestic oil production to drive up the global price of oil and Russiaâs revenues.
* Give Putin what he wants regarding things like the START renewal and Nordstream2.
* Donât hold Russia accountable for destructive hacking.
* Cut and run in Afghanistan in a manner that telegraphs weakness.
* Make it clear that we are desperate for a deal with Iran and need Russia to negotiate for us.
* Take steps to make it seem like Ukraine joining NATO is inevitable and might happen sooner rather than later.
* Hold back on providing Ukraine with defensive weaponry.
* Talk big about sanctions while refusing to say what they might be, thus tempting Putin to think we are bluffing.
* Predict that an invasion will succeed within days, thus confirming any overly optimistic assessment Putin was getting from his own intelligence apparatus.
* Precipitously pull out all diplomatic and military personnel, to make it clear to Putin that we wonât get in his way.
* Make no real attempt to negotiate a peaceful settlement.
* Have a very public spat within NATO to give the impression that we are lukewarm about providing weaponry.
* Do nothing when Russia sends troops into the Donbas.
.
I can’t think of anything else we might have done to encourage the invasion.
I had a feeling Musk was going to get to the bottom of the Hunter Biden censorship story, and Taibbi was the right guy to use.
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598822959866683394
.
Ugly, ugly, ugly. Very blatantly it looked like it was an intent for censorship while looking for an excuse to implement it. It’s very clear why the Trust and Safety team is now unemployed en masse.
.
Democrat Ro Khanna comes out smelling like a rose, the only one who successfully foresaw the sh**storm this was going to become from the beginning. I mean, how hard was that to predict? Not so amazingly he went to college at the University of Chicago where free speech is an actual thing even today.
.
What will be even more interesting is whether the legacy media will report the story. I don’t think they can ignore it. I think there is going to be more.
.
Twitter threads are a very awkward concept.
Tom Scharf,
Dribbling it out in tweets is great marketing, but limits the quality/quantity of information. I hope that after the twitter threads are done Taibbi will be able to write a comprehensive summary and post it somewhere.
.
It is a little odd: Taibbi seems really pissed that censorship has become so blatant; but this has been clear to most people since before Obama was elected. Those on the left in positions to censor almost always do, at least by blocking of some ‘inconvenient facts’, and they seem proud of it. Those being censored have been complaining loudly for a long time. Was Taibbi unaware of it? Hard to say. Maybe he just had to suffer some censorship first hand to understand just how pervasive it is.
It looks like Taibbi was handed internal Twitter files, with Musk’s approval no doubt.
.
Getting direct and specific requests from government officials for takedowns and taking action on them is a bigger problem IMO. That needs to end on both sides. I really want to understand the Biden admin’s justification for that and have them explain how it is not a 1st amendment violation. Further, I want there to be consequences for government officials who engage in that behavior. It is unethical at a minimum.
.
The Republicans can get those answers starting in January.
The ânext generationâ US stealth bomber, the B21, was rolled out tonight. It will be called âThe Raiderâ to honor the famous Doolittle Raiders. They revealed very little other than the nose-on silhouette, which looks a lot like the B-2 Spirit, but maybe larger.
Some tidbits they did reveal:
Defense Secretary Lloyd AustinâŚ.. “Let’s talk about the B-21’s range. No other long range bomber can match its efficiency. It won’t need to be based in theater. It won’t need logistical support to hold any target at risk. And even the most sophisticated air defense systems will struggle to detect a B-21 in the sky.”
Northrop Grumman âŚâŚâThe B-21 will carry conventional and nuclear arms, and could eventually fly without a pilot.â
So, the most high tech stealthy nuclear bomber ever built can fly anywhere in the world with out a pilotâŚwhat could possibly go wrong. I keep having visions of Major Kong in Dr. Strangelove.
A fleet of 100 are planned and the russians claim to have shot down two of them already.
From ISW ASSESSMENT, DECEMBER 2:
â #Russia is attempting to capitalize on the Western desire for negotiations to create a dynamic in which Western officials feel pressed to make preemptive concessions to lure Russia to the negotiating table. â https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-december-2
In military terms, Ukraine is âKicking ass and taking namesâ. Itâs the guy with the sore but who needs to make preemptive concessions.
Critical Threats has an very long but interesting article:
âThe Long-Term Risks of a Premature Ceasefire in Ukraineâ
It talks of russiaâs long term objectives in Ukraine and concludes that ceasing hostilities now favors russia. Some brief excerpts:
âThe path forward should be clearâthe West must prioritize reducing Russiaâs ability to renew a war that the Kremlin is more likely to win and that would carry the same escalation risks as the current war by helping Ukraine use its position of relative advantage now to set conditions to deter future conflict.â
âThe imperative of seeking to avert a future war in Ukraine thus requires continuing to help Ukraine fight to make necessary military gains and secure necessary reconstruction assistance rather than seeking to freeze war prematurely.â
âSuccess for Ukraine and the West lies in ensuring that Ukraine has secured territorial gains, military capabilities, and economic and reconstruction support while it is at or near its peak that are all great enough to deter a recovering Russia from restarting the war even as Ukraineâs power and Western support drop.â
https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/the-long-term-risks-of-a-premature-ceasefire-in-ukraine
Reviewing the Taibbi tweets, there is a lot of dishonesty and cowardly behavior on display, but there is one person who’s behavior looks like the purest of evil: Vijaya Gadde. She pushed to have access to the story immediately and completely blocked, using a phony excuse about computer hacking, and using methods normally reserved for child pornography. When others started raising serious questions about the continued blocking of a legitimate and accurate news story, she did her best to make sure blocking of the story continued.
.
While it is obvious Vijaya Gadde is nothing more than a dishonest partisan who was acting to protect Biden, and so not very interesting, the questions Republicans in the House need to ask are for Jack Dorsey: You describe yourself as being in the free-speech wing of the free speech party. If that is true, then why did you hire such a person to be in charge of moderation? When it became obvious she was abusing the process to thwart conservatives, why did you not fire her, along with all the like-minded people she had hired to carry out partisan censorship? At a minimum, why was she not fired when you recognized in 2020 that the lap top story should never have been blocked?
They had “no evidence” the laptop wasn’t hacked! Of course there was no evidence it was hacked either, and that is entirely the point. By the standards they produced on the fly in this case they could censor anything they want any time.
.
The NYT did the same thing with ClimateGate emails, claiming it had a policy about publishing hacked or stolen materials. This was utter rubbish and everyone knew it. What happens when Trump’s tax returns are placed in a reporter’s mailbox? Standards instantly change. It is transparently dishonest and that is the problem with people who are too clever by half. They can easily willfully fool themselves with their own cleverness.
.
What evidence did they have the laptop was hacked? Actually, none. They had a statement from former intelligence agents that this had the hallmarks of a disinformation campaign, but this statement explicitly said the ex-agents had no evidence (this is always left out when legacy media references this “fact”). Open letters containing speculation from ex-agents should be assumed to be partisan affairs, not * facts or evidence *.
.
They need to answer the hard questions, the media needs to be more curious and do their jobs better.
.
The framing of this story is now “this is not news, we knew the censoring was unjustifiably partisan”. A week ago the framing was “this is just conservative conspiracy, there is no evidence social media is partisan”. They just got handed the actual evidence. Move along, nothing to see here!
SteveF: “Sure, there has been tremendous malfeasance by those in positions of authority.”
.
As you’re acutely aware, the climate establishment censor information harmful to their enterprise and publish uncritically to support itself. This corruption I believe has been growing in the medical journals as well. The medical establishment response to Covid 19 rang alarm bells for many within medicine as well as the public at large. Self-interested establishment leaders like Fauci overrode science by viewing themselves as science. Thus our past ability to trust labels is compromised.
.
I came here years ago and humbly learned a vast amount of climate science from you and others after my trust for establishment climate science was eroded by looking under the hood. Before 2014 I knew almost nothing about the science backing Nature’s MBH98 hockey stick and I didn’t have or express a strong opinion on global warming. This is the same position I had before my brother got me to look under the hood of the vaccine science establishment about 5-6 years ago. The Stephen McIntyre of vaccines is Dr. Andrew Wakefield. Instead of being a retired mining consultant Wakefield, (before he asked the wrong question), was the top neonatal gastrologist at the prestigious London Hospital. There is a huge story that you and most people have never heard, including a Climategate-like whistleblower event by a top analyst at the CDC, named William Thompson.
.
Just like some people think that CO2 has no warming effect because MBH98 was a corrupt fabrication others think that no vaccine is net beneficial versus risk because of the covered up CDC scandal behind their seminal study to verify the safety of the MMR shot, DeStefano(2004). I do not accept the logic that one uncovered malfeasance means that everything the CDC or the Goddard Inst. or UEA publishes is garbage. It means that any controversial subject deserves a deep dive, not dismissal. I know none of us has the time to do this and thus we many times need to humbly suspend judgment or weigh the little we do know to make decisions about getting the annual flu vaccine or the bi-monthly Covid booster.
When the media starts speaking with an overly unified and homogenous voice, while simultaneously suppressing counter arguments with emotional dismissals, the red flags go up.
Tom Scharf,
Ah the old âno evidenceâ argument. Thatâs one of the classic logical fallacies. I saw it used often by folks claiming that infection acquired immunity to COVID was not as good as vaccinations. Itâs called the argument from ignorance. Since the opposite argument can be easily made, it should be obvious that itâs completely unconvincing. But then formal logic and rhetoric havenât been taught in K-12 since before I was born.
Ron Graf,
Andrew Wakefield, really?
*sigh*
MMR does not cause autism. Period.
If this site only had a mute button.
NPR leads an article on Twitter:
https://www.npr.org/2022/12/02/1140355862/twitters-former-safety-chief-warns-musk-is-moving-fast-and-breaking-things
“Elon Musk’s rapid changes at Twitter are risking the safety of its most vulnerable users around the world, including human rights activists, free speech advocates and marginalized people in autocratic countries, according to the social network’s former head of trust and safety.”
.
The changes are “risking the safety of free speech advocates” according to the chief censor? Do tell, very interested! Unfortunately the next 1000 words fail to even attempt to explain that wild assertion. This is part of the new trendy thinking that speech must be censored to protect free speech, an infinite mental loop some people are trapped in.
Tom Scharf,
NPR is hopelessly biased and run by shameless numbskulls to boot. I can’t stand even 10 minutes of their drivel. Virtually everything they ‘report’ is purposely slanted to support Democrats…. or ‘the squad’.
DeWitt,
“MMR does not cause autism. Period.”
.
Yup, and anyone who thinks so either has not critically examined the data or is incapable of doing that. Such claims about MMR vaccinations have much in common with ‘reporting’ at places like MSNBC…. hopelessly and mindlessly biased, and hopelessly misleading.
Free speech requires careful nurture and protection, like a garden being overrun by weeds. There are voices, like weeds, that don’t belong there. Who are saying the wrong things and this threatens to swamp the voices of those who are saying the right things. The solution is not to plant more flowers, but to remove the weeds. Of course, what may look like a lovely flower on the surface, can quickly strangle your entire garden. What constitutes a weed is merely a matter of perspective.
.
The problem is that reality falls somewhere in the middle. There are weeds in the garden. Without heavy filtering, spambots could bring a newsgroup to its knees. Screaming protestors can refuse to allow someone to speak so noone can listen. This “grey area” is where “trust and safety” hang out. The motte position is that they simply deal with the spam and abuse but it’s easy to advance to the bailey, where unwanted opinions are redefined as spam and abuse.
So NPR claims without evidence that Musk is ârisking the safety of free speech advocatesâ. But do they have anything to say about Apple changing Air Drop at the behest of the PRC government? That move is very clearly risking the safety of free speech advocates. I am guessing that the answer is “no”.
âMMR does not cause autism. Period.â
.
That is kind of a straw man approach to the question of what is justifiable in the professional destruction of someone who poses the question of âshould we do a study.â Wakefield was the lead author of a 12-coauthored paper in the Lancet looking at 12 very similar cases of sudden neonatal-pediatric gastro-disfunction coupled with encephalopathy, both classic precursors of onset of autism. He was looking for a potential common cause, a syndrome. The paper posed a half dozen correlations to be possibly studied, including that I believe 8 out of 12 had just received the MMR vaccine.
.
Long story, short, Wakefieldâs paper was retracted after he was de-licensed along with one of his co-authors, whom later successfully proved in court that he was politically targeted and unjustly discredited. He won and got reinstated. Wakefield went on to study autism and accepted the embrace of the community of parents of autistic children.
.
To counter Wakefieldâs growing movement in 1999 the CDC commission the DeStefano study to look and prove there is no risk to the MMR vaccine. Two years later they completed the study. But when the data was analyzed they came to a big problem: there was a statically significant signal for autism associated with the MMR vaccine, especially among families of lower income. They spent two years internally debating as to what to do and finally came to the conclusion that they should destroy half their data thereby making the signal fall below statistical significance. All the coauthors met and one by one ceremoniously put their copy of the data in a garbage can in loyal solidarity. We would not know of any of this but for the eating away at the conscience of the first coauthor, William Thompson.
.
Thompsonâs confession seems to be scrubbed from YouTube but here is a link to Dr. Brian Hooker explaining how he got Thompson to open up. Hooker recorded all their conversations surreptitiously but later got Thompsonâs consent. This was all captured in a documentary called Vaxxed that is now banned but may be streaming somewhere on the web.
.
The MMR itself is not the cause of autism and I donât know of anyone who ever claimed that. However, autism was practically nonexistent before 1960 and increased exponentially to present day, where it is now 1:50 children, 90%-plus boys. My brother has done a lot of private research on it and believes that too many vaccines in too young of a child tends to push the oxidative stress past a threshold that causes an inflammatory response, especially in those that are vitamin B12 deficient.
.
The CDC and NIH are about as interested in this angle of research as the FBI is in Hunterâs laptop.
Australia vs USA in the World Cup has been cancelled. Twice over.
If you might remember from the 2015-16 presidential primary debates Trump was asked his opinion on childhood vaccination and he replied they should be delayed. The moderator immediately went to the two physicians on the stage to take the opportunity to discredit Trump. Both Carson and Paul backed up Trump and added that childhood vaccines need to be both delayed and spread out.
Ron,
It’s unfortunate (in my view) that it’s your brother who you’re citing. It tends to make the issue personal, and it’s not personal at all.
Can we agree to disagree and drop this? I know DeWitt was wishing for a mute button and I find myself wishing for one too. Because the fact is, I don’t care. Ugly as that might be. I don’t agree with you regarding autism and vaccines, but I am insufficiently motivated to do the requisite work to argue the case intelligently.
.
[Edit: It’d been awhile. But I remember now how to mute people:
Thank you Ron.
]
Which I hope is not understood to mean every time I’ve ever reply to somebody with a simple ‘thank you’ I was muting them. Often the statement is simple and sincere. Only on occasion does it mean ‘I don’t care enough to continue this conversation’.
So. Thank you all.
DeWitt Payne (Comment #216841)
–
“MMR does not cause autism. Period ”
–
Learning more as I go along.
–
The ever increasing diagnosis of autism, whatever that is, does not seem linked to an ever increasing immunization rate as would be required.
The amount of study involved since the original allegations seems to disprove any link as well.
What Ron has been saying however , vaccines aside, is that with all human activities Trust but Verify is the absolute scientific minimum in all fields.
An at the time very competent expert in the field thought he had found a problem.
Thalidomide anyone?
Believe the experts?
–
Drugs and vaccines do have side effects.
Companies do try to cover them up or minimize them.
To say that vaccines are safe is wrong.
Vaccines are necessary and essential to reduce human suffering.
Angech, thanks for framing my points with the explicit qualifications and disclaimers to protect sensitivities.
.
DeWitt: âItâs unfortunate (in my view) that itâs your brother who youâre citing.â
.
I only cited him as the random chance of how the subject came to my attention. Itâs not personal. My brother does not have autism nor is he a pediatrician giving shots to toddlers. I apologies to any readers that find the topic too personally sensitive. I am speaking perhaps too freely, I know.
.
Those that find themselves the urge to hitting the ejection button on me can relate now to the Twitter people that labeled me a bot for speaking freely about lab origin likelihood of covid. They didnât want to hear it.
.
Angech, I am curious if you saw data on the growth of the vaccine schedule versus the growth in autism or was it just a from the hip observation. Because in the USA our schedule has grown faster than any other country. Japan tried to keep up than then deliberately stepped back. Countries with fewer vaccinations tend to have lessor autism if I recall. I would start pulling in research but I have already overstayed my welcome on this topic.
.
Mike M, your list of Biden policy blunders that enticed Putin to invade is missing this:
And it depends on what it does. Itâs one thing if itâs a minor incursion [by Russia] and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do.
Corrections: Mark, not DeWitt found it unfortunate that I cited my brother.
.
The ratio of boys to girls having autism in not 90%. I was going from memory which I knew was hazardous, especially since it took seconds to look up. The ratio is between 3:1 and 4:1 boys to girls.
.
Glyphosate (Round Up) is also a suspect for autism. The evidence the cause is environmental I would say is strong. The establishment would like the consensus to be that it has always been the same but just never noticed before.
.
On another topic, Steve F, and DeWitt, David Young just did a post on CFD and climate models on CE. You might be a couple of the few that could follow his technical writing. https://judithcurry.com/2022/12/02/colorful-fluid-dynamics-and-overconfidence-in-global-climate-models/
Many times the increase in spectrum disorders is more due to an increase in the diagnosis rate instead of an increase in the disease itself. Autism long ago was only applied to those with pretty severe deficiencies, as was depression. It gets hard to sort out. ADHD is another thing that is likely more of a new categorization of something that has existed for a long time without a name.
The biggest cause for increase in the frequency of autistic spectrum disorders is probably greater parental age. Not the only factor (some appears to be hereditary), but advanced parental age is consistent with later marriage and later families.
Tom Scharf,
There is a huge range of autistic spectrum disorders. I expect you are correct that decades ago people only paid attention to pretty severe cases.
In the recordings of William Thompson the subject of the historical trend of ASD came up. IIRC, Thomson cautioned Hooker that there are confounding factors like rate of diagnosis and therefore a better strategy would be for him to do citizens requests for data on the diagnosis trend for neurological ticks since these are less subjective and less politically sensitive. Thompson had knowledge that troubling data in ticks had been covered up but the data would set off less alarms.
.
I am confident there has been a broader rate of diagnosis over a wider spectrum of disorder. Still, I am not confident that explains the whole ASD phenomenon. Charts
.
I apologize for my impertinence. I respect those who are disinterested. I guess I just did not expect to be so alone on this.
FYI: Video of Munk Debate on Trust in Mainstream Media
https://vimeo.com/munkdebates/review/775853977/85003a644c
.
Douglas Murray wins the debate in form and facts, the defense was pretty bad. I think I could have done a better job defending the MSM. The defense just wasn’t prepared, Malcom Gladwell came off poorly IMO.
I went and searched and Vaxxed the movie has been pretty much scrubbed from Youtube, Amazon and Google. It looks like Itunes has it rentable for $3.99 for Ipad and Iphones.
.
Here at minute 2:30 is Robert DiNero talks in 2016 on Today about his support for the movie despite his film festival, Tribeca, banning it’s screening. His partner keeps trying to change the subject while he keeps coming back to it.
.
Here at minute 11:30 is Wakefield himself giving his summary on what needs to be done about vaccine safety. The person on the left is Del Bigtree, the movie’s director and the leader of the vaccine safety movement that opponents call “anti-vaxxers” (in similar fashion to “climate deniers”).
SteveF
That’s my guess. These days schools seem to diagnose disabilities in kids right and left. Parents even seem to want it because schools all have special ed staff to help the kids with “needs”. When we were kids, the “special” kids were at risk of being pulled out of regular classes and the fact that you were “special” was public knowledge. Now you might get extra time on the SAT and school tests, but that fact is then concealed from universities when you apply!
This originates from someone trying to sell his book⌠but that doesn’t necessarily mean itâs not true:
â’BIGGEST COVER-UP IN HISTORY’ I worked with the Wuhan lab â I tried to warn them & I KNOW Covid was a lab leakâ
âDr Huff claims the pandemic was the result of the US government’s funding of dangerous genetic engineering of coronaviruses in China.â
âThe epidemiologist said Chinaâs gain-of-function experiments – carried out with shoddy biosecurity – led to a lab leak at the US-funded Wuhan Institute of Virology.â
https://www.thesun.ie/news/9841176/wuhan-lab-warning-covid-lab-leak/
Ron,
No, it’s fine if everyone actually wants to talk about it after all. Maybe they do.
It’s probably fine if they don’t [too], come to think of it. Lucia’s moderates lightly… I wouldn’t sweat it.
I’ll go do something else.
David Young’s post at Climate Etc is a well-written and evenhanded exposition of the limitations of computational fluid dynamics in modeling in general (mostly aeronautics where limitations are not so severe) and more specifically in global climate models where limitations can be severe.
He shows where these limitations lead inevitably to tuning. He suggests that more research is required in this field – which probably would require those in the field to admit to the extent of the limitations.
Quipstering was minimized and that always is helpful in reading replies.
Lucia,
I recently looked at a series of large studies of autism and parental age. It looks like somewhere under 50% of diagnosed cases are (statistically) tied to parental age, with paternal age effect clearer than the maternal age effect, if only because men can father children to much older ages than the age where mothers can become pregnant. Still, there is a significant random component. There is some evidence that more severe cases on the autism spectrum (those with substantial mental disability) are more strongly associated with older parents than milder cases.
.
A large scale Japanese study compared the frequency of diagnosed autism between kids who had received three separate vaccinations for measles, mumps, and rubella, and kids who received the MMR triple vaccine. Result: no difference in frequency of autism.
.
I would guess that single point polymorphisms might help us understand why autism develops, but the scale of the studies (like those for general intelligence) would likely have to be large to find correlations. Comparing single point polymorphisms for parents and children (with and without autism) might reduce the required scale of the studies.
SteveF
I think the future for this sort of knowledge is DNA– but it’s going to take a while. The scales are more achievable because it’s not like anthropology where you just collect from remains you found in some 1000 grave. But there is still time (computer and human) and effort. So I think we might know this pretty well in 20 years. (They have connections for some stuff.)
.
I don’t doubt your report age matters.
.
But I do think we are also in an age where people almost “celebrate” mental/emotional/developmental disorders (as long as they aren’t so debilitating that everyone would notice.) Tons of people like to announce they have ADHD or other “disorders” — which are mild enough they required careful observation to diagnose. And I can’t help but think some of the reported autism is stuff that would never have been diagnosed in the past.
.
The parental age effect could be big enough to still be discernable despite the effect I suspect. So it isn’t either/or.
.
The one I suspect is rather difficult to prove or disprove. It’s almost impossible to study. You really can’t do a study to determine whether someone my Mom’s age would have been diagnosed as “on the spectrum” based on current practice but was not back in the day when that was just thought to be “her personality”.)
.
A fair number of (not Indian) parents hiring tutors describe their kids needs for help as springing from the kids “ADHD”. The Indian parents know kids being pushed to be at the top of the class needs extra help. Because lots of kids are equally smart, equally motivated blah… blah… But tutoring can let them achieve and not collapse. So needing help doesn’t mean you have ADHD.
.
The white kids whose parents hire tutors usually don’t seem to have a dang thing wrong with them.
russia now is visually confirmed to have lost more than 1800 infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs) since it began its invasion of #Ukraine on February 24. Of these, 567 were captured in working order by Ukraine. Oryx just updated its count.
https://twitter.com/oryxspioenkop/status/1599422558712930305?s=61&t=pb3mscY5II-WauCUk_HCDg
Since February when russia invaded, the county that has supplied the most IFVs to Ukraine is russia.
Ron,
Hereâs the problem. Seen on a billboard today about 5 miles from my house:
âDid Tylenol Cause My Childâs Autism? MyAutismClaim.comâ
.
Fundamentally they donât know what causes autism and they barely even understand what it is * physically and biologically * beyond a set of measurable characteristics on a scale. Therefore anyone can correlate a parameter with the rise of autism diagnoses. The adaption of HDTV. Videogames. The use of forceps during birth. Any number of changes in pregnancy related or childhood healthcare. They are just correlations that imply causation. It is by definition a lot of hand waving because you cannot really connect the dots to something you canât physically measure.
.
Maybe one of the many theories about autism is right, but they have a tough road to prove it even if they are right, and clearly most of them are wrong because they contradict each other. I canât tell the difference between them and until they can really measure autism biologically then it becomes uninteresting to go down rabbit holes.
A good portion of the introverted geeks and nerds I grew up with would have been diagnosed on the spectrum using today’s tools. It’s not to say this isn’t something possibly real, however being smart and extroverted is also on a spectrum of some sort and we don’t go around on a “search for the guilty” for those conditions. Intelligence is a spectrum. It is an interesting science to attempt to determine how these differences arise, but IMO we are very far from clear causation and all the same genetics / environment arguments apply.
Tom Scharf,
Unlike all those other factors which might correlate (Large flat screen TVs vs autism? Gotta love it!), the correlation with parental age is very clear. It accounts for less than half the diagnosed cases, so obviously there is a lot more to the story than just parental age, but it is reasonably (statistically) consistent over time and across cultures. It is also a reasonable expectation: the stem cells which generate sperm cells age and are known to accumulate genetic errors over many years. Egg cells are known to age and become damaged as well (trisomy 21 being the perfect example). The paternal age effect is clear even when the mother is young: mothers in their 20’s who have offspring with fathers in their 50’s have ~25-35% greater chance of a child with significant autistic symptoms.
Tom Scharf,
WRT to nerds and geeks: could be. I think today I would have been diagnosed with mild autism, since I was a “late talker”… I said very little until I was almost 3. My mom just concluded my older sister (16 months my senior) talked so much for both of us that I had no need to talk. đ
They actually called one of the outstanding house races in CA (already!), they are waiting on a recount in Colorado for the final one. Likely to go Republican.
I have to admit I am shocked (shocked!) California actually reached 97% counted in that district in only 4 weeks since polls closed. Oddly enough, it was a GOP flip.
.
The Boebert race in Colorado was already called by most organizations, and the democrat has conceded. So 222: 213. 232:203 would have frozen out the handful of nutty members of the Republican caucus. We’ll see if McCarthy can quell revolt by that handful in his caucus.
One way to think about it is cancer. They do now know what causes cancer. Genetic cell defects that causes cells to keep replicating and not stop when told to do so. So everything that causes cell damage potentially leads to cancer. Smoking just happens to cause a lot of cell damage in the lungs. The reality is you can get unlucky at any time with a gamma ray from space that hits a cell in your body at the wrong place.
.
We went through a phase in the 1970âs and 1980âs where everything caused cancer, but they were just correlations with things that cause cell damage. Environmental determinism was out of control. They were simultaneously all right and all wrong. Itâs very unsatisfying for many to learn cancer is a low level problem with no humans to blame, only statistical probabilities. We are all ticking time bombs with cancer. Have a good night sleep tonight!
I guess its hard to stop talking about autism. I only brought it up because learning of and hearing the “anti-vaxxer’s” case influenced my lack of trust in the CDC way before Covid. It was thus was less incredible for me to believe they could influence the publication of undesirable data. How many here had heard of the William Thompson confession of DeStefano(2004) before now? That is likely about how many are aware of Climategate or Steve Mc in the anti-vax community. They are likely a mix of political parties since I have never seen any partisan talk by them. They are also chock full of medical professionals.
.
Tom wrote: “Maybe one of the many theories about autism is right, but they have a tough road to prove it even if they are right, and clearly most of them are wrong because they contradict each other. I canât tell the difference between them and until they can really measure autism biologically then it becomes uninteresting to go down rabbit holes.”
.
This and most other comments here I agree with. Autism is much like cancer in that there is no clear correlation with one cause. That is why the theory of oxidative stress and epigenetics make some sense (but are far from proven). Epigenetics is the propensity for signaling a developmental pathway based on age. We all realize that the earlier one is in their development inside or outside the womb the more sensitive to external harm mutagens but also the same is true for all plain oxidants, like the adjuvants, preservatives and growth media in vaccines. The natural counter-measures are supported by vitamins we know now. This is why pregnant women take folate (but should also take a multi-V and stay away from industrial chemical exposure, and exercise and not drink or smoke, etc…)
.
We should all thank Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. for the vaccine manufactures finally figuring out a way to remove methylmercury preservative (thimerosal) from childhood vaccines. I think it is still in the flu shot. It may not have caused autism. But it didn’t help.
Tome Scharf,
“They do now know what causes cancer.”
.
Sure they do: getting old causes most all cancers: https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/age
.
We are all, unfortunately, going to die, and cancer is I think the #2 cause of death (after cardio-vascular deaths). Nothing mysterious…. we are but flesh and blood. Now if we could just figure out how to upload our consciousness to a computer, we could live immortally.
.
Only joking; that is mostly a fantasy shared by nutty ‘tech titans’ in California. Most everyone else understands they are going to die, sooner or later. Social Security actuarial tables are always available to remind us of this. I used to think (30+ years ago) that medical science would make real progress against the fundamental limits to human lifespan (which looks a bit over 100 years), but as far as I can tell, this has just not happened. While average age at death increases slowly with medical advances, progress is glacial in pace, with essentially zero progress against the upper bound. We are indeed just flesh and blood.
Ron,
Removing thimerosal was nothing but PR. Thimerosal, also known as mercurochrome, was used for many years as an antibacterial treatment for minor wounds and scrapes. When I was young, we practically bathed in it. Its chemistry in the body has zero relationship to, say, methyl mercury chloride or worse, dialkyl mercury, because the other element bonded to the mercury atom in the molecule is a sulfur and that bond is extremely stable.
The incidence of severe peanut allergy has also increased a lot since the 1960âs. Are you going to blame that on vaccines or Roundup too? I have to admit, though, that blaming vaccines for autism makes a lot more sense than blaming possible traces of asbestos in talcum powder for ovarian cancer.
SteveF,
They actually raised the issue at least once on Star Trek:TNG that a transporter copy wasnât really the same person. The person being transported is destroyed by the scanning process and usually a âperfectâ copy comes out the other end. The same logic would likely apply for a computer copy.
DeWitt,
“The person being transported is destroyed by the scanning process and usually a âperfectâ copy comes out the other end.”
.
You are going to give silly tech titans a wet dream! But why not 2 copies, or 10? Or replicate yourself from a saved copy in case of some unfortunate accident? It’s all just data right? Sci-fy, shmy-fy… we’re all gonna’ die.
DeWitt, our discussion on the merits of thimerosal is about as informed as the a couple of anti-vaxxers with our education level having a debate about aerosol forcing. Nonetheless Thiomersal and Mercurochrome (Merbromin) are not the same thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merbromin
.
The two educated anti-vaxxers, however, could clearly understand that Mike’s Nature trick to hide the decline was not a trick as in a neat mathematical solution, as Wikipedia claims.
.
And, similarly, I think we can all agree that the CDC spending two years to figure out their trick of deleting half the data is not a valid statistical method.
Ron Graf,
DeWitt is a chemist with and advanced degree from CalTech and (I think) 40+ years practical experience. I suspect DeWitt has a wee bit more appreciation for the chemistry and toxicity of mercury in thimeorsal than your typical anti-vaxer. BTW, I also have a chemistry degree and 40+ years experience, including 20 years of technical consulting/troubleshooting/analysis of chemical processes in trouble. Nothing I have seen rises to even the level of a serious question about the safety of MMR.
.
I personally have an allergic reaction to thimerosal; it was used for many years as a preservative in contact lens solutions. Over a decade or so of use, my reaction to thimerosal became extreme enough that I was close to abandoning contact lenses. Fortunately, that allergic reaction was recognized and non-thimerosal solutions became available.
I seem to keep on offending. All I wanted is to appeal for a bit of humility.
.
DeWitt, you are correct that strong bonds means stable bonds. I am guessing the RFK Jr. was not the chemistry expert. But I am not going to look up who was or how many or prestigious their credentials.
.
Many credentialed experts told us the mercury amalgam tooth fillings were absolutely safe due to their chemical stability. When I had one replaced lately I noticed my dentist suited up with a sealed hazmat respirator. A dentist putting in a silver-mercury filling today would be drummed out of business. Is that nonsense too? Real question.
.
Edit: The FDA banned mercurochrome. Was that a mistake? I know there was no admission of danger, only that the orange stain masked the red of a possible infection. (Yet the did not ban iodine).
.
I remember that it was mostly school nurses who used it. Somehow we all survived. ????
Ron,
You keep appealing for humility and pointing to the nonsense advanced by Climate Science (TM) as if that has something to do with the scientific consensus on vaccines. You are comparing apples with bananas.
.
Climate scientists use extreme uncertainty in future warming and even greater uncertainty in the consequences of that warming in the distant future (vast uncertainty they keep insisting on!) to demand draconian public policies today which make no sense economically or socially. Theirs is fundamentally a political/philosophical enterprise with an extreme ‘green’ bias (humans bad, nature good). The only reason I ever paid any attention to climate science was because the consequences of the policies being proposed were far more damaging than any plausible consequences of warming itself.
.
Which is now the position of a few former alarmists (like Micheal Shellenberger, Apocalypse Never) who have come to similar conclusions. I keep waiting for more.
SteveF, of course the two debates are very different. What you might forget, which was my main point, is that you, I, Shellenberger, even DeWitt, are âclimate deniersâ to a great portion of the public. And they have NASA and NOAA and most of the worldwide academic experts to back them up on that claim.
.
The main similarities I notice are how the effects of establishments power and influence corrupt information through bias and sometimes through fraud (if strong enough motive). The later is always justified as being in the longterm public interest as well as is covering up any malfeasance that might harm the publicâs trust.
.
Another similarity is the establishment’s vilification of anti-vaxxers and climate deniers alike as an ignorant, uniformed, and potent threat to the public health. And, of course, they heavily appeal to their expert authority and consensus on that opinion.
I believe that there are multiple causes and/or combinations of causes for autism and that contribute to the difficulty in so far and in the future nailing down causes. There is also the very broad spectrum for identifying individual autism and might well make the severest cases less difficult to pin down.
I have a grandson with severe autism of whom I am a guardian and who is mostly non-verbal. You have to really get to know him to understand how he relates. He understands and responds to the spoken and written word of others but mainly communicates using an electronic device designed for that purpose. If you observed him for a short period of time you might not suspect he was autistic, but after a while his quirky manners would give it away. He is limited by his autism but appears quite intelligent when he has to resolve a problem that is directly affecting him.
I would never want to do an all-of-the-above approach to autism as I have witnessed parents with autistic offspring try every new to them approaches for dealing with autism and buying into to unproven causes. In their situations some are understandably very vulnerable to con jobs.
I have observed many autistic individuals because of my grandsonâs condition, and I would agree with the observation of someone who had seen many more autistic individuals than me when she said, âwhen you have seen one individual with autism you have seen one individual with autismâ.
In my view of vaccines and autism studies I would not hesitate to have a cared one vaccinated. I think some parents buy into the studies that purport to show a relationship because they incorrectly think it takes any blame off them for the situation. There is no blame for autism.
https://www.weizmann-usa.org/news-media/feature-stories/the-autism-puzzle-what-the-weizmann-institute-is-doing-to-solve-it/
I should have added that my autistic grandson could readily mimic words that I would feed him when he was very young. He could say them almost perfectly and were readily understood. As he aged his ability to speak words diminished. He has retained a word that he used to refer early in life to my wife and me that sounds like grandpa and grandma.
Kenneth, thanks for sharing that. And I apologize if talking about this topic was hurtful. (I blame SteveF.) But seriously, had you ever connected with others involved with the
anti-vaxvaccine safety movement? I have not, beyond my brother, who was only interested academically.Some conspiracies are more equal than others.
One similarity is the establishmentâs vilification of both anti-vaxxers (increased safety advocates) and climate deniers (lukewarmers) as ignorant, uniformed threats to the public health. They have the weight of their expert authority consensus to back that up. And they control the MSM news and bulk of investigative reporting media. They can quickly censor any threats or leakers or whistleblowers. Thompson was reeled back in by his CDC bosses, for example.
From Stephen McIntyre’s Wikipedia page:
.
We live in a bit of an echo chamber. It would be extremely difficult for you to try to convince a young person using published evidence of your beliefs, SteveF and TomS. Just think of how hard it would be for the one child in the class that read Shellenberger’s book and try to change the teacher and class’s POV/
Ron, I am not at all bothered by talk about autism.
I know a number of people whose first choice of a cause for autism is early childhood vaccinations, but none that would say that it is definitely the cause.
I know a few who have spent considerable money on “cures” that never even showed any improvements. My grandson is on medications that relieve some of the worst symptoms of autism but none are advertised as a partial or complete cure.
It takes awhile for many parents to come to grips with there not being any cures, for at least, the intermediate future. It is better for all involved when the situation is acknowledged.
Ron,
Wikipedia is agressively edited in favor of the climate agenda so take anything written about McIntyre with about a ton of salt. MBH was completely bogus. The premise that you could use tree ring data to determine global temperture was and is ridiculous. Yes, there was other proxy data, but all of it required post hoc massaging. The original MBH algorithm would always create a hockey stick from random noise. The later algorithm was only slightly better. You had to add some redness to the noise to get it to produce a hockey stick.
MBH does not show error estimates. In the stick part of the reconstruction, the error limits are wall-to-wall. Even the IPCC has stopped using it.
DeWitt,
But MBH was never seriously a scientific study. It was a âstudyâ designed to advance a specific policy POV, much like Steig et al was designed to show âdangerous warningâ over all of Antarctica.
.
Steig et al was so blatantly wrong that it was not even all that difficult for a group of amateurs to explain its errors (basically too many principle components truncated, IIRC), and to point to its clear discrepancies with instrumental data from the Antarctic peninsula. All later work on Antarctica has pretty much dismissed Steig et al, and actual measurements continue to show that most of Antarctica has not warmed at allâŚ. if anything, the highest elevations have actually cooled a bit. But advancing understanding of temperature trends in Antarctica was never the point⌠the paper was a propaganda vehicleâŚ.. put that image of Antarctica on the cover of Nature with scary headlines and scary colors (red of course) showing alarming rates of warming over the whole continent. The MSM dutifully showed that inaccurate image to the world, and the desired goal was achieved. Screw âthe scienceâ⌠public alarm was (and remains) the objective, and it hasnât gotten any better since Steig et al was published and refuted.
DeWitt, I am in your choir. But if you were talking to a 10th grade earth science class as a guest speaker you could spend 20 minutes laying out what you did and more. Then the teacher would correctly label you as the minority âskepticâ point of view. And as you stepped out the teacher would qualify your statements that McIntyre was a retired mining consultant, likely oil shale, and that many people like him were fossil fuel corporate contractors. The teacher would also point out that the MBH99 has been confirmed by NASA, NOAA and the IPCC, whereas MM2003 and MM2005 were published in lower echelon journals, MBH99 was in the top journal on climate. âBTW, kids, do your own research on Wikipedia.â
There was plenty wrong with the hockey stick. Anybody with math skills and some time can figure that out * definitively * for themselves. It must be stressed it was provable. Many, many people did find the flaws with the guidance of McIntyre and others. My view is the controversy wasnât some academic manipulated data and invented some new statistics to get an answer he wanted (yawn), it was the emotional reaction by the climate science community and environmental journalism once this was definitively pointed out. They put Mann on the cover of an IPCC report previously and so couldnât admit fault. It was an embarrassment for the science establishment and deeply unsettling for anyone who examined it in detail. If they were treating this garbage as beyond repute and elevating Mann for it, how far did the rot go in climate science?
.
TLDR â Tree rings are poor thermometers
Tom, yes but every scandal that exposes an establishment to ridicule, discredit or worse, accountability, follows the same dynamic today, especially in the absence of healthy journalism.
.
If the movie Vaxxed was complete crap there would be no reason to black list its opening and then virtually scrub it from existence. I used to be able to point to the recordings on Youtube but they are gone now. I did download Baric’s 2016 podcast on his Wuhan lab collaboration on chimeric sars viruses just before it evaporated.
.
In one of his last comments at CE Mosher reminded all there that they were not winning the debate. And in fact they had already lost.
.
I don’t want to believe that and feel that there is an innate thirst for truth and I am not unique in seeking it. I think my main problem is that I hear people out that make extraordinary claims. I have an open mind and don’t fear my brains falling out. I am a moth to a flame on stories of establishment coverups and corruption. I suspect Elon had a similar upbringing of living on science fiction novels and Omni magazine. I wish I could see what will be of the world in 50 and 100 years and am hoping we can overcome the scourge of elitism or whatever is ailing us at present.
The role of epigenetic modifications in neurodevelopmental disorders
Off topic, if anyone is interested, the bloody battle of Bakhmut is continuing. The front lines are fluid. The russian Wagner Group âkeeps throwing human waves of inexperienced mercenariesâ into the front lines. There is drone footage of open fields littered with bodies. One of the defending units taking casualties is the Georgian Legion [a unit of Volunteers from Georgia]. The English language newspaper âGeorgia Todayâ has a detailed history of the town and the battle. I think it is very accurateâŚ.
https://georgiatoday.ge/the-battle-of-bakhmut/
Georgian legion https://twitter.com/georgian_legion
Boys behaving badly in comparison to girls has been forever.
A combination of shorter attention span and higher testosterone levels.
Exacerbated by feminisation of the teaching profession.
And single mother families.
Gee, I am old fashioned and bigoted.
Hence the higher numbers of diagnoses of behavioural issues as the medical problems Autism and ADHD.
–
The problem for Ron is that the condition was initially linked to a specific vaccine, then to a group of vaccines with thiomersal and then to âallâ vaccines.
Actual proof is lacking and multiple suspects is the old story of when one idea is unprovable pick another one.
–
I have dealt with only a couple of truly autistic children in a lifetime of experience so it is definitely not common and not a behavioral issue.
–
The problem is also one of trying to link natural cover ups to actual malice which is a totally different subject to the problems of causation.
–
Vaccination as a cause of autism is dead as an issue at the current moment on the current data and definitions.
angech,
Yup, old fashioned and bigoted. Next you’ll probably say that physical examination of many patients convinces you men and women are really not the same. Keep your head down if you try to speak freely in public.
.
According to the CDC, something over 1% of kids show some “autistic symptoms”. The number with substantial mental disability (which interferes with language and most normal behaviors) is far lower… probably under 1:500.
angech,
Rickie Gervais can get away with it, we can’t: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yI6qvQtrTU8
SteveF
–
“Keep your head down if you try to speak freely in public.”
–
Wise advice.
Russell, thanks for the updates on Ukraine. The defenders of Bakhmut are up there in my book with the defenders of Bastogne in 1944.
.
Angech: “I have dealt with only a couple of truly autistic children in a lifetime of experience so it is definitely not common and not a behavioral issue.”
.
Yes, ASD I suspect may actually be several different disorders with possibly multiple and overlapping causes. The argument that it was wrong to impugn vaccines, and in particular the MMR vaccine, is a weak one in my opinion. Firstly because it was never a claim or even a faint hypothesis that vaccines were the single cause, let alone the MMR vaccine of the late 1990s. Much of the alarm is in the medical establishments reaction to a research physician’s even bringing up the question of could childhood vaccination be an influence on the syndrome. Wakefield was not stiffly debated. He was destroyed, labeled unethical, reckless and a con man.
.
Then after that was accomplished and Wakefield was laying in the gutter, stripped of his medical credentials, along with any of his co-authors who dared to stand up for the paper, the health community undertook studies to see if there was anything to the claim. Ten of Wakefield’s twelve co-authors were forced to beg for the paper’s retraction in order to keep their careers.
.
Then four years later, in 2002, after the data had been analyzed by the CDC’s own study, they found a statistically significant influence of the MMR vaccine on cases of spontaneous onset of severe autism. They said nothing. They apparently had a fierce debate as to the proper way forward for two years before putting enough pressure on all the study’s co-authors to falsify the data. This is according to the first co-author of that study over ten years later.
.
They should have just published the study, reinstated Wakefield and followed his suggestion of giving the three vaccines separately, rather than in one mega-shot.
Michael Goodwin of the NYP does a superb job on the Twitter files release and the Hunter Biden laptop story, censorship, collusion and the destruction of America’s democracy.
Bakhmut may either be a turning point in the momentum of the war or may be a clear signal to the Russians of how hard they are going to need to fight for every inch of Ukraine. You don’t want to be there.
.
Drone footage of Bakhmut. Thousands of impact craters.
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/zcp5l2/this_is_what_the_suburbs_of_bakhmut_look_like_at/
I believe I have a somewhat different take on the tree ring and other temperature proxy studies by climate scientists.
In my view too many climate scientists look strictly for study results that affirm their prior views of climate change being an existential threat to humankind. I doubt very much that the general population of climate scientists has a deep understanding of statistical analysis and its limitations vis a vis the differences between climate science and hard sciences where experiments can be designed under controlled conditions. When a climate scientist latches unto an analysis that fits a preferred agenda, they tend not to look in depth at the uncertainties involved, the validity of the methodology used, or sensitivity tests that might weaken the conclusions of the study. When the results hit the mainstream media and get hyped as a breakthrough in confirming their agenda, it becomes very difficult for the original study to be constructively criticized. It often results in some very vague replies to any criticism or avoidance of addressing the more basic methodology problems of the study.
In using temperature proxies for the historical and observed time periods, a correct approach would be to understand the physics of potential proxies and the limitations and uncertainties of the proxies association with local temperature changes. A physics/chemistry based criteria would be developed for selecting a proxy, a priori. Those selected proxies would then all be used in the model that attempts to associate proxy changes to temperature changes. Selecting proxies ex post facto by itself is a very big statistical violation of the predictive power of such a methodology. Various ameliorating techniques that allow for using part of the sample to construct a model and another part to test it can be used, but those methods are subject to peeking at the data and/or testing many proxies without accounting for the uncertainties those actions pose.
There are methods of testing and analyzing results in the hard sciences, where controlled experiments can be undertaken, that cannot be translated to climate science where there is no control. I think that a surprising number of scientists in hard and soft sciences do not appreciate these differences.
The NYT’s get around to covering the Twitter Files. Curiously they didn’t cover the files themselves for unspecified reasons (the same with laptop). Here they only cover the reaction to the files as a story about the media. I’d give them a plausible deniability pass on them not deeming this an important story except they have been flooding the zone with negative Musk stories for a month straight now. Physician, heal thyself.
.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/04/business/media/elon-musk-twitter-matt-taibbi.html
“Mr. Musk and Mr. Taibbi framed the exchanges as evidence of rank censorship and pernicious influence by liberals. Many others â even some ardent Twitter critics â were less impressed, saying the exchanges merely showed a group of executives earnestly debating how to deal with an unconfirmed news report that was based on information from a stolen laptop.”
“The New York Times requested copies of the documents from Mr. Musk, but did not receive a response.”
.
Hey NYT, the evidence was posted. Ask the people named and associated with the censorship if the data is real.
The biggest problems for tree rings is rainfall is a big factor and very localized, and trees don’t grow in the winter. The raw tree ring data measurements are a complete utter mess (or else no crazy math would be necessary, right?). Mann’s tossing of certain data before analysis was almost certainly prejudiced by a desired result. Depending on these black box algorithms (computers and math was used!) that sh** out principal components of uncertain quality and declaring one of them temperature is a bit like just drawing a line with a crayon blindfolded knowing what you want.
.
Even worse, using this low frequency, low resolution data without error bars and then appending the high frequency, high resolution data of the recent temperature record to the end of it (without ID’ing this in the graph) and very seriously proclaiming “things are changing so much faster now!” is just embarrassing.
.
Mann’s graph is one of many possibilities of the past, it just isn’t any more likely than anything else in the actual error range. You can only do so much with garbage in data. The proclaiming of this as an important finding became religious in nature once legitimate criticism started to land.
In searching for a history of mercury in childhood vaccines the first result is the CDC’s timeline on Thimerosal. Stangely it skips over DeStefan(2004) but it points to, Verstraeten(2003), cited it as a study clearing thimerosal from autism. But reading it I found it implicated thimersol contaning vaccines (TVCs) for neurological tics!
.
Can you imagine you were a toxicological investigator and you suddenly noticed that dysphoria is increasing at the same rates as autism and ADHD and you knew that studies have shown that prenatal stress is associated with homosexuality and wonder, Hmm… Should I look at childhood vaccines? And you, like every medical professional taught in medical school since 1999, were told the story of that con man Wakefield, who used to be a doctor but tried to question vaccine safety.
There are better proxies than tree rings, like maximum latewood density (MXD), O18, coral growth, strontium/calcium, manganese, diatoms, foram, sediments etc., but none are direct thermometers for temperature or are based on first principles and all are susceptible to selection biases.
Michael Mannâs proxies had many problems beside the initial selection biases. He did things like truncate a MXD series in the late period because it had inexplicitly stopped responding to temperature changes. I recall there were some very weak attempts to justify this action. He used historical temperature readings as temperature proxies. In one published study he actually eliminated part of a tree proxy series because it showed unbelievably high temperatures in the instrumental period. He rationalized this by attributing it to CO2 fertilization. I do not recall if it was a Mann proxy study, but there were proxies that gave the opposite response to temperature than would rationally be expected. In the regression the coefficient flipped it from the expected positive to negative value and since the opposite to expected correlation was rather high the proxy was used.
When the instrumental temperature was used at end of the proxy series and many scientists agreed that the method was valid, it showed that they had prejudged the validity of the proxies as acting like true thermometers. How else could you avoid plotting apples and oranges on the same graph.
There is much research demanded before a historical proxy for temperature could be validated and determined under what conditions the validation is appropriate. Unfortunately, the climate scientists involved appear only to use proxy data and leave the research to other branches of science who probably are not totally aware of the climate related problem. I personally think that since the climate scientists dealing with temperature proxies can force results that further their agenda, they see no need to do the critical research. And, of course, other involved entities motivated like the climate scientists are not going to push the need.
Ron Graf (Comment #216906)
My impression is most of the alarm surrounding anti-vaxism is a non-trivial fraction of parents began refusing to have their kids vaccinated and that some previously fairly well controlled diseases would see their rates spring up. Some, like fairly scary measles, have.
.
I’m nort sure I’ve heard of Wakefield and perhaps his fate was not deserved. But I don’t think most of the alarm around anti-vaxism was about him personally– if it had been I would have heard of him!
The alarm around him was about– at the very least– probably over-egging the pudding to the point of deceptoin in writing a paper. AND having as his motive the potential to profit financially as a result of doing do. I don’t know what specifically he went around saying nor if it was over the top or mild. I don’t know if he actually did or did not stand to earn $43million a year for selling diagnostic kits for a non-existant syndrome (as per wikipedia) or any of the other things he stood accused of. I don’t know if he did or did not over-egg the pudding in his Lancet papers or in any public engagement related to his supposed findings.
.
But I do know that others later showing a slight statistically significant result about something related would not be enough to clear him of what he is accused of doing over all. It is perfectly possible for someone to profit financially by distorting evidence to blow light molehills of evidence into apparent mountains. You really can’t clear people accused of doing that by pointing out that a molehill of evidence of something somewhat related can be dredged up.
.
Some details on what he is actually accused of is here: https://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5347
.
With respect to “anti-vax” name I’ve heard is “Jenny McCarthy”. So I really don’t think much of the whole “anti-vax” brouhaha is “about” this person. Of course the specific accusations of malfeasance in publishing a particula paper are about him.
.
Much of the alarm surrounding “anti-vax” issues was about what would (and did) happen with diseases. Honestly, I have no idea if what you claim about the establishment’s treatment of him is true or not. (And I’m not curious enough to look into it.)
My prediction is the Ukrainian army mounts a Christmas offensive. Here’s why.
ISW says â#Ukrainian officials have indicated that Ukrainian forces plan to continue offensive operations over the coming winter to capitalize on recent battlefield successes and prevent #Russian forces from regaining the battlefield initiative.â
But⌠âUS Director for National Intelligence (DNI) Avril Haines assessed on December 3 that the pace of the war in Ukraine will slow over the winter so both sides can refit, resupply, and reconstitute, despite evidence that conditions on the ground favor a renewed offensive and despite the demonstrated tendency of Ukrainian forces to initiate new counteroffensive efforts relatively quickly after the previous effort has culminated.[6]â
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-december-4
Official Ukrainian channels arenât talking, as usual, but they are leaving cute hints. Like this video of a female soldier dancing in the snow with the caption: âMorning Pikachu Dance. Winter has never been an obstacle to a good mood.â https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1599644738189070337?s=20&t=ZKps-JoY4y0IJ6D-Ft2euA
OSINT posts are reporting the ground and lakes are starting to freeze in Northern Ukraine. The surface conditions may be conducive to military ground operations in a couple of weeks.
https://twitter.com/davidhelms570/status/1599768662260428800?s=20&t=ZKps-JoY4y0IJ6D-Ft2euA
Meanwhile the UK Ministry of Defense says that russian public support for the war has suddenly fallen sharplyâŚ. And âWith Russia unlikely to achieve major battlefield successes in the next several months, maintaining even tacit approval of the war amongst the population is likely to be increasingly difficult for the Kremlin.â
https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1599295144825704448?s=20&t=UQXbaP38OE07VtpMWxN7fQ
Lucia, first thank you for hosting an open forum for expressing “rank exploits/musings.” Please don’t feel there is any implied obligation on your part to care to vet each one. And I hope you believe that I am not trying to sell anyone anything or achieve fame.
.
My only interest is to share my experiences and research that someone might find important and hope that others might share theirs.
.
I am not surprised if you did not hear of Andrew Wakefield or that others heard of him as a discredited con man. I was completely uninterested until my brother shared his interest and got me to watch Vaxxed when it premiered in 2016. It streamed on Prime for about a month and was available on Vaxxedthemovie.com but has since been pulled. I did a few hours of independent research afterwards. I read Wakefield et al(98) retracted and did some critical thinking. Did the top neonatal gastroenterologist just decide to go on an unethical crime spree or did he ask too sensitive a question to be scientifically ethical to ask? I did not see an ethical problem but I did see a political one. As you point out, our public health depends on people having faith in vaccine safety to gain their informed consent for themselves and their children. If we lose that trust then we all become more vulnerable to communicable diseases.
.
But is that trust broken by finding a flaw in the approved vaccines? I would think not as long as the issue is addressed and corrected as soon as possible. I would not even have big problem with the continued use while the jury remained watching the evidence for a few years. How easy it would have been to do a retrospective study on those getting the MMR versus those not getting it or taking three separate shots spread over time. My take at looking at Wakefield’s story and the evidence, especially the CDC author’s confession 10 years later, and felt it was another example of bureaucratic politics and coverup.
.
Jenny McCarthy briefly spoke out but she is not a scientific authority. Neither is Robert DiNero, both of whom have autistic children. DiNero personally approved of the film but was not willing to take a career hit by going against his own film festival’s ban on it. Sad.
Wakefield deserves the scorn he has received. An attorney that was suing for vaccine damage had him on the payroll for two years to the tune of 400k prior to the publishing of his paper and that fact was not disclosed in the paper. He also altered the data to better fit his narrative.
Godlee, Fiona.?
BMJ : British Medical Journal (Online); London Vol. 342, (Jan 6, 2011). DOI:10.1136/bmj.d22 That transcript included the anonymized data from which his subjects were selected.
Ron
Significance is in the eye of the beholder
Google xkcd: Significant – PSY 210: Basic Statistics
Your problem is at least threefold.
Say peanut butter causes severe autism. (It doesnât as far as we know).
All kids eat peanut butter.
All kids have vaccines.
Do we stop them eating peanut butter?
Do we report it as statistically significant?
You commented that it is only one of many causes.
So say that is true.
Iâm sure a meta study would throw up examples of a statistically significant link to every medication and food that we ingest.
In fact this is shown by MIMS which publishes side effects of medically used drugs.
So I will cut the good doctor some slack.
Letâs say just 100 basic foods are statistically associated with severe autism instead of the thousands there are.
This would mean that your vaccine worry is only one of 100 known statistically significant causes.
Letâs say 1 in 1000 kids has severe autism
That means that the vaccine is only responsible for a 1 in 100,000 chance of being a problem.
And that is overstating it in a big way.
–
People need someone or something to blame for everything that happens.
I have had enough tragedies in my life, in my families and friends life to sink a ship.
And lots of good times.
Spontaneity, chance, serendipity have to be accepted and appreciated.
–
Sorry Ron.
Not personal.
I get wrapt up in the statistics and probabilities and miss the people.
Will the Russian street get mad if Ukraine attacks on Christmas?
Mitch McConnell is agreeing to do an omnibus spending bill now instead of a short term funding bill until Republicans take over in January.
He is also agreeing to an amendment to the defense bill to give media companies a legal cartel to negotiate with social media about posting their content. All amendments were rejected that attempted to ensure this wouldn’t lead to demands for censorship as a condition of posting this content.
Russell Klier (Comment #216915),
I think you are correct that Ukraine will mount a winter offensive. Someplace the Russians don’t expect. The DNI guy sounds silly a pause so that “both sides can refit, resupply, and reconstitute” would be something Russia desperately needs.
The battle for Bakhmut, and along the entire 1000km front line, highlights the strategy of the new overall Russian commander.
.
Russia has moved to a defensive stance that uses the Russian massive advantage in artillery to inflict heavy casualties on Ukraine forces and to conserve their own forces. The Ukraine reports of Russian human waves attacks are pure Ukraine propaganda.
.
Reports of Ukraine casualties at Bakhmut alone are of a battalion equivalent in dead and wounded per day. As this is mainly an artillery battle heavily in Russian favor, the loss ratio highly favors Russia.
.
These battles are being fought close to Russian supply and at 1000km from Ukraine supply coming from the Polish border. This distance from Poland requires supply to be moved by rail, which is increasingly being degraded due to Russian attacks on Ukraine electrical grid as the majority of Ukraine rail is electrically powered.
.
As noted in many news accounts, Ukraine fires about 5k rounds of artillery shells per day where Russia fires about 20k per day. Ukraine fires in 2 days what the US produces in 2 weeks. A reading of the US reports show that heavy artillery ammunition being sent to Ukraine has almost dried up due to the depleted US stocks. Long term, this artillery imbalance will continue to grow in favor of Russia.
.
Resupply of tanks to Ukraine has almost totally ended as all available old Soviet stocks have already been sent. The west has refused to send NATO tanks due to supply and support issues. Russia has very large stockpiles of tanks and is continuing to produce more.
.
Modern war between major powers is largely determined by logistics, and Ukraine, and the west in general, is losing the logistical battle.
.
.
I have convinced myself that with not a lot of effort it can be shown that individual US Immigration Courts and individual Judges working in these courts have statistically significant differences in denial rates for asylum of immigrants after controlling for high leverage independent variables. Of course, convincing myself does not mean my methodology is correct. In this case I think it is.
The reason I go through these exercises is to determine whether I can show sufficient significance that others working closely in the field could and should have made a similar effort. I see in the literature a few efforts that are rather limited in scope, but nothing that shows the general problem of judges (actually lawyers selected by the Department of Justice) not interpreting the law in a reasonably like manner and further the Federal Government not appearing particularly concerned with the problem.
What does come through in some of these papers on this topic is that the authors judge any denial rate higher than that of the judges with the lowest rates (and those rates are very low) as being the problem. I have to wonder if this position is what limits in depth analyses of denial rates.
MikeN (Comment #216920)
âWill the Russian street get mad if Ukraine attacks on Christmas?â
Like the Hessians at Trenton, the russians will be so full of wodka that they wonât know it happened until after the first of the year.
âA Boozy Hessian Christmas Dinner, Crossing the Delaware, and The Birth of Our Nationâ
https://dannwoellertthefoodetymologist.wordpress.com/2016/12/25/a-boozy-hessian-christmas-dinner-crossing-the-delaware-and-the-birth-of-our-nation/
Mike M. (Comment #216923)
âThe DNI guy sounds silly a pause so that âboth sides can refit, resupply, and reconstituteâ would be something Russia desperately needs.â
I think it is disinformation designed to fool the russiansâŚ. Itâs the final event that convinced me itâs happening.
Ed Forbes (Comment #216924)
Show me your proof
Andrew P: “Wakefield deserves the scorn he has received.”
.
AndrewP, Thank you. It’s important to have all sides and I recall Wakefield specifically answering Deer’s charges. Do you have anything more that Deer’s seven-year project or Wakefield’s reply? I’m not sure any of us would look good after a king’s general warrant, especially for 7 years.
.
The original charge against Wakefield, IIRC, was that he did not get proper authorization from the London Hospital’s ethics board before commencing the study. Wakefield says that’s not true. Deer says it is. Then from that reasonable suspicion of a crime was the pretext to attack the paper and all the authors. Ten denounced Wakefield and said they did not have anything to do with the paper that had their name on it. The co-author that actually did the patient examinations could not say that so he was de-licensed. According to Wakefield that co-author was vindicated in court after many years and millions of his own legal fees. Does Deer mention this?
.
Deer’s charge that Wakefield profited as an expert witness is a valid charge of possible bias. It doesn’t seen unusual that a well published pediatric expert might be called to give expert testimony about pediatrics. Does that mean that he can no longer publish on a topic he testified on? Four hundred grand is a lot. Maybe the problem is there should be a limit to what experts can be paid. I donno.
.
The charge of falsification is serious. It’s what Thompson of the CDC confessed (on tape) to his team conspiring in 2004 on DeStefano(04) to cover up a statistically significant link found of autism to MMR. This was the main feature of Vaxxed the movie.
.
I see Deer charging Wakefield of incorrectly matching the maladies with the anonymous numbered patients. That is not as serious a falsification as having all your coauthors agree to through half the data in the trash, literally, in order to break the statistical significant threshold of correlation.
.
Wakefields paper’s claim is that there should be more study of MMR for correlation to autism. DeStefano’s claim on behalf of the CDC was that they did exhaustive investigation and found no influence of MMR on autism when they really did find some.
.
Wakefield and crew were ruined. The CDC investigators lived happily ever after. The head, Julie Gerberding, the one who authorized the DeStefano falsification went on to get the top job in Merck’s vaccine division.
Ron
Scientists going off the deep end for fame and $$ has happened before Wakefield and will happen after. So while that rhetorical question can be asked, asking it hardly suggest Wakefield is innocent of what he was accused of.
.
To clear him of what he was accused of, you need to engage what he was accused of and counter that evidence. Did he stand to make mucho $$$ from alternative replacement vaccines? That doesn’t seem to be in dispute. Did he exaggerate and/or lie about some all or most the 12 patients he reported on in his Lancet paper? (Parents said he did.)
But he didn’t lose his reputation over “finding a flaw”. He lost his reputation for appearing to have misrepresented evidence in a scientific paper. At least one kids parents said he just flat out lied about their kids dating symptoms that occurred before vaccination to afterwards.
.
Faking evidence in a scientific paper is a really, really bad thing even if someone later finds there might be a link between vaccines and some disease.
.
If misrepresenting what he lost his reputation for is the only path to redeeming his reputation, that would suggest, perhaps he actually deserved to lose it for the reasons he lost it which are unrebutted
.
AndrewP
This is what Wakefield lost his reputation for. If Ron (or anyone) wants to redeem him or claim he was treated unfairly, that’s one of the accusations they need to engage. And no, asking a rhetorical question is not engaging it.
Ron
You seems to be assuming they threw data in the trash for that reason. They may well have thrown it in the trash because they discovered that’s where it belonged.
.
And evidence suggest for good reason.
.
Maybe other people got away with things– or not. But that doesn’t mean Wakefield didn’t get what he deserved.
.
Thompson did not confess to a “cover up” nor a “conspiracy”.
https://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2016/03/22/andrew-wakefield-releases-the-trailer-for-his-william-thompson-video-slick-production-and-dishonesty/
Lucia, we often forget because of things like the Jan 6 hearings, but in the olden days I can remember where one was first presumed innocent. Reasonable doubt was given to the accusations, not the accused. I think that came from British law. Secondly, it used to be seen as unfair to pass judgment without hearing both sides in an equal forum, both subjected to cross-examination.
.
Reading Deer’s article indictment, if I were Wakefield’s attorney I would ask Deer. “Is it possible that the reason patient 11 started to show some symptoms at month 14 when they got the MMR at month 15 was because the patient was having a reaction to another vaccine? Let me ask that a different way. If you had a bad reaction to a shot would you delay or cancel future similar shots? Is that in fact a valid medical protocol? Did you ask the father 11 if the boy had any vaccinations before the MMR?”
.
I did not see the transcript of what I heard with my own ears in your linked article. It was like the NYT reporting and not finding anything on the Hunter laptop except evidence of possible splices.
.
My point is the picture can change abruptly on a story depending upon if it is the NYT or the NYP writing about Hunter’s laptop.
Thompson’s confession came slowly over the course of several phone calls over several months, each lasting 1-3 hours. The movie had clipped the most relevant parts but I later listened to the the last 3 hours of it, the most revealing parts. I am not going to ask you to find it or listen to it. I did not realize the whole thing is now gone, including the movie. I guess I was dreaming. I recant everything. You got me.
Russell,
Basic internet search works. The amount of intentional fictitious propaganda put out by both sides is extreme, but paying attention to both sides one can generally tease out something close to the âtruthâ
.
US running low on 155 mm ammo, Stinger, HARM, Javelin, GMLRS missiles to transfer to Ukraine â CNN sources
https://euromaidanpress.com/2022/11/18/us-running-low-on-155-mm-ammo-stinger-harm-javelin-gmlrs-missiles-to-transfer-to-ukraine-cnn-sources/
.
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/ukraine-pentagon-ammunition-shortage/
.
.
U.S. will help repair decimated Ukraine electric grid; rumors of Russian mobilization in Kherson grow
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/29/russia-ukraine-live-updates.html
.
Ukraineâs heavy losses in battles for Kherson revealed
https://www.plenglish.com/news/2022/12/01/ukraines-heavy-losses-in-battles-for-kherson-revealed/
.
In Ukraine, Bakhmut Becomes a Bloody Vortex for 2 Militaries
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/27/world/europe/ukraine-war-bakhmut.html
â BAKHMUT, Ukraine â For almost an hour, the stream of Ukrainian casualties in the eastern city of Bakhmut seemed unending: Ambulances, an armored personnel carrier and private vehicles all screamed to a halt, one after another, and disgorged the wounded in front of the cityâs only military hospital.â
.
.â One of the Pentagonâs frequent concerns is that the Ukrainians are firing ammunition at an unsustainable rate â especially in places like Bakhmut â under the false assumption that the Westâs supply of ordnance is unlimited, said the U.S. defense official, â
.
.
Very interestingly if you search on duckduckgo.com the first result that comes up for “William Thompson confession to Brian Hooker on DeStefano” is This. Otherwise Dr. Brian Hooker’s statement documenting the confession does not exist on Google.
.
I have a feeling that it will be hard to find anything but whitewash on Climategate at some point soon, if not already.
Ron Graf
That’s the standard before we send someone to jail. It’s not the standard for individuals to form opinions based on evidence.
.
Well, perhaps your Wakefield lawyer would ask that in some hypothetical trial. I would assume he wouldn’t ask “Could the reason the patient got the reported symptoms before being vaccinated was a supernatural teleconnection to the future vaccine?”
.
Well, you haven’t supplied a transcript to what you heard with your own ears.
.
Sure. And Wakefield writing, directing Vaxxed can also affect how material is assembled and slanted, possibly even in his own favor. And releasing his movie 6 years after the scandal can give him time to organize the spin.
.
I get why he wants to get his side of the story out. But this isn’t even like NYT vs NYP weight evidence differently and possibly with whatever bias they have. Vaxxed is Wakefield’s own production reporting his own side. Period.
.
it’s not a “confession”. Thompson doesn’t think it’s a confession.
The link took me to
Recent Studies Suggest COVID-19 Vaccinated People are Infecting Unvaccinated People
I don’t know why you find it interesting that’s the first result to that search. This obviously doesn’t report Thompson’s supposed “confession”.
.
No one is trying to “get” you.
.
But as far as I can tell your argument is that Wakefield says he did nothing wrong and wrote and directed a movie about it. The script of that movie is organized to convince people Wakefield did nothing wrong. We are (for some reason) supposed to assume he is innocent until “proven” guilty. And possibly, we are supposed to continue to think that until everyone on the planet has proven it to everyone else. Oh– and we evidently are supposed to ignorethat the rebuttals don’t address the actual accusations about his behavior but seem to move to a tangential point of whether there exists any snippet of evidence that MMR (or other) vaccines might cause autism– which even if there is such evidence, wouldn’t not erase the fact that Wakefield is accused of fabricating evidence— and there is credible evidence he did so.
Lucia,
You are made of stronger stuff than me. Or maybe you just have more patience.
SteveF, you are entitled to your opinion. You had made it up before knowing anything. Just keep that in mind. Once one makes that investment one has naturally biased themselves. I am not perfect but I try to keep an open mind. Courts of law where to civilians are opposing each other the standard is preponderance of evidence. In a criminal court where it is the state against an individual the evidence burden shift tremendously in the individual’s favor, whether jail is on the line or fine or even probation. There is good reason for this. The state has tremendous resources to investigate and litigate, along with the pubic presumption of unbiased prosecution of wrongdoers. Having the state even investigate you starts you at a severe disadvantage and hit to your credibility.
.
While it is true that I did not hear all of Deer’s allegations from his 7-year investigation, everyone here has also not hear Wakefield’s response, not that he is required to outside of a court. In fact, there is good reason to believe that Wakefield has responded. Good luck finding it. I am not sure what link Lucia clicked on or whether her browser is blocking this site where Brian Hooker makes his allegations but it is definitely blocked from Google’s search index. That should tell you something.
Lucia, try this link and compare to the one I posted in my prior comment. They should both go to “CDC Vaccine autism fraud”.
https://vaccineimpact.com/2016/cdc-whistleblower-scientist-given-huge-bonus-and-asked-to-rewrite-fraudulent-vaccine-autism-study/
I found here on duckduckgo after 30 min of scrolling. There is no notations other than the date heading in 2014. I don’t expect you to listen to them but if you do I would do the latest one. At least you can see they exist.
.
Hooker slowly built a relationship with Thompson and Thompson begged Hooker for forgiveness for what he had allowed to happen after recounting in detail the pressures put on him and other researchers to destroy the evidence that MMR vaccine showed an effect on African American children. I call it a confession for than a whistleblowing. Thomson was later rehabilitated by the CDC and got his job back in exchange for Thompson changing his view that the cause was the MMR vaccine rather than socio-economic factors. As I wrote previously, my brother thinks that the deficiency in B-12, combined with the oxidative load to the system of the vaccine throws and epigenetic switch in some children at an early enough developmental stage.
Edit: Here is a link to a single page of defense of Wakefield by a single doctor on page 4 of results on duckduckgo. All other results are Deer’s allegations.
http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v15n06.shtml
Ed Forbes (Comment #216934)
December 5th, 2022 at 7:04 pm
“US running low on 155 mm ammo, Stinger, HARM, Javelin, GMLRS missiles to transfer to Ukraine â CNN sources”
—————–
I thought that had a familiar sound to it. Yep:
.
Ed Forbes (Comment #211295)
April 15th, 2022 at 9:30 pm
“Once again NATO finds itself running short of munitions …
NATO, including the US, is fast approaching the point where they either stop sending resupply or seriously drawdown their strategic reserve below their own projected requirements.
“Germany has already reached this point and is cutting back on resupply to Ukraine. The US is fast approaching this point. Production can not be easily ramped up and restocking the high tec weapons already delivered to Ukraine is projected to take several years.”
————-
I am very skeptical of the “running out of ammo” claim. We are spending three quarters of a trillion a year on the military; NATO as a whole is well over a trillion. I don’t know what that is for if we are not capable of fighting a war much bigger than the one in Ukraine. “Running out of munitions” sounds like an excuse to not provide more while hiding the real reason for not providing more aid to Ukraine. That would also explain how we were running out after a month and are still running out 8 months later.
First Ron–
I find it interesting that rather than trying to actually defend Wakefield of what he is accused of, you want to focus on Thompson. Even if you can support the anti-vax view of what happens in the Thompson issue, that doesn’t clear Wakefield. To clear Wakefield you need to address the accusations against Wakefield, which you are studiously avoiding doing.
.
So I’m rather reluctant to go off on this red-herring. Still I suppose you are trying to give proof of what Thompson “confessed”.
To prove that, you need to get something written or said by Thompson. That link is no such thing.
So, overall:
1) Not written by Thompson. (And it even doesn’t provide word for word quotes from Thompson. So that’s a fail right there.
2) Even Hooker -whose letter is posted–does not use the word “confess”. (The editor of your link article does not.)
.
3) Thompson’s was planning to write paper in 2016 that says MMR vaccine does NOT cause autims. (Which suggests he doesn’t think it does– not withstanding whatever this Hooker guy interprets from a set of disjointed discussions over time.)
.
4) Hooker (author letter at your link provides a list of what he calls “facts” which he then does NOT provide evidence to support. Maybe he has elsewhere — but he doesn’t in that article.
For example: wrt to first “fact”.
.
Hooker does not provide QUOTES to let us decided if it’s a “fact” that CDC scientists “colluded to cover up a relationship between the timing of the MMR vaccine and autism in African Americans that was first discovered in November of 2001”. That’s likely because he doesn’t have quotes that support that conclusion. (Merely saying that one of the many t-test showed a stat. sig result and that wasn’t reported isn’t proof of “collusion” and not reporting it isn’t a “cover up”. That’s the only evidence in anything I’ve read to support the slightest claim of a “cover up”– and it doesn’t suppor the claim. Not by a long shot.)
.
All his other stated “facts” have similar lack of support– at least wrt to what is given in that article. A list of claimed facts with no actual link to support can hardly prove your contention about Thompson’s “confession”, nor even the other red-herring you want to go on which is the CDC’s claimed lies on vaccines.
.
(I actually laughed when among the list of “facts” was the line “it seemed that Dr. Thompsonâs superiors “. A what “seems” to someone is obviously not something that belongs ina list of “facts”.)
I’m not under the delusion that the CDC is a bunch of saints who are always objective. I’m just saying you are linking things that contain a lot of bluster and no proof.
.
Now… I did go on the red herring. But I would suggest that if you want to convince people that WAKEFIELD was mistreated you stick to (a) addressing the actual accusations against
Wakefield and (b) provide evidence those accusations were not true. And no, “innocent until providen guilty” cannot be the standard for rebutting investigations that deem him guilty. Can the investigations be wrong? Sure. But you are supposedly trying to rebutt them. That can’t be done by referring to a common principle of law– otherwise we have to consider everyone in jail “innoncent” merely because someone claims they don’t believe the result. We don’t need to do so. (Heck, other than the jury and the legal system no one has to consider them innocent before they are tried.)
.
And honestly, at this point, based on the lack of attempt to address the actual accusations against Wakefield, I’m leaning toward: he’s probably guilty of what they accused him of.
.
Could the CDC also be a den of vipers? Sure. It’s not either or. But that wouldn’t make Wakefield innoncent or undeserving of his fat.
Ron,
My reaction to this:
http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v15n06.shtml
It’s letter of support and an opinion piece. It does nothing to rebut a single accusation.
Ron-
If you think those tapes re informative vis-a-vis your claim you are going to need to tell me some time stamps. I started listening to the last on– and it’s clearly got to do with discussing stuff to committees… Chit chat about having coffee with someone who was a “great guy a young guy….” who somone suggest he probably had a great tan.
Ron Graf,
“You had made it up before knowing anything.”
.
You have not a clue what you are talking about, and that is unfortunate. There is zero credible evidence that MMR vaccines cause autism. Zero. That is what I base my opinion on; it is not pre-conceived.
.
I supported myself comfortably for many years identifying and solving complicated technical problems for chemical companies all over the world. My work was always 100% based on credible data and a basic understanding of how things actually work. The biggest obstacles I faced in solving those problems were not figuring out how to solve the problems, but getting past the pre-conceived notions of people working for those chemical companies… notions rarely based on credible evidence and often confounded/amplified by a misunderstanding of how things actually work.
.
My youngest daughter had (fortunately) relatively mild autistic symptoms which became very evident by the time she was about 2. I read at length about the causes of autism at that time. The photo you see next to my name is her at age 5. She is now nearly 15, beautiful, an utter sweetheart, and aside from a relatively slow pace of speech (in both Portuguese and English) seemingly ‘normal’, but she still struggles in school and sometimes has problems dealing with other kids… who are not always kind to someone who seems in any way different.
My personal preference for the discussion on potential causes of autism would be to look at all the analyses to date and not concentrate on one person’s analysis and the consequences of the claims made for that study. This one incidence will say very little or nothing about where we stand in finding causes for autism. Tentative conclusions with the appropriate uncertainties attached will come from the multitude of analysis published on this matter.
I am familiar with individuals making claims about autism from which they have profited while not delivering the relief promised. I would be very suspicious of anyone making unqualified claims about autism and particularly where there is money involved for the claimer.
If the argument being made about this one case here is that it points to a general attitude by the powers that be that could inhibit research and the reporting of research on autism that should be made by showing a pattern of similar cases.
If one wants to show similarities of this case to climate research and its conclusions it becomes somewhat backwards from what I see posed here. Much of the criticism of climate research is the lack of emphasizing the uncertainty of the claims made which in the autism case under discussion here the criticism of the “victim” would appear to be much the same.
Mike
Notice the lack of 155mm artillery shells in this latest package
.
Nov 23, 2022
According to the Pentagon, the package includes:
Additional munitions for NASMAS
150 heavy machine guns with thermal imagery sights to counter Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)
Additional ammunition for HIMARS
200 precision-guided 155mm artillery rounds
10,000 120mm mortar rounds
High-speed Anti-radiation missiles (HARMs)
150 High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWVs)
Over 100 light tactical vehicles
Over 20,000,000 rounds of small arms ammunition
Over 200 generators
Spare parts for 105mm Howitzers and other equipment
The $400 million is being sent to Ukraine through the Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA), which allows President Biden to send arms straight from US military stockpiles.
.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/11/ukraine-running-on-empty.html
.
https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3227217/400-million-in-additional-assistance-for-ukraine/
Ken
Yes. And further, I would like to know what claim someone is advancing rather than just be provided ‘evidence’ for various and sundry claims. Honestly, at this point, I don’t know if Ron’s “main” issue (for which he is providing evidence is)
1) Wakefield is innocent of what all the accusations he was accused of.
2) Wakefield is innocent of some subset of the accusations he was accused of.
3) Even if Wakefield was guilty of all he was accused of he was treated worse that other people would have been.
4) The CDC specifically has committed some sort of malefeasance vis-a-vis reporting on the connection between thimerosol and autism.
5) The CDC has has committed some sort of malefeasance vis-a-vis reporting on the connection between thimerosol and something else (tics?).
6) The CDC is cautious than he thinks they should be about reports on connections between ill effects and vaccines.
7) Simlar to 5&6 but replace CDC with “medical community”.
8) Thompson “confessed” something and recounted actual malfeasance of some sort.
Every single one of these claims is a different thing. To rebut it, you have to state it clearly and then provide evidence. It can’t be that “Thompson felt he had a hard time publishing his paper on tics so Wakefield is innoncent!” (Going last to first, I’m listening to the last recording here… and sigh.. 22 minutes in it’s just a researcher relating rather mundane events surrounding publishing of his paper from the inside of a federal agency that requires clearance. Honestly, it could hardly be more because it’s a chit-chat format. I’m not sure if I’m going to listen to the other bajillion minutes without some guide to which minutes are supposed to be important.)
I believe Ron has noted that by “throwing away” one half the data the conclusions from the paper in question became statistically not significant. That means that the significance level was not exceeded by much with all the data. Ron, can you provide information about the paper with regards to any sensitivity tests run. Removing data that might have been questionable would be part of sensitivity testing. Also what was the sample size before and after removing one half of it and what were the t or z values. Or perhaps an F value.
Ed Forbes,
Since shells for artillery is a “sensitive” matter…. there appears not nearly enough production to support Ukrainian use rate…. the number shells being sent may be withheld/hidden to not tell the Russians where the Ukraine stands on artillery capability.
Lucia asks: “Could the CDC also be a den of vipers? Sure. Itâs not either or. But that wouldnât make Wakefield innocents or undeserving of his fate.”
.
My interest is more whether CDC is a pit of vipers rather than if Wakefield is a saint. And also, I am more interested in if the CDC covered up important safety data to protect Merck, where the director of the CDC soon got a top job at rather than whether the Wakefield spruced up the data in his study to show a syndrome connecting an intestinal disorder and autism, with a possible association to vaccine injury.
.
I found the movie after an exhuastive search on a site obviously of an anti-vaxxer, who predicted correctly that her Youtube post would be scrubbed, but offers people a dropbox access to the movie in parts. 3:15 minutes in you can hear a clip of William Thompson giving what I would call a confession to Brian Hooker.
.
https://christianobserver.net/vaxxed-full-length-documentary-full-uncut-interviews/
Ron,
If that’s your interest or point, maybe you should try to advance that point directly rather than introducing tangents. And then make that point. It would certainly be interesting if the CDC covered up important safety information. But the fact that this would be interesting doesn’t mean there is evidence they did so.
That’s a link to a web site that itself has a link to a video that is has remained on youtube for 6 years (and so obviously not scrubbed.)
The move is runs 1:27:34. Could you give a hint about where in the movie I might hear the bit you consider a “confession”? A time stamp within 5 minutes might be nice.
Ron,
Could you cut and paste the specific link you think has a confession at 3:15 minutes. I’d like to find the bit.
Ukraine added a new weapon to its arsenal⌠Long range kamikaze drones. They hit three russian air bases, one was 300 miles from Ukraine [nearer to Moscow than Ukraine].
Some speculation from the OSINT crowd:
1.The drones are refitted recon drones that were manufactured at a factory in Ukraine during the soviet period.
2.The drones were fitted with transponders salvaged from downed russian aircraft so they looked like friendlies to russian air defenses.
3.The russians robbed the air defense units from the interior air fields to replace battlefield units that were destroyed by the HARMS missiles we sent to Ukraine.
I always wonder at times like these if this will be the issue that causes the russians to snap and unleash weapons of mass destruction.
The damage was not extensive:
ENGELS AIR FORCE BASE – SARATOV, one Strategic bomber damaged:
https://twitter.com/NLwartracker/status/1599970276707475456?s=20&t=njst0lqwXaQpmy0Za7_g_w
https://twitter.com/MT_Anderson/status/1600133185047707651?s=20&t=njst0lqwXaQpmy0Za7_g_whttps://twitter.com/MT_Anderson/status/1600133185047707651?s=20&t=njst0lqwXaQpmy0Za7_g_whttps://twitter.com/MT_Anderson/status/1600133185047707651?s=20&t=njst0lqwXaQpmy0Za7_g_w
https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1599943675060310018?s=20&t=njst0lqwXaQpmy0Za7_g_w
https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1600133489294118914?s=20&t=njst0lqwXaQpmy0Za7_g_w
KURSK AIR BASE. oil storage on fire.
https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1600041823203827712?s=20&t=KqhO_iaRtG4krmeSwdqvSA
OK…the video (out of several you mean) seems to be this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ew3nwdvh4pe1ye6/vaxxed.mp4?dl=0
I don’t hear a confession to anything. A confession requires something to be specified. That’s the “great shame” and “part of the problem” quote in the article I linked above. What’s he confessed to? Nothing. What’s the problem he’s been part of? We don’t know.
After that phone call, Wakefield plops video– so not the phone. So the phone call is assembled to something else done at some other time. So it doesn’t refer to the phone call. There is no confession on that phone call– and as far as I can tell no confession.
.
Others can go look, listen and decide for themselves. But it doesn’t sound liek a “confession” to any specific identifiable thing.
.
Or if you think there is a “confession”, tell me what he’s confessed to and point to where he says he’s confessing to that.
.
(I mean… yeah…later he thinks the CDC is “paralized” about anythikng related to autism. That’s an opinion, it’s not a crime, it’s not a cover up, it’s not collusion. And it can’t be Thompson’s confession for which he feels shame because he doesn’t consider himself part of that.)
An attempt to change the subject.
.
The government may not use private actors to do that which is prohibited to the government, such as censoring speech. The prohibition includes providing inducements to private actors and/or threatening private actors with consequences.
.
Defenders of Old Twitter argue that censoring news at Biden’s request was OK because Biden was only a candidate and not in the government. Set aside the involvement of the FBI, which is a whole ‘nother kettle of fish.
Is there a meaningful difference between a candidate for President and the President?
Don’t requests from a candidate carry the implication of being backed by government power if the candidate is elected?
If mere candidates are different, can the incumbent President’s campaign do that which is not permitted to the government?
.
My answers are no, yes, and no.
MikeM
From the point of view of the law? There is a mega-sh*t-ton of difference.
.
Should Twitter have censored for a candidate? No. I think it is shameful for a large platform that gives some appearanced of openness to censor a politically charged story at the request of a candidate.
.
To your other rhetorical questions:
Perhaps. But candidates fail to help those who helped them all the time.
Interesting question for the legal beagles.
Presidents themselves can’t do much to help something like Twitter. But political parties can.
Mike M,
I think the question of a candidate versus office holder is secondary to a more relevant question: The FBI had the laptop for months before the Post story. The FBI for certain knew it was 100% authentic, and knew the Biden family was selling influence/access. The fact that the FBI warned social media companies about likely “Russian disinformation” in the couple of months before the elections was most likely an attempt to push social media companies block the the spread of information about the laptop…. which they new Giuliani had given to the NY Post. Almost certainly the FBI also provided critical information about the laptop to the Biden campaign and others to help prepare a PR strategy when the Post published about the laptop… those 50 “intelligence” bigwigs had to have been informed by someone that the laptop story would soon break.
.
All 100% consistent with the FBI’s willful interference in the 2016 election and undermining of the Trump administration… before it even took over! IMO, the biggest problem the country faces is that far too much power has been ceded by Congress to the ‘permanent bureaucracy’. That bureaucracy is strongly aligned with Democrats, and quite willing to harm Republicans whenever they think it is ‘necessary’. The only path out of this conundrum is to take most power away from bureaucrats and punish severely (long prison sentences) any caught using their positions to influence politics. Only Congress can do that, and it will only happen if Republicans control both houses of Congress and the Presidency. Could happen in January 2025, but with Trump running, it is unlikely Republicans can gain the trifecta they need; if Trump gets the nomination, a Democrat wins the Presidency, if he doesn’t get the nomination, he forms a third party and a Democrat wins the Presidency. All very discouraging.
.
I keep hoping for a bolt from on high, but it hasn’t happened so far.
Steve,
A possible explanation but not a likely explanation.
.
The US is not reticent on proclaiming the amount of 120mm shells it provides and these fall in the same general category.
.
The US and NATO was historically deficient in maintaining the large stockpiles of ammunition needed for protracted combat vs a major power such as the Soviet Union.
.
Production and stockpiles of munitions after the end of the Cold War has declined significantly since the focus was then on low intensity conflicts, such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
.
The likely answer is the US military is unwilling to further reduce its stocks of 155mm ammunition at a time with escalated tension with China
lucia,
Can the incumbent Presidentâs campaign do that which is not permitted to the government? Real question.
SteveF,
I agree that the FBI involvement is HUGE.
I watched some of the videos on the Vaxxed issue and what I heard and saw was accurate information from my experiences with autism on the timing and the extent of behavioral changes in autistic individuals. What was missing was any details of the paper that we are talking about here. There was very much an emotional content in the production of those videos that in my view would detract from a scientific view of the situation. There were criticism of how public health had handled some vaccine issues, but that in and of itself says nothing about an association between vaccines and autism.
Ron, if you are looking to criticize public health for their actions, I think you picked the wrong case. It is kind of like picking Trump to further a legitimate political stance.
MikeM
Of course they can and do all the time. They can, for example, run political ads for the President on television.
.
I think you need to refine your question and then submit it to legal specialists who know case and SCOTUS rules relevant to that specific question.
Ken, Thank you for watching the movie and joining the discussion here, especially as we know the topic is very close to home for you and the same to SteveF. Why I didn’t turn away from my brother and tell him I wasn’t interested is that I know he has spent many thousands of hours researching the science around this topic and similar ones. He had followed Wakefield’s case even before the Thompson confession. So the movie was very interesting to him and it was for me because of the science and backstory he caught me up on. I did not mean to bring this topic up but I suppose that experience influenced me to watch the CDC behavior on the Covid’s vaccine safety with a close eye.
.
Ken wrote: “If one wants to show similarities of this case to climate research and its conclusions it becomes somewhat backwards from what I see posed here.”
.
Respectfully, I disagree the main point is not
about covering up uncertainty. It’s about abuse of power to corrupt information or establish consensus for political/financial gain. For example, Kamala Harris said in October 2020 that she would not ever consent to taking a vaccine associated with Trump. In other words she was telling people they should not trust to give their consent. After the election, with the very same vaccine, she would call anyone who did not comply with mandatory vaccination, a national security threat. The military just this weekend lifted their ban on vaccine refusnick’s on the behest of incoming majority leader McCarthy.
.
I think the anti-vaxer slur given by SteveF against the journal that published the CDC VAERS data was what caught me off guard. Now I realize that this is a very sensitive issue for him and many others. I think it is also important that the powers that be do not vilify investigators. This can have just as negative effect on the progress of science as the con-men, which I still do not believe Wakefield is or was one.
“…which I still do not believe Wakefield is or was one.”
.
You are entitled to your opinion, and so am I: he has shown himself to be dishonest, published falsified data, and stood to personally gain a fortune if the MMR vaccine was no longer used as a result of the public alarm he was trying to create. IMO, he is worse than a con man.
Ron
There is no Thompson confession. Or if you are going to call it a confession, please add what he confessed to.( Murder? Adultery?) Then link to the the material that shows him confessing to that specific thing.
.
I have above engaged your claim about the bit shortly after minute 3 in Vaxxed. It is clearly not a confession. It is highly misleading to persist in calling that a “confessions” when it obviously is not a confession of anything concrete.
Ron,
The Vaxxed story doesn’t make a remotely reasonable case that there was abuse of power to corrupt information etc.
.
That Kamala Harris said something is true. But it hardly bolsters your case against her tendency to shift with the political winds to try to claim it’s someone related or analogous to this Vaxxed case.
.
Sure. But that doesn’t mean people whether in power or not can’t investigate or criticize people who make bad arguments, do sloppy work or appear to have falsified data in a journal.
.
Sure. But though you say you think vilifying investigators has a negative effect on progress of science, you nevertheless appear to be vilifying those who investigated Wakefield. And you seem fairly willing to vilify the CDC — who also do investigations.
If you think investigators shouldn’t be vilified you ought to apply your policy evenly. Or you perhaps should be more precise in what you mean by “vilify”.
.
Investigators investigated Wakefield. Those investigators came to a conclusion you disagree with. You are welcome to believe the investigators were wrong. But you can’t possibly expect to change the mind of other people who agree with the investigators because you provide nothing to rebut what those investigators found.
Lucia: “But that doesnât mean people whether in power or not canât investigate or criticize people who make bad arguments, do sloppy work or appear to have falsified data in a journal.”
.
I absolutely agree that the people who break the rules or their oaths should be investigated, exposed and punished appropriately. If you think that there are no politically motivated investigations and punishments I think I am just in a different news feed than you.
.
If you agree that misconduct can be committed by the investigators just as much as by the target then one need to look at both stories and all the underlying facts not to be fooled. Part of the problem is that today, more and more, one side has undue influence and control of the underlying facts and their dissemination. It was alarmingly difficult to find the facts that I had available just a few years ago.
.
I am not trying to change the topic here but my interest in climate is similar to my interest in integrity in the medical establishment. If you think things are just peachy right now again, we have different news feeds then. I see a general problem with reproducibility in science papers, not just Wakefield’s alleged sprucing the facts on his case studies. Part of that is normal investigator bias. That can be combatted by more research conducted by rivals and their competing hypotheses. What is a threat to everyone and the system as a whole is the politicization of science, starting with control of narratives and approved hypotheses versus “unapproved.”
.
I know that Steve Mc got smeared by the BBC just a while back with a full-length documentary on Climategate (for to inoculate the young against con-men and weak thinking). I will look for it. It should come up on top of the search results. The truth on Climategate that you and SteveF and others remember will be very difficult for you to find more and more, I predict. That is, unless Elon is a tipping point and we start an information openness movement of something against censorship.
Ron
I haven’t said nor suggested any such thing and don’t think it.
.
Sure. But you can’t be blind to the problems with one of the sides just because you perceive them and “underdog”. Vaxxed as a movie has big problems. It is extremely tendentious and takes the 60 minutes script for putting together stories and puts it on steriods. You can see that at “minute three” of the supposed “confession” you pointed me to. That is the words of demogogic practice.
.
I don’t know why you once again intimate that the reason you can’t convince me to agree with your view on Wakefield is that I don’t read the right news feeds or think things are ‘peachy’. The situation isn’t “either Wakefield was mistreated” or “things are peachy and those high up never use their political power unfairly”. If you want to convince people Wakefield was mistreated, you have to address the case against Wakefield. Not tell people “Steve McIntire was smeared” while intimating this tells us anything about Wakefield. It doesn’t.
Lucia, I just Googled “Climategate” and got 9 debunking articles and one truthful, it was Forbes. This is for a topic that has support of a major political party and industry. Think about what journalists or publishers want to hitch their wagon to expose to Wakefield, Hooker and Thompson’s story or how much fight. One that did was Del Bigtree, who before doing so was the producer for a long-running daytime popular medicine show, “The Doctors.” Now Bigtree is a blogger getting blocked and deleted and survives on the very loyal following of a group of parents of vaccine injured (or not) parents.
Thimerosal (merthiolate), has never been used in the MMR vaccine according to the CDC. It was removed from all childhood vaccines in 2001. The incidence of autism was about 1 in 150 children in 2000 and had increased to 1 in 44 by 2018. If one were of a mind to, one could claim that removing thimerosal has increased the incidence of autism.
I havenât looked, but my impression is that vaccination rates for children havenât changed much for decades. To a first approximation it doesnât seem likely that there is any connection between vaccines and autism.
Ron
You keep repeating this strategy of trying to clear Wakefield by smearing other people. It’s a failed one. If you want to redeem Wakefield, you need to find a positive argument for why one should think Wakefield is not guilty of that which he was accused of.
Lucia, you seem to want to hitch me to defending Wakefield against Deer’s allegations. I see now that Wakefield sued. I am sure that if I had access to Wakefield’s defense testimony against the net’s flooded list of repeats of Deer’s and Offit’s attacks I would be able to defend him much better. But even the whole plausibility of the vaccine litigation con-man fake expert narrative does not seem to reconcile with a lot of circumstances.
.
1) Wakefield worked very hard to achieve a prominent career as a top research physician in his field, hardly someone looking for easy money. There are professional expert witness physicians, like for back injury worker’s comp claims. Yes they need to be exposed.
.
2) Wakefield’s “fraud,” if Deer did not spruce his results, was lightly exaggerating the evidence of a gastro-autism link, with an exaggeration of the possible vaccine correlation. Also, Wakefield did not get the proper hospital signatures on his use of their facility for research use. He abused his privileges. These are weak beer in my book to make him a war criminal, even if true.
.
3) Deer asserted that Wakefield’s gastro-autism link has never been reproduced. Even in the small research that I did today that looks like a clear lie. After that MD’s article standing up for Wakefield and the neutrician and gut health connections found to autism, I did a Google scholar search on it and there are many articles connecting autism to gastro symptoms. Deer did spruce his research right there. De-license him. Wait. he’s an investigative journalist with ties to big pharma? What? If that is true he is a paid hitman. I may look into this later.
.
4) Wakefield’s claim was too weak to win anything in vaccine court. He was a bad con man. A call for more research on MMR vaccine is not a fact argument. But not only the CDC but many health organizations around the world started looking into MMR. And, by the way, it seems like it is a fact that African American children ran a non-random risk from the MMR vaccine in developing autism. And the CDC did not think it was their obligation to share that fact. And, we only know this today because of a whistleblower that told an autistic child’s dad the truth after many hours and phone calls over months. But it was not a confession. And nobody without a few days on their hands can find any evidence about it not. It’s almost like it never happened.
DeWitt,
My favorite candidate for the cause of autism is the development of large format flat-screen TV’s….. oh, and ever faster microprocessors, more farm raised seafood, the fall of the Soviet Union, and…. well, the list is probably endless. YMMV.
Ron, I probably see much the same problems as you do with climate science and other sciences in general. Much of what I see as problems are what is ignored and not so much the analysis that are published, although part of what is ignored includes criticisms of published analysis.
However, I would avoid making my cases by obsessing on a single apparently flawed/failed study that the powers to be discredited.
I can recall a paper that was making a case counter to the prevailing concensus climate science view on a matter that I currently do not recall all the details. It was criticized by the powers that be for not including auto correlation in determining statistical significance. It was a proper and correct criticism. I would not think that would have been a good example for criticizing the climate power base even if I could draw examples where criticism was justified.
There is no dispute that the MMR vaccine, at least at some point in its iteration, caused neurologic tics. This is published from at least two different CDC investigators. When did any of us ever hear about that?
.
The medical community was steadfast for a decade that mercury based preservatives were safe for injection into babies and kids — until they took them out of the child vaccines quietly in 2001-2. Apparently just after they started their own studies in response to or against Wakefield.
.
Vaccines, besides preservatives and the live or attenuated antigens, have adjuvants like nano-particles of aluminum that
aggravatestimulate the immune system to look to fight something. Any one of the components can have different effects in different people, depending on age and genetic predisposition, their nutrition and other environmental influences including dose or number of recent vaccines. The world health science community is slowly understanding this. Thanks in small part to Wakefield and to Hooker-Thompson.The story with the FBI and Hunter Biden dates back to the DNC hack allegedly by Russia. The claim is this was a Russian disinformation attempt. At worst it is a Russia information attempt. The emails were real. The FBI is concerned about election interference. Itâs mostly the media using the term disinformation which is an attempt of partisan spin. The messenger may very well have nefarious motives as most political dirt does, but that is not a basis for censorship. These are being conflated intentionally. The FBI has real concerns but censorship here is wrong.
Tom Scharf,
But the laptop story was not a Russian disinformation effort (nor a Russian attempt to interfere in a US election). While they were issuing warnings about “Russian disinformation” they already had the laptop, knew was was in it, and knew it was 100% authentic.
.
I hope the Republicans can get internal email messages about the laptop and with whom the FBI communicated about the laptop prior to the 2020 election, but I hold little hope of that. As with Lois Lerner and her targeting of conservative organizations, all internal and external FBI communications will either be claimed to be privileged and not disclosed or will have been destroyed/lost in “routine system maintenance” or “in error”.
Ken, I agree with you that the focus on vaccineâs as a primary cause of autism is a losing argument if that is what one comeâs away with as the movies main point. I was mostly interested in the CDC coverup of their own autisms-vaccine finding, even if modest, coupled with what I consider extreme measures taken to destroy Wakefield. What I am now interested in is how the government of big tech or both manages to (almost) completely wash away the history of this case except as a cautionary tale to potential investigators not getting proper approvals for their hypotheses.
.
The movie also brought home to me to see the degree of seriousness of autism and the heartbreak these parents feel, especially with regressive autism, where they have a normal walking, talking 18-month-old and suddenly they are not. And they are never able to recover to a normal state for the rest of their lives. I think the movie helps us think clearly about weighing even the small risk this is due to vaccine injury against the very tiny risk to life impact of chicken pox and measles.
.
Thanks Ken and SteveF for allowing me to tell the vaccine safety people’s story. I probably was not the best person to do it justice.
Ron
I don’t think I’m hitching you. I’m just responding to your hitching yourself to defending him like this.
DeWitt: “The incidence of autism was about 1 in 150 children in 2000 and had increased to 1 in 44 by 2018. If one were of a mind to, one could claim that removing thimerosal has increased the incidence of autism.”
.
Thanks for your research and if you have been following the Vaxxed debate here. Your statistic is alarming to me even if I use the opposing argument that the statistics are growing due to awareness and expansion of diagnosis and inclusion.
.
Wakefield could have been wrong on his hunch to look at vaccines except that the CDC backed it up inadvertently, despite their intention to shoot if down. The fact that they covered it up and the person in charge of the CDC at the time soon went to work for the company that was protected is not a good look. But who’s looking? Nobody and it’s vanished from history. Which is also alarming.
Ron
This thing you call a “fact” is unproven. It’s a unsubstantiated claim.
People change jobs at take other jobs in their area of expertise.
That a company was ‘protected’ is also an unsubstantiated claim. Just because that’s the interpretation in the antivaxx narrative doesn’t make it a “fact”.
Your answer of Nobody is incorrect. Clearly the anti-vax camp is looking or you wouldn’t be talking about it. It’s also clearlyh not vanished from history– you are talking about your theory.
Lucia, I think I’ll respectfully rest on the direct topic of vax safety for the time being. I do not have time to do more fresh research and I don’t want to repeat myself and harm your valuable blog.
Thanks again.
.
In debating the topic, however, my interest wandered to media control of the politically controversies per se. We know now for a fact that censorship of political opinions was part of the normal business of Twitter. It may have even employed the majority of their staff.
.
I did a quick Google of Climategate and then also a search on Youtube to see what sample of returns I got. I won’t report back exactly what I found but I urge all to do the same.
.
Lucia: “It’s clearly not vanished from history. You are talking about it.” Yes. but I cannot maintain it.
.
History will soon be almost solely dependent upon digital history. Books will be still available but students will not regularly go to the library as a class assignment. They are learning online. I just found out online on a prominent youth education site that not only was the hockey stick vindicated, itâs worse than we thought. A recent study of the LGM shows that contrary to prior science, the LGM shows Holocene had no optimum. The temperature has been absolutely stable for 10,000 years until the last 150 years. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqtZdnpfgIc
.
There is also Michael Mann giving the history of Climatgate here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJ-bRB5HXtM
.
And here is a clip from the BBC’s 10th anniversary on Climategate here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lslIyHo6zg
.
Outside of a lukewarmer controlled blog none of us have much of a chance. You will make a worse case than I did to a fresh acquaintance or your school child after he just got done with an modern lesson on climate change. To quote Joe Biden: “You think I’m joking. I’m not.”
Now we know why there was nothing about the FBI in the Twitter files released over the weekend. Twitter’s top lawyer (and former FBI top lawyer) James Baker was actively working against the instructions from his boss (now former boss).
.
And in other news, advertisers are returning to Twitter.
.
Musk could come out of this not only as a hero, but really rich. OK, even richer. He has already cut Twitter’s expenses well below their prior revenues. If advertisers return, Twitter will be in an unfamiliar place: Operating in the black. If he can make Twitter a nicer place that is more welcoming of diverse opinions, they might get a big increase in users. Ad revenue’s should follow, perhaps pushing Twitter profits into billions per year.
.
Of course, it could still all fall apart. We shall see.
Interestingly Rich Muller seems to have escaped the censoring algorithm on Youtube. Clips of this 2010 lecture can still be found. That will not last long either I’m afraid unless there is a government intervention against censorship or something. I hate to ask the government to take more charge of anything. Any thoughts?
I see that Walker has pulled ahead of Warnock with about 2/3 of the vote counted. We shall see if he can carry the ball into the end zone. But I think he pulled ahead 4 weeks ago, but then got tackled sort of the goal line.
Ron
You are hardly a lone isolated voice.
.
I should note that when people defend Steve McIntire,they discuss details of the work and point to specific issues. They don’t defend steve by saying, “Look what they did to Andrew Wakefield”. Meanwhile your defense of Wakefield is “look what they did to Steve”. (And bear in mind, Steve’s paper is not retracted, no panel has taken away his license yada yada….) The reason for the assymetry in the defense of Steve vs. Wakefield is that it’s not hard to actually discuss the accusations of Steve directly and engage them. The opposite seems to be the case with Wakefield where the “defense” seems to be, “but sometimes other people are bad.”
.
So no: it is not the case that people will be unable to explain what Steve did or did not say, or defend what he found and so on.
MikeM
Likely because eyeballs are still at Twitter.
Lucia: `They donât defend Steve by saying, âLook what they did to Andrew Wakefieldâ.’
.
If the hockey stick topic came up at a vax blog I might be on (hypothetically) I certainly would compare Steve to Andrew Wakefield, an information suppression and establishment narrative control issue that they could relate to. They would fight me, especially DiNiro’s wife, whom I suspect is very liberal, and I would do about as well as I did here as they point to globs of contradictory evidence against me in plain sight.
.
Lucia, have you ever tried to explain a climate controversy to a person with only street knowledge on the topic? Or a child that just got the opposite lesson from 14 years of schooling? Real question.
Ron–
If you did that, it would be a pitiful way to defend Steve whose work is easily defended and explained. And many people can defend his work directly. If someone can do that for Wakefield, you haven’t managed to find that anyone.
And a question that is irrelevant to your discussion here because you aren’t discussing with people who can’t understand topics. Your problems are
you are making claims you cannot support. And when you try, the link doesn’t support it. E.G. Thompsons “confession”. You still have not responded to my pointing out the discussion at minute 3 which you call the confession it is not a confession. You just start going on about how authorities can be bad or how people criticized Steve Mc etc. That’s an evasion.
.
I can explain specific well defined topics to people who only have street knowledge. However, the topic rarely comes up in conversation.
I know you don’t “like” Beers report, but here:
https://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5347
Lucia, I am guessing perhaps you did not watch the movie, only the 5 second snip of the recording. At 2 min. in, after showing clips of measles news scares, the confession of Thompson is typed out by fingers at a keyboard.
.
âI have waited a long time to tell my story and I want to tell it truthfully. I was involved in deceiving millions of taxpayers regarding the potential negative side effects of vaccines. We lied about the scientific findings.â – William Thompson
.
If reading is more comfortable, here is a website that explains for on the movie better than I did.
Ron,
I scrolled to 3 minutes since that was the bit you suggested I look at.
Now: Obviouysly, Thompson isn’t actually typing and narrating that. It’s attributed to him. And what is the “lie” or “deception” he is supposedly confessing to?
The quote doesn’t say. Without stating what is being confessed it’s not a confession. So I ask you once again: What is he supposedly confessing. With a “what” it’s not a confession.
.
To defend that he “confessed” you need to collect together enough to discover what he confessed to. (And it would also be nice to get context. But I suspect Wakefield would have put it in if it was helpful to his case. So I would tend to think the “what” is left out because it’s either never stated by Thompson– and so no confession exists– or it’s to something… yawh…. )
.
Look, I know you are frustrated that you think things were “disappeared”. But that doesn’t make them exist. What you have is not “confession” because we don’t know what the “lie” or “concealment” supposedly was. (Nor who supposeddly really did it and so on and so on.)
My point is that the FBI defense is that they suspect the Russians were behind the DNC hack, which may be an attempt to interfere in elections. So they warn companies about ongoing efforts. The companies then make their own decisions as to how to handle suspect material. The companies then switch from must be proven false to disallow to must be proven true before allowing it. Iâm not saying this is the way it ought to be, Iâm saying this is likely how their thinking was.
This gave them an excuse to censor with plausible deniability.
My guess is the laptop data was shopped to the FBI and other high profile media institutions before the NY Post. When the people behind it saw the FBI wasnât going to act before the election they gave up and gave it Giuliani and the Post.
Ron–
The link makes it even clearer that Hooker provided that quote from what is characterized as many (secretly recorded) conversations chose to not provide more context. And note Hooker specifically does not provide us with any quote detailing what the lie was. Certainly, the article at the site could have spared a few more electrons to post a few more sentences surrounding the quote to clarify what the lie was. But no. That remains a mystery.
.
So it’s pretty clear that “confession” is not confessing to anything specific. Or if it was something specific, what that is is not provided to use.
.
It’s also clear from the article that the other people at the CDC did not think they were “lying” or “deceiving even if Thompson might have though they were. Sure, Thompson’s interpretation of the data may have differred from theirs. But that doesn’t mean he was right nor that they lied. Their opinion was “it couldn’t be right”. The would have had reasons for an opinion– but we aren’t told.
Well… figures can lie. But it’s also clear that the others in the meetings did not think
Thompson’s presentation of findings was right. As in: they thought it was wrong. (There are lots of ways analyses can be done wrong– and maybe Thompson doesn’t accept their view. But there may just be a disagreement.
.
We would need to see the numbers to gauge who was right. We don’t have it. (Thompson doesn’t seem to have supplied it though evidently he supposedly had it.)
.
We don’t know that was the reason “they” reduced the number of children. That would appear to have been Thompson’s guess about other people’s motives. Their motive could have been to follow the protocol as they understood it.
.
For what it’s worth– article also appears to contradicts itself on the protocol:
This says they would use two sources of information. That ought to mean they only use participants for whom they have both records. Using both would mean they get confirmation on data like age, birth place, health at birth and so on. And it means they would not use cases with only one source of info in the final analysis.
Then it says this
Which would mean that according to the plan they should pitch the cases with no birth certificates!
Who claims the plan was “explicit” and that it said this? Do we have the plan? Can the author of that post quote from the plan? I’m guessing Hooker says it’s “explicit”, doesn’t really know and we don’t have the plan. So the claim there was a deviation from the plan, is, sorry to say, unsupported.
Sure. And that happens in studies all the time. Because… well.. the plan.
Did Thompson release the analysis plan? ( Given the hook of the article, I’m guessing not. Or he did but it doesn’t support the view there was anything wrong with the analysis– so Hooker doesn’t quote it– just like he doesn’t quote what specifically Thompson supposedly lied about. But who knows, maybe the plan is around there somewhere.)
.
As conspiratorial as the blog makes thing sound, all the main authors seem to have done was eliminate the individuals for whom they had no birth certificates which the first description suggests was the plan all along. That would mean they need to have both documents. This sounds routine. (It’s also not unusual to peak around at “more” data not in the plan. People might want to see if a result holds up– it gives you more confidence.)
.
Well…. we don’t know what the “certain things” the higher ups wanted to do were. Whatever it was Thompson went along with it. (My guess is he was grumpy but didn’t think whatever he was doing was wrong at the time.)
.
But maybe higher ups looking at the protocol were pointing out his interpretation of the protocols was incorrect and that the plan saying they would use data from both documents would mean they would use data from kids who had both documents. (Birth certificates are a heck of a lot of accurate on age than school records.) Or maybe something else. If that’s what happened it could make him grumpy– but he’d go along.
.
A scientist disagrees with higher up’s decisions. But then goes along! Put out an APB!!
.
“It was decided” by whom? Clearly someone who didn’t try very hard to make sure it got destroyed because Thompson evidently kept his documents.
.
Did Thompson release his copies? Including the protocol? The article is silent. If he released them, the public could see them, run numbers and also verify whatever mangled claims might have come off secretly recorded telephone conversations.
.
For this article to have teeth:
1) We needs to know what Thompson was supposedly “lieing” about.
2) We needs to see and read the data plan.
3) We need the data.
There is just so much missing– it looks like a big bag of almost nothing to me.
âWarnock beats Walker in Ga. runoff, growing Democratsâ Senate majorityâ W. Post
Until the Republicans grow a pair and cast Trump to the devil this shit will continue. The only ones I have seen with any courage are Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, Meghan McCain and Liz Chaney. Remember the Georgia Senate in 2020? âŚ. this will happen every two years, like Bill Murray and Groundhog Day.
They want to sit back in their foxholes and hope someone else takes him out⌠ainât gonna happen. They have to rise up en masse and take him on. Fat Chance!
Mike M,
“Of course, it could still all fall apart. We shall see.”
.
Right now Musk faces politically motivated legal threats from the Biden administration, the state of California, and the European Commission. The California threats are mostly financial, but could easily cost Twitter (Musk) billions of dollars to settle with California. The other threats are more serious, especially from the European Union, where they have no real history of freedom of speech, and can make laws to punish those who disagree with them, with no need to have support from the voters. The Biden administration can’t easily move directly against Musk, but will no doubt push the EC to punish Twitter for not censoring. Hillary has already called for the EC to put Twitter out of business if Musk refuses to return to censorship of non-progressive views.
.
Given a chance, I have no doubt Musk can make Twitter a profitable company; he has probably already cut costs by more than half, which as you say, should lead to profitability. I am just not certain the left is going to allow him that chance.
Lucia: “There is just so much missingâ it looks like a big bag of almost nothing to me.”
.
Thank you for taking time to let me speak on this. You could have easily silenced me as I am sure Twitter and others did to every person that tried to get this story out. Even if you don’t believe Thompson or Hooker or Wakefield they should have been allowed to get their story to the public. At the beginning of this discussion, if you remember, the biggest impediment to the stories credibility is that you felt if it were true you would have heard about it.
.
Thompson claimed to suffer great anguish for keeping his story to himself for 10 years about what he felt was a hugely unethical and corrupt workplace. There was a very brief time where his whistleblowing status hit a few medical news sheets but it quickly evaporated and he knew he had made an even bigger mistake by opening his mouth.
.
I will watch the movie again. After six years all I remembered is the heartbreaking stories of the parents intermixed throughout the movie with clips of Thompson’s taped conversation with Hooker. Afterward, I was so shocked and thus still skeptical and sought out the actual recordings and listened to the last three hours or so. It was real. Everything in the article you just read was in the tapes and much more. There was a detailed description of the final showdown on what was to be done to cover up the finding and a special meeting called at a remote location where they were all to bring their copies of the data. When they got there they were all instructed to place their data in a trash can, according to Thompson, who secretly, (and foolishly), had kept another copy.
Russell Klier (Comment #216996): “The only ones I have seen with any courage are Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, Meghan McCain and Liz Chaney.”
.
No, those are the completely gutless Republicans who grovel before the woke Establishment. If such regain control of the party, then America is finished.
.
The party needs to move on from Trump. But Trump voters look at people like the ones you name and realize that moving on might turn into going back to the pre-Trump party. So they figure, not unreasonably, that they better stick with Trump.
.
What is needed is someone with Trump’s courage and principles who is not so obnoxious. So far, DeSantis is the one clear standout. Maybe Pompeo also.
TomS: “My point is that the FBI defense is that they suspect the Russians were behind the DNC hack…”
.
The Russian DNC hack is also still a main talking point fact for the left holding onto the Russian collusion narrative. I believe there is very strong evidence that the Russians did not give the DNC or Podesta emails to Wikileaks. But for another day… I’ve been neglecting work.
SteveF (Comment #216997): “The California threats are mostly financial, but could easily cost Twitter (Musk) billions of dollars to settle with California.”
.
I had not heard about those. Could you summarize of provide a link?
.
SteveF: “The other threats are more serious, especially from the European Union, where they have no real history of freedom of speech”.
.
Yes, the EU is problematic. It is not clear to me just what they could do to a company with no physical presence and no physical products in the EU.
Here is a nice summary of what is wrong with the Mitt Romney Republicans:
https://pjmedia.com/columns/stephen-kruiser/2022/12/05/will-gop-commit-political-suicide-with-bipartisan-amnesty-bill-n1651091
.
The specific trigger for the above is the “bipartisan” immigration proposal which does nothing to secure the border but will give amnesty to the DACA recipients. But it is far worse than that:
I don’t understand why or how you can laud the principles of this man who believes we should violate the [C]onstitution to immediately put him in office:
(emphasis added)
I don’t think … whatever abstract framework Trump uses to justify this type of statement to himself is consistent with the job the President swears to do:
I guess in a nutshell, I disagree that Trump’s ‘principles’ are anything we should be seeking in a new candidate.
Ron
I’m not disputing he felt anguish. What I’m pointing out is we lack information about what specific actions he claims to have done and what specific actions others have done.
Depth of anguish is not always indicative how how bad something actually was. Some people feel guilty about everything.
.
The book is rich in conveying feeling. But clips included that you pointed to are light on facts necessary to know what actually happened. They are the clips repeated over and over– but if you look at them, then don’t contain much in the way of substance.
.
Perhaps. But they don’t quote the relevant bits and they don’t provide the relevant information. The reason could be that that facts don’t support their narrative or are not known. You can’t assume that facts the writers chose to not provide support their narrative.
.
Why foolish to keep it? Perhaps foolish to blab about keeping it on the phone. But this isn’t classified info.
,
Honestly, you don’t know whether other people didn’t keep copies. And this was recent enough that people would likely have digital materials on there laptops, machines or whatever. I suppose Thompson thinks he’s telling the truth that no one else has the data. But I would bet he’s wrong.
Before we throw Trump on the scrap heap we must remember that his replacement as leader of the GOP must be immune to unrelenting attacks, setups for hoax investigations, and payoffs and blackmail. That means also his or her family will be subjected to the same and also must be absolutely clean and solid to stand up against tyrannical FBI and USIC, media-DNC complex.
.
The main reasons Trump is unpalatable to the establishment Dems and GOP include his curtailment of cooperation with globalist agenda on climate, his curtailment of illegal immigration and his distrust of neocon military adventurism and nation building.
MikeM,
The “establishment” isn’t going to pick the GOP nominee. Voters will. Someone like DeSantis has a much better chance than the people Russel listed. Pence? Unlikely. Meghan McCain? Less likely. Liz Cheney? Impossible. Russel thinking someone has “courage” (whatever that is) isn’t going to be the attribute to get them nominated, elected or even make them particularly fit for office.
.
Hey, I admire Pence’s behavior on Jan 6 especially. He’s good guy. Do I hope the GOP nominates him? Nope.
.
Ron
That’s not the main reason he’s unpalatable to either establishment Dems or GOP and especially not GOP.
.
The bluster. The Bragadocio. The name calling. For GOP, the throwing other GOP under the bus. The not helping others in the GOP. The caring only about himself. All of that is higher on the list for why the establishment don’t like him.
New Study: “cardiac autopsy findings in five persons who have died unexpectedly within seven days following anti-SARS-CoV-2-vaccination… Our findings establish the histological phenotype of lethal vaccination-associated myocarditis.” -Dr. Martin Makary on Twitter
.
Makary is a good guy. He is a professor and chief surgeon at Johns Hopkins U. Hospital and was, (until recently he started speaking out against Fauci’s covid policy) the editor and chief of the largest medical newsletter, Medpage.
Lucia, I should have said that the main reason they originally didn’t like him. He is far from perfect in character. I hope we find the perfect uncorruptable and intelligent person that is willing to be attacked ruthlessly along with his family, friends and associates.
Mike M,
Here is a link: https://www.reuters.com/legal/will-twitter-layoffs-violate-us-law-2022-11-04/
.
In theory Musk covers his liability by providing severance pay, but it looks like the way the laws are written the State (and perhaps the DOJ), and also fine the company $500 per employee for 60 days because they didn’t give 60 days formal notice of layoffs…. so up to $500 * 3,500 * 60 * 2 = $210 million (fed and state) plus legal costs. There are also multiple “class actions” by former employees, asking for huge payouts, already filed against Twitter for, it seems, the sin of being owned by Musk. Not certain of the basis for the class action suits or if they will actually be heard.
.
The EU routinely fines companies for vast sums; EU rules say they can (apparently) demand a fine of up to 10% of global revenue from any company they don’t like that happens to have customers in the EU. Not sure about how they would propose to collect that, but my guess is Merrick Garland would be happy to help the EU collect in any way he figured he could get away with under US laws.
Mike M. (Comment #217000)
â So far, DeSantis is the one clear standout. Maybe Pompeo also.â
By my litmus test, Pompeo passes, DeSantis fails. DeSantis has been a real Chicken-shit when dealing with Trump.
âPompeo goes after Trump while mulling presidential bid, says heâs âtired of losingâ
Read more at: https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article268924107.html#storylink=cpy
The Twitter Files intrigue intensifies :-
.
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/elon-musk-fires-twitter-deputy-general-counsel-jim-baker-over-suppression-of-information/
.
“Elon Musk Fires Twitter Deputy General Counsel Jim Baker over Suppression of Hunter Biden Story.
.
Days after releasing the first set of the âTwitter files,â Taibbi released a supplemental thread on Tuesday explaining that he and fellow journalist Bari Weiss were shocked to discover Baker had been involved in vetting the first batch of the Twitter files âwithout knowledge of new management.â He said this revelation delayed the two journalists from publishing a follow-up to the files over the weekend as previously promised.
.
Taibbi said the âTwitter Filesâ were delivered to him and Weiss via a lawyer close to new management but âthings then became complicated.â Weiss discovered over the weekend that the man in charge of releasing the files was Baker.
âMy jaw hit the floor,â Weiss reportedly told Taibbi.
âThe news that Baker was reviewing the âTwitter filesâ surprised everyone involved, to say the least,â Taibbi wrote. âNew Twitter chief Elon Musk acted quickly to âexitâ Baker Tuesday.â
The news that Baker was reviewing the âTwitter filesâ surprised everyone involved, to say the least. New Twitter chief Elon Musk acted quickly to âexitâ Baker Tuesday.
.
â Matt Taibbi (@mtaibbi) December 6, 2022
.
Baker was the FBI general counsel in 2016 and 2017, at which point he served as a top adviser to then-director James Comey through several controversial investigations and decisions, including the bureauâs investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.”
.
Baker is the guy who submitted the false FISA warrent against Trump and suppressed the Hunter Biden story in the first place. The information I believe he is supposed to have removed involves more direct evidence of government input. Whether Elon really didn’t know what this guy was doing is up for speculation. He might have been handing him some rope.
.
What better way to create a government/private partnership with plausible deniability than to fill said companies with seedy, ex-federal officials.
Lucia,
“Heâs good guy.”
.
Ya, Pence is one of the few nationally known politicians I would not mind having live next door… or play a round of golf with. Nearly all the rest? NOOOO!
DaveJR,
That is almost an unbelievable ‘foxes guarding the hen house’ situation. Will Musk now have a truly independent person go through the files and release all the stuff that Baker withheld (certainly involvement of the FBI, and likely the Biden campaign)? Baker even having access to the files gives me pause. First day Musk should have fired every employee who either did not directly write code, do accounting, maintain the servers, fix the air conditioners, or clean the rest rooms.
“Asked on Twitter if Baker, a former FBI general counsel, was asked to explain himself before the firing, Musk replied: âYes. His explanation was . . . unconvincing.â
.
I guess.
And the bad guys never stop: “San Francisco is setting up a ‘site inspection’ of Twitter after reports of offices converted to bedrooms”
.
Anonymous reports, of course.
Twitter must comply with EU hate speech rules. No option. They can filter messages served to those countries. I think this is how it works, otherwise it would be lowest common denominator. This is one the things that makes this app very hard for developers.
Ron Graf (Comment #217006): “Before we throw Trump on the scrap heap we must remember that his replacement as leader of the GOP must be immune to unrelenting attacks, setups for hoax investigations, and payoffs and blackmail. That means also his or her family will be subjected to the same and also must be absolutely clean and solid to stand up against tyrannical FBI and USIC, media-DNC complex.”
.
lucia (Comment #217007): “The âestablishmentâ isnât going to pick the GOP nominee. Voters will. Someone like DeSantis has a much better chance than the people Russel listed.”
.
Both Ron Graf and lucia are correct. GOP voters will pick someone who appears to be on their side. But they can not be sure that someone will remain on their side in the face of the unrelenting attacks from corporate boards, Democrats, the media, the Deep State, and even from within his own party. GOP voters have long experience of electing people who pretend to represent them but who then sell them out. They won’t opt for a known sellout, but there will be plenty of candidates who have not yet proven their weakness and/or phoniness.
.
Trump did not sell out his supporters. He stood up for them against dreadful assaults. That has made him unique in recent history and has earned him the loyalty of tens of millions of voters. They are not going to transfer their loyalty to someone new unless that someone has a track record to prove he is not another Romney, or McCain, or Bush, etc. That is a tall order.
.
As it stands, “someone like DeSantis” is a category with one member. Hopefully, nothing happens to reduce that to zero.
Ron,
By no means. Trump has long since disqualified himself from receiving any further support from me. He threw himself on the scrap heap, one might say. I think independents would agree, the guy is done with anyway you slice it.
I’d love for the future candidate to be SHAZAM. But I sure don’t view this as a choice between some hard to find one in a million candidate and a sure loser who is unfit to hold the office anyway like Trump.
Not the main reasons he’s unacceptable to me. Who knows. See Lucia’s comment.
Tom Scharf,
I have a better idea: don’t sell advertising or anything else to Europeans. Those idiots can censor the internet themselves if they want.
Tom Scharf (Comment #217018): “Twitter must comply with EU hate speech rules. No option.”
.
What happens if they don’t? Real question.
Russell Klier (Comment #217012): “By my litmus test, Pompeo passes, DeSantis fails. DeSantis has been a real Chicken-shit when dealing with Trump.”
.
Oh for crying out loud. TRUMP IS NOT THE ENEMY. He is a deeply flawed ally. You are insisting that the Republican Party tear itself apart. If the litmus test is that Republicans must attack someone who is on the side of the people, then we are doomed.
SteveF (Comment #217014): “Ya, Pence is one of the few nationally known politicians I would not mind having live next door⌠or play a round of golf with.”
.
I am sure that Pence would be a marvelous friend and neighbor. He is a highly capable guy and a good man. But as Governor of Indiana, he proved to be spineless.
People will die from side effects of vaccine. That is not a conspiracy or a revelation. The hope and data show that the vaccine saves lives at a tremendously higher rate. This will vary by age group. People under 30 should give this more thought than people over 60.
“The main reasons Trump is unpalatable to the establishment Dems and GOP include his curtailment of cooperation with globalist agenda on climate, his curtailment of illegal immigration and his distrust of neocon military adventurism and nation building⌔
.
What makes him unpalatable to me is that he is an insufferable a$$hole who acts like a selfish, spoiled 4 year old, and hurts the GOP and the country with his endless self-promotion and endless score-settling. It is 100% what is good for Trump 24/7, never what is good for the country, and certainly never what might be good for anybody else. He appears incapable of learning, and is IMHO, wholly unsuitable for any public office. The guy will obviously never be President again. Unfortunately, he can still do a lot of damage to the GOP and to the country, and being Trump, almost certainly he will.
Then the EU can fine Twitter as their law allows or take other action and get them removed from the EU. You canât serve child porn to the EU from an oil platform in a stateless ocean either. They have the power to force Twitter to comply.
Mike M,
“If the litmus test is that Republicans must attack someone who is on the side of the people, then we are doomed.”
.
Trump is on the side of nobody but Trump. He would rather destroy the GOP and have the crazy left in charge than allow someone other than Trump to run in 2024. “Small” is too kind a description. In 2016 I believed Trump would be capable of improving…. he can’t.
Trump sold me out with stop the steal. So that supporter sold out count is at least one.
Tom Scharf,
There has to be something Twitter does in Europe to justify fines against Twitter. Else wise, the NY Post and a hundred other web sites with content the EC doesn’t like would be subject to destruction at any time at the hands of European regulators. The reach of the EC does not extend to other countries. If Musk is willing to write off making any money from Europeans, then he can flip them the ‘blue bird’….. so to speak.
Mike,
If you[r] point is that a lot of Republican voters believe Trump to be on their side, I don’t really disagree with that observation.
.
For my part, I certainly don’t want the GOP torn apart. On the contrary. I am speaking out whenever the subject comes up, loudly letting it be known that I will not support Trump, because in my view my fellow conservatives (some of whom still believe Trump is on their side) had better be aware that there are those among us who used to support Trump but who are done with him, before they make the mistake of nominating him as the 2024 candidate. I’m actually trying to help, not hurt.
[Edit: And maybe there are many like me. And maybe there are few. Thereâs no way to tell unless we all collectively hash it out by talking about it.]
The EUâs new hate speech laws are onerous and Twitter must comply. The EU has shaken down Google for billions in a similar way for antitrust allegations. They have sovereignty over their territory. They may have signed up to some global regulatory things to help homogenize international compliance. CE and US electrical regulations are similar but not the same for example. Itâs a nightmare for companies. All media companies must comply, thatâs one of the reasons they all kind of look the same. They can serve different websites to US and EU. Compliance is one thing, enforcement is another. The easiest thing to do is write articles fit for everyone. The media can mostly do that.
Tom,
I want to say something like ‘Can’t Twitter decide not to do business in the EU?’
It’s a phone app, distributed by other companies for phone[s] made by other companies, making money off advertisers. Twitter isn’t based in the EU. It’s not quite clear to me what the EU can do to Twitter if they don’t comply. Maybe the EU could cause Apple and Google to block the app in the App stores for EU customers, OK I get that. But the fining of billions of dollars I don’t understand.
I’m NOT SAYING you’re wrong. Just saying I’m not sure you have that right. But maybe you do. I’ll look into this in my copious spare time.
Tom Scharf,
So the NY Post is subject to European “hate speech” regulations? I really don’t think so. Google makes a huge amount of money in Europe, and so is subject to their regulations. The Europeans tried to force every airline that flies over their territory to comply with European “greenhouse emissions rules”. They lost. The US told them it wasn’t going to happen. And it didn’t. The EC is indeed a PITA in just about every way possible. I have had to deal with their ridiculous standards, regulations, and ISO specifications (many of which are so crazy I blink in disbelief) because I sell my products there. But all-powerful they are not.
See, The Guardian frames it as ‘or else be banned’, which I totally get. But that’s not the same as Twitter not having a choice.
Musk wants Twitter everywhere and in the EU, I’d think for the advertising revenue. But that’s not the same as ‘he has to’.
Mike M. (Comment #217023)
âOh for crying out loud. TRUMP IS NOT THE ENEMY. â
Here is my point- TRUMP IS THE ENEMY!
He single handedly handed the Senate over to the Democrats in 2020. He is the reason Joe Biden won the Presidency -JOE BIDEN!. The Democrats have had control of all three branches of government because of Trump. Now look at 2022. Look at Trumpâs handiworkâŚStart with Walker and DR. OZ. The Republicans would have won if they had slightly stronger candidates in Georgia and Pennsylvania. OZ lost to a vegetable. Every other statewide Georgia race went to the Republicans. Until the Republicans excise this cancer, named Trump, they are doomed.
Further reading:
âFactbox: in Key U.S. Midterm Races, a Number of Trump’s Picks Came up Shortâ
https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2022-12-06/factbox-one-last-test-for-trumps-u-s-midterm-election-endorsements
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -âFormer President Donald Trump had a mixed endorsement record in the U.S. midterms, pushing the Republican Party further to the right in nomination contests, but picking candidates who lost key elections, contributing to his party’s failure to take control of the Senate.â
âHerschel Walkerâs loss in Georgia delivers another blow to the former president in a state that has been emblematic of his struggles when it comes to endorsements.â
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/06/us/politics/trump-candidate-endorsement-georgia.html
mark bofill,
Exactly right.
.
The “world government” types like to think they already have world government. They don’t. As the Russians show each day that they fight in the Ukraine, and the Hungarians show each day they refuse to comply with EC rules. I will not be surprised if the Hungarians leave the EC in the next couple years; it is a pretty insufferable regime to live under.
Russell,
Well, not SCOTUS.
But I don’t think your main point is wrong.
Shrug.
.
[Edit: Thanks Steve. I used to say I agree with 90% of what you say. As time has gone on, I’ve come to realize that estimate is way too low. I think I usually mostly disagree with you when I’m initially wrong about something.]
lucia (Comment #217007)
âRussel thinking someone has âcourageâ (whatever that is) isnât going to be the attribute to get them nominated, elected or even make them particularly fit for office.â
I was not advocating any of those people for President [or any office]. I was pointing out that those are the only Republicans that have had enough [whatever] to publicly go after Trump. Republicans being afraid of Trump is the only reason he is still able to cause trouble. Shout it from the rooftops, Trump has to go.
They can choose to not do business in the EU. Piracy sites are an example. They donât comply with the law and avoid enforcement. Eventually their websites get removed after the EU enforces action. They then open up shop elsewhere or a VPN can be used to access the site from outside the compliance area. DNS servers I think can remove the site.
Iâm not an expert, only know the basics. But the EU laws have teeth for a company like Twitter. They will comply and I have seen no suggestion they wonât.
Iâm running under the assumption Twitter wants to do business here. Apps can be removed from app stores. Not a fight worth having v
Mike, thank you, I misspoke. I meant the Democrats have had control of the three offices of government that enact legislation because of Trump. [and look at the mischief they have been up to these last two years]
mark,
You are too kind. I very rarely disagree with you… but I promise to tell you when I do. đ
.
Getting on a plane to Brazil in a few hours to pick up my daughter for a visit over Christmas and New Year. 8 hours to think, work, and practice my Portuguese.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/09/14/tech/google-loses-eu-fine-appeal/index.html
An example of one of many. My view is these shakedowns are really an EU tech tax.
I didnât mean to confuse people by suggesting they couldnât leave the market. This shâ˘â˘ is serious business for lawyers.
The EU has declared war on Big Tech.
The US passed laws that said it was illegal to pay EU airline emission fines, ha ha. It was a standoff. As I recall somehow Aerobus plane manufacturing business was threatened and it was squashed. They tried in this case and failed. A similar situation in the US is CA trying to write US laws by forcing auto regs in their state.
I am not a Twitter user, but it seems to me that the way to make Twitter welcoming for both free speech and snowflakes would be to give control to the user. Set up something like the junk filter on my email program that each user can train to their own specifications.
.
Some things, like child porn, could be universally filtered. Other filters might only apply to users in certain countries. But for the most part, people could train their own filters.
Mike M.
I use Twitter on my home computer, with Firefox as a browser. There are some add-ons in Firefox, that you can use to block anything you don’t like: publicity, suggestions…etc. I subscribe to around 20 people. That is quite enough.
I agree with Russell about Trump and the damage the Republican party will do to itself by putting off kicking that a$$hole out of the party. I saw this coming when he was elected and thought at the time he would become a gift to the Democrat party and now if he is not banned he will be the gift that keeps on giving.
Mike Pence was in state and federally elected offices from 2001 to 2020. He has always been rated very conservative in those offices. He is somewhat too uptight religiously for my taste, but Iâll take him a 1000 fold over the egomaniac who egged a crowd on that took up the cry âhang Mike Penceâ. He is many times over the foil to the Democrat party compared with the former Democrat Trump. If in doubt look back, for example, at his vice-presidential debate and compare it to the disaster of Trumpâs debate.
Tom Scharf,
The EC has diminished itself by becoming dependent on Russian petroleum and natural gas. They are in absolutely no position to dictate policies to anyone, in spite of their delusions of ‘ultimate power’. Let them try to tell the Indians, Chinese, or even the Brazilians what they ‘must do’. Laughter will be the only appropriate response. When you pass absolutely stupid laws and absolutely stupid regulations that damage your own economy, few are likely to go along and damage their own with the same stupid laws and regulations… the Biden administration excluded, of course.
Russell
“Not going after Trump” doesn’t mean someone is afraid of him. It can mean they are smart enough to know that going after Trump is making things all about Trump. A good candidate should advance positive policies rather than spending their live “going after” Trump.
.
Yes– many should should should from the rooftops that Trump has to go. But those running for office should tells us the direction they plan to take the country. Not make the campaign all about “not Trump”.
lucia (Comment #217050)
December 7th, 2022 at 5:13 pm
I agree that a positive approach can often be the winning one, but the problem with the Republicans and Trump is that when asked about a one of Trump’s many incidents they need to show their disapproval in clear terms and not in some vague way that makes them appear to be quaking in their boots over the potential disapproval of the RITOs.
So the consensus seems to be the uncultured GOP masses who adore Trump need a better leader. Because remember, it’s not about us; it’s about them. They are the 75% of the GOP today. We are (correct me if I wrong) the white, mostly male, 50+ boomers.
.
I, like most here, did not choose Trump in the GOP primary. He was forced on me. I cringed at the Access Hollywood video and assumed he was finished, notwithstanding Hillary was unpalatable, to say the least. We can all recite the mistakes he made, the most important one was not firing Comey on day one.
.
But there was the good too. Think about the SCOTUS picks, the deregulation economic boom, handling foreign threats and standing up for America in NATO and UN, (and for Israel).
.
I think Trump did an even better job commemorating our D-Day heroes at Normandy on the 75th anniv. than Reagan did on the 50th. Trump somehow struck a profile and manner that reminds one of Patton: the elite brass can’t stand his lack of political couth but the troops love him. Can anyone imagine the Normandy memorial if given by Biden, Harris or Buttigieg, (whom strikes the profile of Alfred E. Neuman – What me worry?) I cringe.
.
All that said, I would take Reagan, JFK or Jimmy Stewart if they were available to step up now. Who would you want to reincarnate to be president? real question.
I think the advent of ISO 9000 certification was a godsend to EU for rationalizing regulations even though that certification was not a regulation. It was supposed to be a marker that a company was following certain procedures that insured the quality and safety of it products. I had first hand experience with that process and while there were some good points that could be made for the process, similar to most regulations, it assured very little other than the company obtaining it was good at obtaining certifications.
I dealt with customers and vendors and found that working closely together and being honest and sometimes painfully honest with each other produced the best results. A certification would have to be based on the unique relationship of any given two companies doing business and not a fit one all like ISO 9001. When a problem occurred it became readily apparent in determining whether the company with the problem had the motivation or wherewithal to fix the problem by asking for a written corrective action and following up thereafter. The lack of provisions for problem solving are inherent in regulations.
Ludwig Heinrich Edler von Mises (1881â1973). He was of Austrian birth, but when reincarnated the rule is you get to come back with a nationality of your own choosing.
lucia (Comment #217050): “Not going after Trump doesnât mean someone is afraid of him. It can mean they are smart enough to know that going after Trump is making things all about Trump. A good candidate should advance positive policies rather than spending their live âgoing afterâ Trump.”
.
I completely agree!
OK, so what Trump said the other day is unacceptable. But Democrats do as bad or worse and get a pass, let alone forcing other Democrats to denounce them.
.
Any number of Democrats (Biden included) condoned riots in 2020. They attacked cops for doing their jobs. They gave moral and financial support to criminals.
.
Biden is IMO committing treason by refusing to secure our southern border. Far worse than anything Trump ever did or said.
.
Biden has spent a career as a crooked politician on the take from foreign governments, some of which are enemies. Worse than anything Trump actually did, but arguably not worse than some things Trump said.
.
Biden obviously lacks the mental competence to be President. Trump, with all his flaws, would be better than a senile fool.
.
Biden has turned the Department of Justice into a weapon to use against his enemies. Again worse than Trump.
.
So I object to saying that Trump is beyond the pale while accepting the likes of Biden.
Mike M. (Comment #217045)
âthe way to make Twitter welcoming for both free speech and snowflakes would be to give control to the user.â
Musk said about the same thing early in the transition. [I canât find the quote] It hasnât happened yet – I keep looking.
Mike,
Look, I didn’t vote for Biden. I don’t support Biden. I am going to have to ‘accept’ Biden though, because he won the election, and because I’m a conservative and not a progressive revolutionary of the sort who wants nothing more than to destroy our system.
I say Trump is beyond the pale because I believe he is. I am not going to support him. Pointing out that Democrats are as bad or worse isn’t helpful, because I’m not supporting them either.
Bari Weiss has this on âCommon Senseâ
It will curl your hairâŚ.
âThe Hijacking of Pediatric Medicineâ
The kids health field has been taken over by the Queer crowd:
âThousands of pediatricians convened in Anaheim, Calif., in early October for the American Academy of Pediatricsâs (AAP) annual conference.
… audience members were shocked when Dr. Morissa Ladinsky, an associate professor of pediatrics at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, lauded a transgender teenager for committing suicide.â
âŚand a lot more.
https://www.commonsense.news/p/the-hijacking-of-pediatric-medicine
Once again, the Babylon Bee nails it: “Democrats Endorse Trump After He Calls For Destroying The Constitution”.
https://babylonbee.com/news/democrats-endorse-donald-trump-after-he-calls-for-destroying-the-constitution
Powerline has a great quote from John Marini in 2016:
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/12/thought-for-the-day-john-marini-on-trump.php
I will just requote the final line:
If you don’t recognize that we are still in a crisis that has created the need for Trump or someone like him, then yeah, throw Trump on the scrap heap.
The EU isnât done yet with airline emissions shakedowns.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/eu-announces-price-hikes-airline-permits-bid-combat-climate-change
Trump policies were fine. Trump was also useful in sending a message to the governing class their future rule is not assured (aka danger to democracy). Iâm referencing electing an outsider, not his crazy election fantasies. I wonât support Trump under any conditions this time around, I donât care if he is running against Sanders. He blew it.
I don’t agree that a different candidate than Oz would have won. A different candidate than Walker likely wins given that Kemp won.
However, in both states as well as Arizona, Nevada, New Hampshire and other states, the Democrats’ turnout machine is much better than Republicans. This is a repeat of 2000 where George Bush was leading in polls, but Democrats won on turnout and Gore won the popular vote. Ken Mehlman sent a memo about it, became head of RNC, and then in 2004 managed to beat Democrats on turnout, with exit polling showing an even matchup of registered Republicans and Democrats, instead of the usual 4 point lead.
Republicans did nothing about the expansion of mail balloting and ballot harvesting that Democrats expanded in 2020.
âThe only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothingâ If a Republican is not publicly and actively anti-Trump he or she doesnât have my support.
I kept hoping one of the Democratâs political ploys would succeed in taking him out but they were bumbling fools and he was too slippery for them to nail him. Maybe the âguilty on multiple charges of criminal tax fraud and falsifying business recordsâ will finally do him in, but I have little hope; lord knows the Republicans are too afraid of him to oust him.
We donât require enforced conformity. Leave that to the left. If people like Trump, so be it. Expressing an opinion is one thing, shaming is another. I understand the appeal of Trump, just now disagree with it.
The kids health being taken over by the fruitcakes story is going mainstream:
From Byron York quoting the Free Beacon, ”The AAP says kids under 10 canât cross the street by themselves,’ one pediatrician said, ‘but they can change their gender. How does that make sense?” Read @aaronsibarium on the politicization of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
https://freebeacon.com/coronavirus/the-hijacking-of-pediatric-medicine/
MikeN (Comment #217064): “I donât agree that a different candidate than Oz would have won. A different candidate than Walker likely wins given that Kemp won.”
.
Indeed. My impression is that Oz lost not because of Trump, but because he took the Trump voters for granted. If you look at the maps for 2020
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pennsylvania_Presidential_Election_Results_2020.svg
and 2022
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2022_United_States_Senate_election_in_Pennsylvania_results_map_by_county.svg
they carried the same counties, but Trump carried Appalachia by much larger margins than Oz.
.
The alternative to Oz was a rich hedge fund manager who is a fan of ESG investing and of uncritical investing in China. He would have been less appealing to Trump voters than Oz while being the perfect foil for Fetterman’s schtick.
.
Oz was hardly a creation of Trump. Trump’s guy dropped out and Oz was leading in the primary polling when Trump endorsed him a few weeks before the primary.
.
Walker was a weak candidate, but you can’t blame him on Trump. He got more primary votes than his two closest opponents combined while other Trump endorsed candidates got their butts kicked.
Tom Scharf (Comment #217066): “We donât require enforced conformity. Leave that to the left. If people like Trump, so be it. Expressing an opinion is one thing, shaming is another. I understand the appeal of Trump, just now disagree with it.”
.
Exactly right. And the best way to excise Trump is for Republican primary voters to do it.
And of course, those of us who think he is horrible have a right to say how horrible we think he is. We have just as much a right to say this as the Only-Trumpers have a right to criticize those they call “Romney Republicans”.
MikeM
Well….that’s not evidence he neglected Trump voters. of course the candidates whose only claim to votes was a Trump endorsement did not do as well as Trump himself. First: not every past pro-Trump supporter was merely pro-trump. Some were just anti-Biden. They weren’t going to automatically vote for the Trump-endorsement only candidates. Second: Trump himself has lost some of his past voters. Even people who think some of the Jan 6 hearing is over the top still think Trump behaved abominably that day. So some of those people would change their vote.
.
Trump endorsed weak candidates who would probably not have every been nominated unless he endorsed them. He endorsed them because at this point no one with anything going for themselves will associate themselves with Trump– and Trump will not endorse someone unless they suck up to him. So the Trump suck-up/endorsed candidates were then weak in the general election. And worse the association with Trump hurt them with independents and GOP who are not “only-Trumpers”. And so they lost.
.
In some of those districts someone else might have won. But the pro-Trump candidates were a weak pack. Because he endorsed weakness to the detriment of the GOP– and he did so because Trump is only for Trump and no one else.
I agree with Mike M here. The alternative to Oz was not palatable at all to the blue collar Trump Republicans. He also threw out the window Reagan’s credo of not speaking ill of other conservatives. McCormick smeared Oz mercilessly. Fetterman was virtually unopposed and applied his unused war chest to immediately continue the smear that McCormick started for him, that Oz was an effete Hollywood carpetbagger and TV snake oil salesman. It did not help that Oz’s wife is an heiress to a nationwide tree maintenance company that was fined for employing illegal immigrants.
.
Third place in the GOP’s PA primary was an African American woman that rose from the grass routes and was more on Trump’s message that Oz, but she rose after Trump had already endorsed Oz. Both Hannity and Trump did a full smear on her as being too inexperienced to stand up to Fetterman (before it was known of his stroke). I think she would have been a better candidate than Oz or Walker. She reminded me of Winsom Sears, who won in VA as AT with Youngkin.
.
She might still have lost with PA early voting and Fetterman not debating. The key on early voting is that it allows virtual ballot harvesting through email, mail and text, something the GOP may just now be realizing. The GOP needs to be smarter on fundraising and quit using spammers that insult their donor’s intelligence.
Karl Rove in today’s WSJ has a good accounting of the 2022 mid terms and how the Trump backed candidates ran behind other Republicans in state wide races.
Those who think that wanting Trump tossed out of the Republcan party and criticizing his crazy weird remarks is somehow supporting the Democrats have it totally backwards; supporting and/or putting up and excusing Trumps actions is in effect supporting the Democrat party. I have said this from the beginning when the crude and self-centered approach to politics in the Republican primaries by Trump was mistaken by many as somehow defying the elites (whoever they might be). His antics played right into the hands of the powers that be and, even though he won an election and by being a useful idiot was able to unwind some of governments powers, in the end his actions and those of his political acolytes have produced a net lose in reducing government’s reach.
Trump is a loser, no, Trump is a Loooooser.
He will foist any candidate that pays him homage onto Republican ballotsâŚ. and that begets more Republican Looooosers. He uses underhanded tactics to strongarm contributions away from legitimate candidates and uses the lucre to support his patsies. Every Republican worth his salt must oppose him.
https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-money-us-senate-contributions-2022-11
lucia (Comment #217072): “thatâs not evidence he neglected Trump voters.”
.
True. I cited voting patterns as a consequence of Oz neglecting Trump voters. My claim that Oz did that was based on the fact that everything I read about Oz during the campaign was about how much work he was putting in in Philly, Pittsburgh, and their suburbs.
.
lucia: “Trump endorsed weak candidates who would probably not have every been nominated unless he endorsed them.”
.
I doubt you can produce a single convincing example of that, certainly not many examples. For the most part, Trump endorsed front runners. One of the few cases where he didn’t and his candidate won was Ohio. Vance went on to win the general by a wide margin.
Follow the moneyâŚ
“We need to WIN BACK our SENATE Majority!! We can still WIN in Nevada, Arizona & Georgia! reads Trump’s message, which encourages supporters to donate money to the “America Defense Fund. But Republican US Senate candidates such as Herschel Walker in Georgia, Adam Laxalt in Nevada, and Blake Masters in Arizona might never see a dime of it. Fine print in Trump’s message indicates that contributions will actually go to the Save America Joint Fundraising Committee, which has no direct affiliation with any 2022 Republican candidate and instead benefits two political action committees Trump himself leads: the Make America Great Again PAC and Save America, according to FEC records.â
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HzGjC4OObbiyEeNw5r_mXubhLZB3NY_CerjVq8LKxqg/edit#heading=h.effrsck8128o
and:
âDonors spending millions on Trump’s legal battles Millions of dollars spent combatting these charges have come from Mr Trump’s Save America political action committee (PAC) – which takes donations from Trump supporters across the country – Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings show.â
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62998508
and:
âBlake Masters has scored a prime spot in the Republican fundraising world: A chance to reach Donald Trumpâs prized donor list directly.
It just comes with a catch: Masters will see very little money from the emailed appeals, though the data he collects in the moment could prove more valuable than the cash. However, the default split for donations made there is 99 percent to Trumpâs political operation â and just 1 percent to Mastersâ Senate campaign in one of the closest battleground races in the country. (Donors could choose to change the default split, but it requires clicking through a link written in smaller type and jammed between several more eye-grabbing colored boxes.)â
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/10/27/trump-donations-99-to-1-00063825
and:
âTrump just sent out a fundraising email for Herschel Walker that says âContribute ANY AMOUNT IMMEDIATELY to the Official Georgia Runoff Fundraising Goal and increase your impact by 1200%â and then auto-defaults to splitting your donation 90% to Trump and 10% to Herschel Walker.â
https://twitter.com/JacobRubashkin/status/1591518319143780352?s=20&t=4jtYhJd3ht8sTrrAyWf76Q
âŚand there are more dirty secrets.
Ron Graf,
“…Oz was an effete Hollywood carpetbagger and TV snake oil salesman.”
.
The smear stuck because, well, there was some truth to it. Political smears, like most jokes, work mainly when they contain a grain of truth. eg How can you tell when a politician is lying? Or the ‘Lock her up!’ chants at Trumps 2016 rallies that were effective because they reminded people she probably would have been in jail were she anyone but Hillary.
.
Someone like Hillary, who was truly an effete dishonest carpetbagger, could easily win a Senate seat in NY because plenty of progressives in New York would vote for the head of the CCP if he ran for Senate in NY. The mostly conservative republicans in PA probably were a lot less than enthused by Oz, and many did see him as a carpetbagger…..and it showed up in their turnout. In fairness to Oz, the party didn’t get Republicans to vote in sufficient numbers either, but the margin Oz lost by was big enough that even a lot more effective get-out-the-vote effort was unlikely to keep him from losing. He was just not a suitable candidate for PA. Same with Trump endorsed candidates in Arizona, New Hampshire, and Michigan…. none were good matches for the preferences of the voters in those states. Four very weak candidates in four winnable Senate races… it is the Trump effect: the gift to Democrats that keeps on giving.
Russell Klier (Comment #217077)
December 8th, 2022 at 9:49 am
Oh, Russell that is just Trump being Trump. All is forgiven – unfortunately.
Well, Trump certainly doesn’t follow that credo!
.
Yep. Trump endorsed people with strong negatives. So they tended to be weak. That’s a problem with Trump’s behavior. He doesn’t care if the candidates he helps get nominated are unlikely to win.
Both Hannity and Trump did a full smear on her as being too inexperienced to stand up to Fetterman
.
Yep. Both don’t follow Reagan’s credo to not speak ill of other conservatives. But this isn’t new for those two.
.
And it would be helpful if Trump didn’t get the subset of Trump-only republicans to boost the nomination of weak candidates. And if he and the Trump only republican’s followed Reagan’s credo to not criticize other members of GOP. That probably ain’t gonna happen without Thor’s hammer taking Trump out.
Mike M
At the time Trump endorsed Oz, McCormick had a lead in polls.
https://www.npr.org/2022/04/10/1091939065/trump-dr-oz-senate-pennsylvania
Others on this thread have already pointed out his negatives in an attempt to “explain” why the loss isn’t attributable to Trump. But Trump endorsed him which pushed him to the nomination. He was weak.
Ron/Steve
Oz absolutely is a TV snake oil salesman. Of course that label stuck! Everyone knew he was a snake oil salesman. But that was Trumps choice to endorse.
lucia (Comment #217081): “At the time Trump endorsed Oz, McCormick had a lead in polls.”
.
The RCP average agrees with you.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2022/senate/pa/pennsylvania_senate_republican_primary-7485.html#polls
But the graph here shows Oz with the lead:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_States_Senate_election_in_Pennsylvania#Polling_2
Looking at the raw numbers, I suspect the Wikipedia graph is not a trailing average, making it misleading.
.
lucia: “Others on this thread have already pointed out his negatives in an attempt to âexplainâ why the loss isnât attributable to Trump. But Trump endorsed him which pushed him to the nomination. He was weak.”
.
Since that race was so close, it is likely that Trump’s endorsement made the difference between weak candidates. But it did not cost the Republican’s the race since there is no reason to believe McCormick would have done better.
“But it did not cost the Republicanâs the race since there is no reason to believe McCormick would have done better.”
.
Exactly.
.
Lucia and others seem to have a thing against crude, arrogant, yet successful type A personalities. I do too. And Trump is not a genius. He is an excellent seat-of-pants negotiator and has a hound’s nose for scams and corruption. And he is a fearless fighter. Those last things are uncommon for the GOP. He can also be an effective speaker when he has to deliver a speech on script.
.
However, I am disturbed to hear he diverted donations intended by donors for 2022 candidates. If that is the case Trump does not have a chance because his biggest selling point to the common man was his incorruptibility and being above the the average campaign-finance-compromised politician.
âI wouldn’t want to belong to a club that would have someone like me as a memberâ
? Groucho Marx
I wouldnât want to vote for a candidate that would have someone like Trump as a sponsor.
-Russell Klier
https://www.newsweek.com/lessons-us-civil-war-show-why-ukraine-cant-win-opinion-1764992
.
âLessons From the U.S. Civil War Show Why Ukraine Can’t Win | Opinionâ
.
MSM is starting to crack in their âconsensusâ that Ukraine can win vs Russia.
.
.
.
â Member of the European Parliament from Ireland Clare Daly pointed out how Zelensky have banned most parties specially left the wing and stated that Ukraine will not be able to return the millions of dollars allocated to it by the European Union during the conflict, as Kiev spends everything on a proxy war with Russia.
.
?? “Since the tap was turned on, Zelenskiy has banned most opposition parties, shuttered the media, attacked trade unions and workers rights,” the MEP noted.
.
?? “Ukraine is marked for a nightmare round of shock therapy, a sell of public lands, deregulation of labor, sale of public assetsâŚon it goes. The country’s future is being sold to finance a proxy war that’s tearing it apart”, Daly emphasized.â..â
.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses/16206
Ron,
While it’s true that I don’t like crude arrogant people, this has nothing whatsoever to do with my opposition to Trump.
Briefly: I supported Trump until he, after losing the election, pressured Pence to overturn the results of the election (paraphrasing Trump’s own words on some occasion). I believe that, had Pence gone along with Trump and Eastman in this scheme, they would have done catastrophic damage to our country long term. Trump is not more important than our system of government. He still does not understand this today, judging by his recent tweets proclaiming that the Constitution [could] be suspended for just this one instance.
For a long time, I accepted the ‘take Trump seriously but not literally’ rationalization. But there is no way to take Trump seriously here without taking him literally, as far as I can see. There is no excuse for these statements; they would not be out of character for an up and coming third world dictator to utter, but they are completely unacceptable in the mouth of a former GOP President and candidate.
I hope this clarifies.
Winston Churchill led the greatest military failure in British history. He drank too much. He was unkind and disrespectful, according to his staff. He would have been a failed leader except that he realized a situation before the establishment and in doing so saved his country (and maybe the world). When the war was over he was discarded on by the voters. He was a man for the moment, similar to Ulysses S. Grant but reversed in points of career.
.
The common conservative thought Trump was the man for the moment. Who do we think will save the world from Orwellian doom, or am I overegging the danger? Real question.
To continue for a moment longer-
When I hear the argument that I should support Trump because the Democrats are just as corrupt and evil, I despair. I ask myself, ‘Have we really come to this, is it really the case that my tribe has no real allegiance to the Constitution and the traditions of this country? Is it really just a choice between the corrupt strongman from my team and the corrupt strongman from the other team?’
I answer this rhetorical question to myself with an angry ‘Hell no.’ I’m sorry if some of you look at it this way, but I sure don’t.
Trump was taking up to 90% of funds raised in the name of Trump’s endorsed candidates….. some like Walker complained, and they then got more (50%). Then there was Trumps “XXXX% automatic matching” of your contribution. Pure deception. Trump seems to conduct himself unscrupulously whenever money is involved. Trump university was a very dubious scheme from long before he was running for president. Type A personality to describe Trump is only accurate if the A stands for a$$hole.
Ron,
crossposted.
.
Does it never occur to you that Trump himself might be the Orwellian danger, with his disregard for our Constitution, laws and traditions, insane ego and lust for power?
Real question. Because it doesn’t look like it ever occurs to you from where I sit. Just because the guy wears my team’s jersey doesn’t automatically make him noble and pure and good. The stuff he has been calling for is anathema to what I believe as a conservative and I’m still a little astonished that more people aren’t bothered by it.
Mark, there was more than Trump and Eastman on board. They also had several senators and congress people. The plan was to delay the certification in lieu of an investigation and litigation of election illegalities. They were following the law. That likely would not have ended in a win for Trump. But it would have prevented the Jan6 riot and degree of divide we are in today. Pence did blow it in my opinion. But it was not all Pence’s fault. He needed to be sold on the plan and Trump did not sell him. He coerced him. Once Trump failed to gain Pence he should have called it off, though, rather than organize his supporter mob to coerce him.
Ron,
I am not going to argue with you. Bless your heart, as we say in Alabama, if you really and honestly believe that was a good idea. [I mean, there’s really nothing more to say at this point.]
mark bofill (Comment #217091)
December 8th, 2022 at 2:16 pm
Hey Mark, I like it when you do no more nice guy. Seriously, I agree wholeheartedly with what you say in your post.
Mark: “Does it never occur to you that Trump himself might be the Orwellian danger?”
.
That certainly is the MSM drumbeat from the time he got elected. But it did not appear to me that Trump has a prayer of turning the USIC, executive branch, congress, and MSM into his sole control. That is insane. I know Dems believe that but I thought it was because they didn’t think too much about how that could actually be.
.
“Bless your heart.”
.
I watched all six of the state hearings on election irregularities. I watched the GA video of the observers being shoed out of the State Farm center due to a pipe burst just before they pulled out the cases from under the table to tabulate for two hours.
.
If you don’t believe the Orwellian danger is now and not when Trump is in power well bless you but I respectfully disagree.
Thanks Ken
mark bofill (Comment #217091): “Does it never occur to you that Trump himself might be the Orwellian danger, with his disregard for our Constitution, laws and traditions, insane ego and lust for power?”
.
Well, yes, given his recent behavior. On the other hand, when he was in power he showed the most respect of any President this century for our Constitution, laws and traditions. Compared to Obama and Biden, it is not even close.
I am not convinced that Trump’s ego and lust for power takes a back seat to other recent Presidents. Trump just lets it show.
Ed Forbes (Comment #217086): â Member of the European Parliament from Ireland Clare Daly pointed out how Zelensky have banned most parties specially left the wing”.
.
Any evidence for that? When did it happen? I am extremely skeptical since I have heard a similar claim from Tucker Carlson that turned out to be not true.
————-
Ed Forbes: “Ukraine will not be able to return the millions of dollars allocated to it by the European Union during the conflict”
.
What? Nobody in his right mind would expect that. If they are NOT spending everything we send on the war, then I have a problem.
Ron
I also don’t like crude arrogant unsuccessful losers. I can’t see why someone wants to stick with crude arrogant unsuccessful losers, but Only Trumpers seem to want to do it.
.
The same might be said for Putin. Though I would note neither Putin nor Trump are actually on the front lines.
“The same might be said for Putin.”
Lucia, do you or Mark or Steve really believe Trump is Putin? Putin came from the KGB, Trump from the hospitality industry. They are both cut-throat fields but only one literally is a throat cutter.
.
Trump makes very bold statements against the establishment, like “We are going to build a big beautiful wall and make Mexico pay for it.” That may be completely uncouth but strangely it was working. That is until we as a country pulled the plug on him because half the country thought he suggest injecting bleach might be a good Covid treatment. The Dems also believed that GOP were lied to about Mexico paying for the wall, but nobody expected Mexico to pay for the wall. Mexico knew to take him seriously, though, and they agreed to the USMCA and cooperated on securing the border, i.e. the remain in Mexico policy, etc…
.
Kamala is super sweet and very giggly and working on “root causes” of the southern boarder crisis. How do you not see our country under a threat by the left? Real Question. Many Dem’s position on the border is that they are climate refugees. You think I’m kidding. I’m not.
.
Who do see as tough enough to rattle Putin and Kim Jun Un but sensitive enough to be palatable to suburban women? Real question. I like DeSantis but I don’t know if he is going to run. Whoever it is will be ruthlessly slandered and investigated to childhood and we can lose a good person. Trump already has been tarred and we have time to see the tarring was unjustified and corrupt when it comes to Russia hoax, Ukraine impeachment and if he did not sell classified docs to Putin he should be cleared there too. He thus has the sympathies of being persecuted and is given slack by his supporters for being a bit blustery.
.
But, as I said, if he embezzled donor’s money with tricks he has to go. I am slow to be convinced at it though.
Mike, is this sufficient? There are many more pages on a quick search.
.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/20/ukraine-suspends-11-political-parties-with-links-to-russia
.
https://mronline.org/2022/03/24/opposition-political-parties-banned-in-ukraine-and-unified-information-policy-imposed/
.
https://ussanews.com/2022/12/08/tucker-carlson-why-is-president-zelensky-banning-christianity-in-ukraine/.
.
https://europeanjournalists.org/blog/2021/08/26/ukraine-president-bans-opposition-media-strana-ua-and-sanctions-editor-in-chief/
.
Ron,
You are mistaken here. To the best of my knowledge, I haven’t said I don’t see our country under a threat by the left. In fact I do.
I have already tried to answer this with my SHAZAM comment. It would be great to find somebody who is tough enough to rattle Putin and Kim but sensitive enough to be palatable to suburban women. I’d like for our next candidate to have the wisdom of Solomon and the strength of Hercules. He should have balls like a tiger and whiter than white teeth, he should be a politician to rival Madison, and maybe it’d be good if God Himself would give us some sign that he smiles on this candidate.
.
This isn’t going to happen. And it’s not relevant criteria for deciding whether or not to back a sure loser who does not hold our Constitution in enough esteem to even pay lip service to it. [] We can and will find a better candidate than Trump if we have any brains whatsoever.
Ron
I haven’t suggested they think he “is” Putin and have no idea why you are asking me that.
You described an attribute you think Trump has– ‘fearless fighter’. I pointed out that it’s shared by Putin. I’m sure there are countless others. Yes, they fearless fight for what they want, when they want it. In my estimation, being the political equivalent of a pugilist is not, by itself, a big positive.
.
I don’t think half the country was motivated by the statement of bleach. It was irrelevant to me not voting for him.
.
I think your mind reading skills vis-a-vis why the people who didn’t vote for Trump didn’t vote for him are impaired.
.
.
Neither. Fortunately, no one choice limited to either Trump or Harris. There are plenty of people better than both. I can oppose both.
.
If Trump is nominated it it unlikely he will win. I think people acting as if our only choice is Trump or the Democrats are being foolish. Because that’s obviously false.
Mike,
The supply the EU has given to support Ukraine are loan packages, not gifts. Ask Greece how the EU is inclined to forgive loans.
Let me put this another way.
A candidate who can meet a high bar should have no problems meeting a low bar, so why don’t we start with the low bar and see how far we get after that.
1) Does the candidate have basic respect for the Constitution? Trump doesn’t appear to.
2) Is the candidate remotely electable? Trump doesn’t appear to be.
Maybe if we could get past basic criteria like this, we could go on to consider how white his teeth are and how low his balls hang.
Ed Forbes,
“A fundraising email from Trump last month warned that âOur Senate Majority is on the lineâ and urged would-be donors to âcontribute ANY AMOUNT IMMEDIATELY to the Official Georgia Runoff Fundraising Goal.â The fine print, however,automatically diverted 90% of individual contributions to the former presidentâs political action committee, the Save America Joint Fundraising Committee, leaving just 10% for Walker.”
.
Could be that report was mistaken, but I don’t think so.
Lucia and Mark, you both state that Trump’s irredeemable flaw then is that he is a looooser. Is that right? Well that is a bit unfair criticism of anyone I would think. We all lose sometimes. It’s just fair against Trump in your minds (using my mindreading skills) I suppose because he claimed he would make you a winner and you would be winning so much that you would be tired of winning. And you kind of took him literally, like Mexico would pay for a wall.
.
My analysis is that you might be angry and disappointed at the election and you are blaming Trump because he is easy to blame. The Dems are lov-n it.
.
“Does the candidate have basic respect for the Constitution?”
.
As Mike M already stated, Trump demonstrated respect for the Constitution when he had the power to violate it. He was not the megalomaniac the Dems predicted. He was a de-regulator, not a tyrant, a war ender not a war provoker. He respected the troops and could tell a general he was wrong.
.
And, in any regard, respect for the Constitution is a lot more relevant to a party that is in a position to disrespect the Constitution, and that is not the GOP.
.
You jest about SHAZAM. But in real life DeSantis is wondering if he wants to put his recent cancer surviving wife through the Melania treatment. I am not a mind-reader, but that is my guess.
Ed Forbes,
The pro-Russia parties banned last March were only a small part of the opposition. So the claim that Zelensky banned “most opposition parties” is simply false. Only one banned party had any members in the Ukrainian Parliament.
.
A leader of that party, Viktor Medvedchuk, is literally a buddy of Putin’s. Putin is godfather to one of Medvedchuk’s children; in the Orthodox church that is still a very significant relationship. Medvedchuk has been credibly charged with treason. Prior to the invasion the US put sanctions on him for plotting with Russia to set up a puppet government in Ukraine. He was placed under arrest and eventually traded to Russia in exchange for Ukrainian POW’s.
.
When Russia invaded, a member of Parliament from that party openly celebrated the invasion, with social media posts welcoming the Russian troops into Ukraine.
.
One might tolerate such in peace time. But normal civil liberties don’t apply when being invaded. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus. The UK suspended elections during WW2.
.
Technically, the party was not banned by Zelensky but by the National Security and Defense Council (essentially the cabinet). And the action was upheld by the courts.
Ron,
I am done wasting my time speaking with you. I assure you, your analysis on why I do not support Trump is off in the weeds, and your foolish speculation in that regard is of no particular interest to me.
.
If you have any further questions you would honestly like to hear my answers to, you may apologize for wasting my time in this manner and politely ask for my comment.
.
Ciao.
“90% of individual contributions to the former presidentâs political action committee…”
.
Anyone that can find an article that is not from CNN, NPR, Politico or Huff Po please share. I can’t find a conservative media story about it. I’m sure it turns out to be untrue the Dem reporters will apologize for the error (sarc).
.
Nobody has mentioned Tulsi Gabbard. I think she might run in GOP. She certainly has wide appeal. I think I would vote for her.
.
Edit: BTW, I am sure I got those spams. I never respond to spam, text or email or mail. I donate only directly to candidate from their web sites.
Steve, not sure why you posed on Trump donations to me. I donate to very few campaigns and send requests to junk.
.
I supported Trump the last several elections because he was not, Clinton, Bush, or Biden.
.
If it is a choice between Trump or someone from the above camps, I will vote for Trump again.
Mark, I really did not intend upset you. I just now went and read your comments again to be sure I am misunderstanding you.
.
You wrote:
“Briefly: I supported Trump until he, after losing the election, pressured Pence to overturn the results of the election (paraphrasing Trumpâs own words on some occasion). I believe that, had Pence gone along with Trump and Eastman in this scheme, they would have done catastrophic damage to our country long term.”
.
I answered this that Trump and Eastman were not breaking the Constitution and it was not a “scheme.” They truly believed, as I still do, that there were significant election illegalities in the swing state. If you didn’t follow it and just listened to you MSM and Fox News you surely missed it. Fox was blacking it out. I don’t know if you get Newmax or OAN or read conservative online media, but they were covering it. The story of computer hacking was farfetched and did not corroborate with other facts I won’t get into. But just because that was a red herring does not mean there were not other means to violate election integrity. Everyone who staked their beliefs on Barr, including Ivanka, did not know the FBI was working actively with big tech to interfere in the election. Are they changing their opinion now? No, because they staked themselves.
.
So now you and many others feel Trump’s Constitution comments are out of bounds even if it is true the Dems broke the Constitution and Trump is wrong to remedy a breaking of the Constitution with another break. That is a far cry from being Mussolini. (I know you never said Mussolini.)
.
I am sorry to see you lose your temper, especially when I honestly admire your manners (to others).
Mike
The war in Ukraine is closer to Civil War than a war between 2 separate countries. The civil war broke out almost immediately after a coup sponsored by the US brought down the elected Ukraine president in 2014 and has been going on continuously since then. Over 15,000 dead from Ukraine shelling the east between 2014 and 2021.
.
The Russians have been involved with supporting eastern Ukraine against the illegal government in Kiev since 2014. This situation has just heated up in 2022, not starting.
.
As to âties to Russiaâ, most of Ukraine has âties to Russia â through marriage or the extensive business contacts developed over generations.
Ron,
I can’t think of any good reason for you to have presumed that I would be interested in hearing your alternative theory of why I do not support Trump, when I have already explained why I no longer support Trump. I don’t know that I lost my temper (I don’t think I did, but whatever) however, it is irritating to have somebody ignore an honest explanation and use their ‘mind reading’ skills to correct someone about what their actual decision making process involved. I think you meant for this to be irritating and offensive, honestly.
My time is valuable to me. I know it may seem strange that I read and comment here given that, but some of the regulars here are people I have a great deal of respect for and I do consider their posts highly valuable. Also some of the regulars here I consider friends and there aren’t all that many people I call friends, so I value that highly as well.
I hope I have clarified sufficiently. I’m not interested in playing games, trying to give offense with stupid unsolicited presumptuous speculations about you, please do not waste my valuable time trying to give offense with stupid unsolicited presumptuous speculations about me. When I offer you explanation on my views, it might be most helpful for both of us if you simply take me at my word.
To address your point,
Yes. I think that Trump’s Constitution comments are out of bounds regardless of what Dems do or say, I agree. And yes. I never said Mussolini. I know little of Mussolini in fact and I can’t say whether or not this is a far cry from Mussolini, and I don’t actually care one way or the other if it is or is not a far cry from Mussolini.
Ron,
I would also like to explain that in my opinion, it is not up to an incumbent President and VP to decide whether or not an election was fair. Possibly I should have explained this before, I apologize. I thought it was obvious that if it were in fact up to the incumbent VP to certify elections only if they decide the elections are fair, that we would see abuses of this power regularly for the rest of time.
Possibly of equal importance – even if I have this wrong, there are a great many people in this country who do not subscribe to Eastman’s legal theory (in fact, I think an argument could be made that Eastman didn’t really buy his own legal theory), and that for an incumbent President to interfere with an election on the basis of a legal theory that a substantial percentage of the population does not accept necessarily precipitates a crisis. I think this is obviously a really bad idea; a really bad thing to do.
Sorry, I posted that last comment prematurely due to fat fingering a key. Still, maybe I have rattled on long enough.
.
I will conclude by noting that having won fair and square the first time around, Trump faced more resistance in office than I have ever seen a President face. I don’t understand why anyone believes that Dems would have accepted this .. whatever you want to call it. If Pence had failed to certify the election, at best people would have ignored him. At worst, he could have caused a civil war.
.
I’m not a revolutionary or a radical, I believe in our system, even knowing it is not perfect, so – none of this sounds good to me.
.
Ok, I’ve got other things to do tonight.
Ron
No. I observe he is a loser — He lost. That’s a fact. As you recall, he called lots of other people losers– for losing. And in the past he seemed to imply that we shouldn’t vote for people who were losers. If you think it’s unfair to criticize someone for losing you should criticize Trump for that behavior rather than ignoring it in him and only criticize those who do the same.
.
But his other flaws are many. And it’s those flaws I object to more than losing.
.
Oh sheesh. Melania wasn’t treated that badly. She wasn’t applauded like Michelle Obama. She was mostly ignored and some criticized her outfits. Big.Whip.
You make it sound like people literally pelted her her with elephant dung.
Huh? What the Dem’s are loving is the existance of GOP-in-Trump only who are sticking with him no matter what he does. They love that because they know they can beat Trump. They aren’t sure they can beat other GOP candidates.
.
I’m also not angry or disappointed at the 2022 or 2020 election. It was an election. I never predicted a red wave. And I like a few more GOP. But I’m not horrible upset.
.
I simply observe Trump nominated weak candidates and most lost. He lost in 2020.
.
He’s loud and full of bluster and no GOP in Trump only are not going to leave his side– but he’s a poor candidate. And we can find better people as GOP nominees.
Bari Weiss is posting the second Twitter dump now and it is has a few more gems.
THREAD: THE TWITTER FILES PART TWO.
TWITTERâS SECRET BLACKLISTS.
https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1601007575633305600?s=61&t=-_FmY_aO_vFOy0yepTQwWQ
This batch is all about âwhoâ got shadow banned, âwhoâ did it and their cockamamie justifications for doing itâŚ.. All the while denying it was happening.
It’s as if VDH knew exactly what we were talking about.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/12/08/does_trump_really_want_to_be_president_148577.html?utm_source=rcp-today&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mailchimp-newsletter&mc_cid=7f7b0d6f07&mc_eid=48ea422397
I would settle for candidates that do not work for Democrats. I doubt he would have beaten Fetterman if he had won the primary, but people like McCormick, is why we have Democrats getting all these wins in November and December.
Thom Tillis is pushing for an amnesty in the lame duck session, on top of the omnibus budget deal, and the goodies packed into NDAA.
Lucia,
“You make it sound like people literally pelted her her with elephant dung.”
.
I think more appropriate might be donkey dung.
The second batch of censorship disclosures from Twitter show the everything conservatives complained about was in fact happening at Twitter; even if not actually blocked, conservatives were subjected to shaddow-banning, removed from searches, not allowed to be listed on ‘trending’, etc. The entire cabal was dedicated to suppressing political views and policies the cabal disagreed with. If Musk manages to eliminate this bias, he will have done the country a service.
.
Lawsuits against Twitter, which appear to lack legal merit, continue to be filed by former employees almost daily in California, continuing the ‘process is the punishment’ approach the left routinely uses.
A lot of twitter chatter today about @Jack lying to congress about shadow banning conservatives, Congress man Steube from Sarasota on Newsmax;
@RepGregSteube: “We’re going to go back & look at this based on what Jack Dorsey (@Jack) & other executives stated under oath before the Judiciary Committee & I can guarantee they lied to Congress, which is a felony… we’re going to start making criminal referrals.”
https://twitter.com/newsmax/status/1601097682059001857?s=61&t=JhdMgZl8IMj4w5SPqXTrZQ
Also, some people here will be interested in this:
â3. Take, for example, Stanfordâs Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (@DrJBhattacharya) who argued that Covid lockdowns would harm children. Twitter secretly placed him on a âTrends Blacklist,â which prevented his tweets from trending.â
I forgot to post the link about Stanfordâs Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (@DrJBhattacharya).
There is quite a bit of chatter about this too.
https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1601011428579717121?s=61&t=pZvq9z1j5ASMh3LTpSmR_A
Steve wrote: “If Musk manages to eliminate this bias, he will have done the country a service.”
.
The “added context” is already a huge leap forward in cutting through misinformation.
.
Never fear though, the Biden admin are all-in on making sure no “wrong doing” is taking place. Physician, heal thyself.
âIf Musk manages to eliminate this bias, he will have done the country a service.â
.
Half the country says, “what bias?”
I thought the best moment in the recent Munk debate was when the NYT lady, Michele Goldberg, said they were merely unsuccessful of proving Trump-Russia collusion beyond a doubt but one must remember that his campaign manager was feeding secrets to a Russian asset. Then Matt Taibbi brought up later that after a year of Kilimnick connection being the lynchpin of the collusion story only two people ever called Kilimnick whose phone number is publicly listed, himself and another independent journalist that left the MSM, Aaron Mate.
At minute 57: https://vimeo.com/munkdebates/review/775853977/85003a644c?#
.
It turned out that Kilimnick was a primary source, not for Putin but for the US State Department. This was particularly devastating since the NYT debaters made their opening about how the MSM calls people to verify stories, unlike independents.
Sinema just left the Democratic party.
Ron,
If she still caucuses with the Dems, it wonât amount to much.
Yet more perfidy from the Biden administration: They have granted clemency to the Merchant of Death, Viktor Bout, and allowed him to walk free.
It seems that Sinema is being coy about which party she will caucus with.
Malcolm Gladwell responding to the “no one called Kilmnick” by insisting that the NYorker and others do tons of fact checking was a big boo-boo for his position.
.
The question left in the audiences mind is going to be “so what is fact checking”? Is it that Columbus sailed to the Americas in 1492? Or does “fact checking” allow a claim of “suspected sky” to run without checking if he’s a real spy, because it is in fact true that some people “suspect” him? I mean, it’s a “fact” that someone (i.e. “sources”) at least said they suspected him. So is “fact checking” officially complete if you merely check that it’s a “fact” that “sources” “suspect” him? Is that what Gladwell would claim?
We don’t know because that’s all just murky in his vigorous defense to the MSM not fact checking that ignores the specific case of an important fact that was not checked.
It appears the “fact” of whether Kilmnick was or was not an actual spy and for whom was not checked by anyone in MSM. And it was clearly an import piece of information to the story even if the stories only reported “suspected”.
.
But if not checking that is ok because the claim that he really was s never made then…. well…. no we shouldn’t trust that person or entity as a source of meaningful information.And if they keep repeating his “suspected” over and over– and never and the caveat — whether he is or not has not been investigated or confirmed–, in a story where it actually matters if he was or was not (and for whom), then the people delivering that story aren’t good sources of meaningful information.
.
And the issue of “trust” isn’t whether they check that Columbus really arrived in the Americas in 1492– which is not controversial. It’s whether they dig into check whether meaningful information is true,justified, supported etc.
.
So, in the end, at least that Gladwell response– whether he intended it to be or not, sounds like sophistry because in responding to a big point supported by a really meaningful example, it addresses what seems to be a detail (fact checking) , doesn’t describe precisely what he means by “fact checking” and then ignores a really big point.
.
(Oh…. and the defense of journalists still calling people and Kronkite not was about diversity and equity. But “we now call black people and he didn’t” is not helpful when the criticism is “they don’t call people who matter to the story“. You can’t make up for a habit of not calling Kilmnick during that Russian collusion story by responding, “but we called an African American professor of political science and asked him his views on espionage”. )
.
If the whole debate went like that it’s no wonder people were swayed to Talibi’s side.
Malcolm wanting to mock-away the MSM’s not covering the Hunter-Biden laptop story. Michelle and Malcom trying to wave it away…. bad for the “trust us” side.
.
We all KNOW that was a big political decision.
(~1:10:_)) Malcolm wants to wave it away as a conspiracy theory and wants to say who MSM is cripples Talibi and the other guys case. But… well… no. The case doesn’t require those in large for pay organizations to all get in a room to collude. It only requires them to have developed some blinders and bias in the same direction and for their “methods” to not correct the bias.
.
In this regard, Gladwells criticism of 50s journalists (for not talking to blacks, women etc.) actually hurts. Because it merely shows that the ability to have some blinders and methods that allow mistakes all in the same direction has always existed. Some stories “didn’t count” back then– some don’t count now. They are different stories– but you still need to be careful.
1:13:10. “It’s so strange hearing you debate Malcom because you listen to nothing your opponents say!”
.
I snorted coffee! I mean *that’s the problem*. Malcolm made up a strawman that the opponents were alleging a “conspiracy” and explains how it’s not a “conspiracy”. (As I was noting above.) And the British accent guy comes back with that! Which was right on!
Ed Forbes (Comment #216924)
âA reading of the US reports show that heavy artillery ammunition being sent to Ukraine has almost dried up due to the depleted US stocks. Long term, this artillery imbalance will continue to grow in favor of Russia.â
How many times have you said that and been wrong? This makes three times I think.
US Department of Defense, 09 December 2022:
âToday, the Department of Defense (DoD) announces the authorization of a Presidential Drawdown of security assistance valued at up to $275 million to meet Ukraine’s critical security and defense needs.â
Included:
⢠Additional ammunition for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS);
⢠80,000 155mm artillery rounds
https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3241679/275-million-in-additional-assistance-for-ukraine/
and this:
As of Nov. 23, the U.S. has committed to providing Ukraine with up to 924,000 155mm artillery rounds for use with 142 155mm howitzers to assist in the fight against Russiaâs ongoing invasion.
https://www.defensedaily.com/army-details-recent-deals-to-significantly-increase-155mm-artillery-shell-production/army/
1:17:___ – 1:20:__ and a bit earlier, the woman (michelle) tries to engage how the media being owned by a number of billionaires changed the demographics and how the market has changed. She wraps up with how this is not a story of media capture by the left, but rather one of capitalist plutocracy.
.
Well…. not either/or. And also misses the relevant issue which is: Has the media come to be dominated by a particular political view, and a small insular demographic. The relevant issue is not “Did ‘the left’ (whoever they are) intentionally organize to dominate the press by thus and so mechanism.”
.
Her entire description would make it seem (a) the demographics of reporter did narrow to a particular narrow group of people– college educated blah, blah. (b) the demographics of large powerful newspapers is narrow — rich people have always owned the ‘big’ ones– but it is “more” now and there used to be more small local people, (c) but it wasn’t “on purpose” to do that. Her point seems to be that it did change just changed because “capitalism and plutocracy” and not “ideological capture”.
.
But why the demographics narrowed and became (or might have become) biased is not relevant to whether people should trust the media to be unbiased or relflect a range of views. The relevant issue is whether those in power reporting and those in the trenches are or are not from a slim demographic that represents a biased outlook.
.
The trust happens only if if the bias is low either because the group of people is generally balanced or because they really, really truly have good mechanisms to eliminate it in stories. (The later had already been discussed.)
1:22__ Gladwell wrap up.
(1) He characterizes opponents of being concerned that the media is full of people who don’t think like opponents do. (True– more particularly excludes them to the point where the proportion is not remotely close to the proportion in the population and the effect tend to create “echo chamber”)
(2) Refers to Hunter Biden story and Russian Collsion story as “hot button issues on the opponents Twitter feed.” (Not sure why Gladwell would think this was helpful to his case where the opponents point is these were IMPORTANT stories that should have been scrutinzed and reported carefully. Gladwell has already failed to either explain why they were unimportant, Michells (whoever) had admitted the media made mistakes. Admitting one could only hear it on a twitter feed…. well… that doesn’t suggest we should trust the media. It suggests to at least hear important stories we need to also subscribe to a broad range of twitter feeds. Maybe we don’t “trust” what we read on twitter either– but that’s not the same as we must trust MSM.)
1:23:47–
Says opponents would like to see the demographics of elite journalists to better match demographics of political views. (Probably true.)
He then wants to explain why institution perfectly matching demographics should not be necessary for trust. (Actually also true. But may elide the real issue vis-a-vis journalism. Brings up a silly example of kindergarden teachers. )
He says what we have to believe that people in our institutions can place their personal beliefs above their ideological positions. (Also true– and equally true when we see nearly all white – asian -male engineers and few African Americas and female. So nice that everyone agrees. đ .)
And then he says if you don’t believe those in the institutions can put aside their position, you can’t trust any institution. ( Ehrmm…. But oddly, the argument of diversity in political views is that this acts as a counter weight because it is hard for anyone to set their own views aside. And it is also a notion under-pinning the US constitution having three separate branches of government, a bicameral legislature, and also many rights reserved to the states which have their own individual governments! So the argument that dividing power among a range of groups is a long standing one in the US– and actually the entire Anglo sphere and to large extent “the
West”. And it’s also one of the main underpinning for why we should do things like count!
So what to make of Gladwell’s summary? Deliverd with a facial expression appearing open and candid. What I meak of it is that it a fragile soap bubble with a brilliant soap enclosure that burst so easily we don’t even need someone to prick it.)
That’s poetic. I’m going to have to find time to listen to the debate now.
Douglas (British guy) points out that “malc” keeps creating strawmen. Restates his position- – just wants MSM to *be honest*. Isn’t trying to destroy it. Isn’t saying don’t read it. Etc. But they need to be honest, report *facts* including *facts they ‘don’t like’.) Summary end.
Next up Michelle (around 1:28__)
Michells claims that only the MSM media has the ethos of distinguishing the ethos of distinguishing between between facts you hope is true and what you actually find. (A rather bold claim leaving out academia, the justice system…. and basically everyone outside MSM. So broad it is clearly untrue to the point of being bunk.
And of course, one of the very real questions is whether, at this point, MSM truly adheres to this ethos. And also whether they are interested in investigating facts that might result in them discovering what they hope is true is not true. That would be sort of thrust of the Hunter Biden and Russian Collision ‘hot button’ stories. )
.
She moves on to criticizing conservative media of not covering things listeners don’t want to hear. (True. They are biased. You can’t trust them to be “fair and balanced” no matter what they say. But… that doesn’t mean we can trust the group she considers MSM. So… not useful to argument we should trust them.
She complains bloggers are not objective and don’t admit errors. Well… sure true of tons of them. But once again: doesn’t clear MSM. )
.
She claims from being around journalists there is a “hunger” to find the counter-intuitive story. (Sure… could be. But that doesn’t mean they pursue any and all possible counter intuitive stories. And one is left with “what constitutes ‘counter intuitive?” )
.
Goes on to NYT to story of trans kids. Pats NYT on the back for running story featuring two cases where transitioning was regretted and one where the kid was happy with outcome. (Not sure why doing precisely the type of story that interests the NYT is evidence we can ‘trust’ them. Though perhaps her notion is that “we” might think they would supress story because it didn’t work out for two out of three of the kids. I guess I have to hunt down the story. To me all it shows is: NYT has a lot of money and does budget to look into some human interest trans stories. Doesn’t mean we can or cannot “trust” them. )
Thank you Tom Scharf for originally providing the Munk Debates link and to Mike N for originally mentioning them.
I think there should be more frequent debates, particularly on ones that drill down more minutely on the facts of a particular case; kind of like putting stories or narratives on trial. If I’m invited to I would like to do some more research on the vaccine safety issue or other particular story or perhaps just on the issue of censorship of stories that do not fit with audience’s preferences.
I have a question to ponder: How come the Sierra Club, the Anti-Defamation League, NAACP and school teachers used to have well defined missions that had little to do with party politics and now they all are controlled arms of liberal ideology? What is the dynamic here?
1:31:__ matt Taibi last word.
Starts by engaging notion that NYT should be patted on back for doing trans-story after YEARS of not covering…. (Like Hunter Biden story.) Basically insinuates NYT only dares doing these stories when the story is already out there. đ
.
Points out that surveys show polls show people do NOT trust the media. He goes on to say MSM is trying to put their heads in the sand and ignore that it is simply a fact people do not trust them.
Points out absolute uniform 100% failure of entire MSM to project that Trump would win nomination. (Which… ok.) But followed by no one asking themselves why NONE OF the MSM could imagine what was coming. Points out the latter happened because they have become an isolated bubble out of touch with the rest of America. (This is, of course, a direct rejoinder to Malcom Gladwell’s accusation that Matt wants the demographics to “look like” the MSM does not achieve the dream of perfect Gladwell thinks they should– and implies because we should trust they do so, that they do. That was the grand vision that institutions can just set aside their views to see everything clearly.)
Ok… only started at the point Ron quoted. But yeah… I can see why the audience swayed toward the “don’t trust” side.
The don’t trust:
Was concrete. Cited specific xamples. Was very focused in what they were saying. Had fewer argument by eyeroll.
The ‘trust” side.
Resorted to a fair number of strawmen. Argued by eyerolls (as the rejoinder to ‘are you really bringing up concrete examples.) Gladwell’s weakness was to present some philosophical dream of what journalisms is supposed to be without providing evidence that it achieves it. Michelle (didn’t look up her name) often admitted the problem– but tried to say that really they aren’t a problem because the cause is …??. (As in, it’s all left wing elites because of Capitalism. )
.
I can’t help but wonder why they couldn’t get better people to represent the “trust MSM” side.
Yes. Thanks for the link. Obviously, I watched it. đ
I thought I might lighten the discussion by asking the question,
Who am I?
The answer in part being the sum of all the books I have read.
Four authors from my shelves as an example
Jack D Schwager Market Wizards.
Roger Zelazny Lord of light *
Irving Chenev Logical Chess
Matt Tabbai Insane Clown President
The last I read some years ago and quite enjoyed.
Very relevant to the discussion I think as he wrote a very negative Trump book yet now emerges as supporter of free speech when he must have known and knows is not so very free in the land of the mollycoddled.
Are the weather ducks lining up in a row?
2022 is obviously not a year to warm oneâs hearts.
60 years being the extent of most human memory or two units of climate change in the human perspective is not very much.
Two years a long time in a climate blog.
I may will have to eat these words in 2 years, Willard will no doubt oblige.
But if trends begin to accelerate downwards, and the world energy crisis worsens we may well regret the spin put on science in the misguided belief that the end justifies the means.
Enjoyed your debate breakdown, Lucia :).
“We may well regret the spin put on science”
.
Ends almost never justify the perverting truth (as means) in an open society in peace time. This is why I asked earlier why all the previously perfectly legitimate non-profits or public institutions seem to be now polluted and merely standing as pretext to drive the DNC platform.
.
Perhaps the Twitter corruption will be the hole in the dam that causes a burst of more red pilled Dems like Taibbi, Gabbard, Turley, Greenwald and perhaps now Sinema. I remember when Watergate caused a significant exodus from the GOP (but Jimmy Carter corrected that quick enough).
.
“I canât help but wonder why they couldnât get better people to represent the âtrust MSMâ side.”
.
What case would you have made for them, Lucia? I can’t see they have one.
lucia,
I believe the relevant epigram is: Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.
Note that this particular phrasing of an idea that can be found as far back as Proverbs 17:28, is probably not due to either Mark Twain or Abraham Lincoln.
Back in 2003 when Bernard Goldberg wrote his book Bias chronicling his experiences at CBS News, one might believe it was just groupthink. I wouldn’t be so generous now.
Lucia, thanks for saving me the bother of reading/seeing the debate. I am not much for debates (I prefer well thought out and reasoned written exchanges) but as debates goes this one does not sound like one argued at a very high level intellectually.
As an observer of the media over many years I do not see the current biases as anything new. There are biases across the political spectrum, but what bothers me is when I see obvious biases where the authors claim to be evenhanded. They could only believe that if they thought there was only one way of looking at an issue, i.e., their way. That kind of thinking does not run very deep.
One can still be informed by the media but people must damn well think for themselves.
Russell
80k 155mm is good for 2 wks at current rate of fire of 5k+ per day.
Vs Russia using at 20k+ per day.
US production is 20k/month
My statement stands. Ukraine is using ammunition faster than can be supplied.
Probably just my bias, but I would expect the don’t trust the media reporters to win, because I think it would be very difficult to convince someone who doesn’t trust the media to change their mind.
Ken Fritsch,
“They could only believe that if they thought there was only one way of looking at an issue, i.e., their way.”
.
Two points: first, that is pretty much the thinking across the entire academic establishment. Second, lots of the people who choose journalism as a major are not going to the the brightest candles in the box, but inspired by their over-confident professors, will likely think they are. Not so smart and overconfident is a bad combination. Leads to much of the garbage we see in the MSM.
If Sinema and Manchin both decide to caucus with Republicans, that would make a real difference; changing what you call yourself is pretty much meaningless. Truth is, the worst of the nonsense for the past two years is never going to pass the House, so a change in control of the Senate is only going to matter for a handful of the most unhinged lefty judge nominations.
angech,
I think what changed for Taibbi was that he became a target of the woke mob as soon as he disagreed in any way with the dominant narrative. I think he finally recognized that arrogant intellectual intolerance inevitably leads to willful dishonesty and a lot of very bad outcomes. If by the standards of the woke left Taibbi is nothing but an apostate, then for the woke left the ideas of most of humanity are unworthy of the tiniest consideration….. and that shows clearly in the MSM’s ‘reporting’ of events.
Judith Curry just posted she has a book coming soon. She also said she did an interview that disappeared from Google search. I searched “Judith Curry BizNews” on Duckduckgo and it came up number one result. Then I did it on Google and it also came #1 but I don’t know if it would have been #1 if I had done the Google first. Can a few people do the “Curry BizNews” Google search to see if it comes up #1?
Ron, it came up first for me.
It comes up #1 for me, both google and duckduckgo. I never use google; too much snooping of my searches…. and targeted ads follow immediately.
More on the 155mm ammunition issue
.
Western Arms Production to Ramp Up as Ukraine Burns Through Stockpiles
.
The Pentagon has furnished some 800,000 155-mm artillery rounds to Ukraine, while the US has just one factory making them, the General Dynamics plant in Scranton, Pennsylvania that produces only 14,000 rounds a month.
.
âWe have plans⌠to get that in increments ultimately up to 36,000 a month in about three years,â said LaPlante.
.
https://www.thedefensepost.com/2022/09/12/western-arms-production-ukraine-stockpiles/
16 senior Twitter employees are named!
â1. @elonmusk , Your new company @Twitter has many ex FBI/CIA agents in high ranks. Should probably do a little housecleaning.â
https://twitter.com/nameredacted247/status/1600316966182715393?s=61&t=vpdNFekuXP57OhFemtDVVw
Here is an article in The Federalist today expressing my opinion on the reaction among some of the GOP to Trump’s talk of going beyond the Constitution to remedy the unprecedented election interference.
.
The writer, Evita Duffy, points out that the GOP leadership should perhaps put at least as much concern with the FBI, big tech and big media’s actual violation of the Constitution as Trump’s suggestions to remedy the violations in an unconstitutional manner. https://thefederalist.com/2022/12/08/these-7-trump-critical-gop-senators-have-no-plan-to-deal-with-unconstitutional-election-altering-censorship/
And if you didn’t already think that social media in general and TikTok in particular weren’t tools of the devil, there’s this:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/teen-girls-are-developing-tics-doctors-say-tiktok-could-be-a-factor-11634389201?st=04rk7p715jyy7wg&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
A follow up article about five months later says that it’s still happening, but that it does appear that the teen girls may have had problems to start with. Some of them could be cured of the tics, but then developed other problems. Comments raise the possibility of a connection between gender dysphoria and social media.
Ed Forbes (Comment #217164),
That link is disturbing. If we are to believe it, we would seem to have to believe:
* A medium size war has depleted US stockpiles in a matter of months.
* It took the Pentagon until September to realize that there maybe was a problem.
* Ramping up production will take three years.
* After the three year ramp up, capacity will still be less than half of what is needed for a medium size war.
———-
We supposedly have the capacity to fight a two front war in Europe and Asia. Either of those would require a lot more munitions than the war in Ukraine. If we do not have or can not produce the required munitions, then we can’t actually fight such wars. If so, that raises the question about what we are spending $800 billion a year for.
.
It seems we are being lied to. No shock there. But it remains unclear just what the lie is and how bad it is.
DeWitt wrote: “Comments raise the possibility of a connection between gender dysphoria and social media.”
.
Possibilty? They’re ‘avin a larf. Social media is the ideal place to spread around mimetic viruses. When you have a popular culture which views “normalcy” as oppressive and celebrates and rewards victimhood and broken individuals, then it’s really no surprise impressionable people will fail and break themselves on purpose.
Ron Graf: “The writer, Evita Duffy, points out that the GOP leadership should perhaps put at least as much concern with the FBI, big tech and big mediaâs actual violation of the Constitution as Trumpâs suggestions to remedy the violations in an unconstitutional manner.â
I don’t believe that the Constitution levies any “shall”s or “shall not”s on the media or private companies (e.g., tech). I will certainly admit that bias exists, but bias is not Constitutionally forbidden.
Edit: Nor is bias universal; there are media outlets with many differing points of view. That’s a good thing, in my view.
Mike M #comment-217168. âbeing lied toâ
.
On procurement, the margins on selling dumb artillery ammunition is nowhere as good as selling âsmartâ ammunition.
.
Remembering back to Rumsfield in the Bush administration, he wanted to surplus all of the Abrams MBTâs as all future war would be low intensity and heavy tanks would not be needed. Neither would large stockpiles of ammunition be needed.
.
2005 article
.
â Rumsfeld moved even further in 2002 when he urged military leaders to start thinking like venture capitalists and invest in new technologies such as unmanned aerial vehicles, space-based weaponry, and information warfare. Suddenly, honored weapons such as the M1-Abrams battle tank were somehow considered irrelevant to modern war, while boots on the ground were considered less important than precision weapons in the air.â
.
â For good or ill, the country will have to live with Rumsfeldâs revolution for a long time to come. If Rumsfeldâs revolution takes hold, he will have built an organization with the capacity to move quickly in response to new threats. The question is whether it will still be able to respond to the âoldâ threats lurking in the shadows of past adversaries such as Russia and China. If those threats reemerge, as well they might, the department will need enormous capacity to respondËnot an easy task if the Iraq war drags on.â
.
https://www.brookings.edu/research/rumsfelds-revolution-at-defense/
HowardW “I donât believe that the Constitution levies any âshallâs or âshall notâs on the media or private companies (e.g., tech).”
.
So if various branches of the federal government are in constant contact with Twitter (weekly meetings with the FBI, for example), informing twitter of “things” and Twitter act on that information, which results in suppressing speech, that’s fine? Seems like a bit of a loophole to me.
.
Besides, Twitter is no more a “private company” than the phone service. That’s the whole basis of their section 230 protections. The idea that they can say whatever they want (by amplifying speech they like and suppressing speech they don’t), about anyone they want, with no legal liability for it, is protection noone else has, and least of all most individuals without billions of dollars backing them.
Oh, and to really rub it in, the very idea that Twitter would suppress speech, particularly political speech, is a right wing conspiracy theory. Newspapers, at least, don’t pretend they’re speaking with the voice of the people. How many datamine Twitter to determine public opinion on issues, do you imagine?
Ed Forbes (Comment #217171),
Interesting.
Harold: “I donât believe that the Constitution levies any âshallâs or âshall notâs on the media or private companies (e.g., tech). I will certainly admit that bias exists, but bias is not Constitutionally forbidden.”
.
I agree with your comment. My understanding of the law is that the government is prohibited to induce a private actor to do what is illegal for the government to do. So the key here is government inducement. The Twitter defense by the left will be that it was not an inducement but Twitter’s desire to figure out who to censor and how and just were seeking government assistance as good citizens. This might fly if Twitter were not so vulnerable to the government regulator’s and legislator’s oversight. In particular the Twitter CEO was warned by GOP that section 230 protection carve-outs would be revisited if it was found they were being abused with, for example, shadow banning. Twitter denied they were doing that.
.
The leftwing legislators wanted Twitter to do more censorship and they controlled both the congress and the executive, and thus Twitter’s had undue influence. Twitter’s behavior was knowingly wrong and secretive and in collaboration with their governing officials. This makes them co-conspirators of a criminal enterprise being perpetrated by the regime in my analysis. But I’m not a lawyer.
Here is a link to the whole 1:30 of Vaxxed:
https://rumble.com/v1x0jwa-vaxxed-the-movie.html
.
I just watched it and realize in the context of the squelching of important stories like the Hunter laptop, this one dwarfs it. The US government would be facing a trillion dollars in liability if there were a congressional investigation like they call for in the movie, to put the witnesses on the record.
.
I guess six years ago it was so unbelievable that childhood vaccines could contribute to autism, that the CDC would not do safety studies until a doctor like Wakefield spoke out, and then only do studies of vaccinated versus vaccinated at different months by race (not against unvaccinated). Then they spent two years trying to retroactively change the priori analysis plan to no avail until they just threw out half the data. And this vanished as a story before it was ever told to the public.
.
How could this happen? Sharyl Atkinson, formerly of CBS news, tells us 7 years ago in her TED talk that one tactic that is used is called “astro-turfing,” as in a fake grass, as in fake grass-roots social media and news environment. She says on certain important issues to big business or government we are in effect inside a giant Truman Show.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bYAQ-ZZtEU&ab_channel=TEDxTalks
Lucia, have you tested how chatgpt handles physics problems?
This might be important. [I know, I say that a lot] Morning reports from Ukraine are highlighting explosions at russian facilities. An example with a map.
âLooks like Ukrainians is hitting hard tonight.
Major explosions reported from Belbek airport, Sevastopol, Simferopol, Yalta and Dzhankoy in occupied Crimea as well as Melitopol.â
https://twitter.com/rien4djri/status/1601693539259543552?s=20&t=I5hTvzQu8Qo8sijaRNRb9g
The thing I can’t explain is that these sites are all well outside the range of the HIMARS rockets we had given Ukraine. [?!]
Two of the sites are russian barracks. Videos show huge fires and in one case grizzly bodies. These sites have been in use for a while, and suddenly they are in range of Ukrainian weapons. I think something is up.
MikeN,
I tested it with a few very technical engineering type questions (eg How does the angle of attack of an airplane wing change with total weight of the aircraft?). The answers seem superficially correct but, as you would expect, convey no real understanding of the question. But that is a bit like the old joke: what is impressive about a dog walking on its hind legs is not how well it walks, but that it can do it at all. Touchy-feely, fluff questions (How would you summarize A Tale of Two Cities?) come back with very good answers, written at roughly freshman college level.
MikeN,
BTW, I have no doubt chatGPT could write a report for English literature class far better than many (most?) students could…. grading students based on work done at home may become pretty meaningless.
MikeN,
Nope. I just learned about it. I was going to fiddle but it turns out you have to create an account (which is probably free, but I was getting ready to tutor at the time.)
I was just going to do ordinary questions. But maybe Monday I’ll check it out and run a physics problem through it. Could be fun.
Lucia,
You have to provide your name, email address, a password, and a cell phone number; the email and phone number are verified with “confirmation” codes sent to you. Once you have given them the information, access is free for individuals.
.
They also offer an application interface so that it is possible to write a program that incorporates the capabilities of chatGPT, so long as the program has internet access.
.
I did encounter a few glitches: “Network connection lost” instead of an answer, even though my local WiFi connection to the internet was perfectly OK. I have read that at busy times the chatGPT system becomes overloaded.
Ed Forbes (Comment #217171).
The policies in the Brookings article were clearly not fully implemented since we are still producing M1 tanks. So I don’t think it is more than a possible explanation for out lack of 155 mm artillery. Also, there are several different types of 155 mm shells and at least two manufacturers (United Technologies and General Dynamics). So the article about our limited capacity is at best incomplete and at worst seriously misleading.
Steve– I figured it was pretty routine and simple. It’s just that I learned about it between two tutoring sessions yesterday. (I saw someone complaining about how it’s going to enable too much cheating in schools.) So when I saw the sign up I knew it just wasn’t the time to do it. Also, I wasn’t all that motivated.
.
But now I am motivated to put in a few typical questions students get asked. I want to see if it’s any good and also if it’s worth the trouble on physics questions.
.
I’m pretty sure with respect to high school tests, schools can deal with this. Homework is already unreliable as a test. It’s main use should always have been and still is practice. Students who know they will be tested will want to know how to do it. Students who just what “the credit” to seem to be working will always be lazy– most of those will fail the test.(There are always a few who do learn from slight exposure to class material. That’s what being “very bright academically” means.”
.
On that– I did finally encounter a student who, I think, I under-brain powered for physics. Her parents discovered she’s way behind *this week* and want to catch her up. But really…. nothing. She’s got nothing. And either she’s become totally demotivated in general or just for physics.
This is a complete rarerity in students I encounter. More often, they missed a few classes and are behind, they have a poor teacher __ either because the lack subject matter expertise or they suck at teaching– or they really were lazy but they are bright enough if they try. This one, I don’t know if I can help her and certainly not in a two week time frame before finals. I feel sorry for her and her parents…. but oy!
SteveF,
I think “they” are worried about college essays too. But, honestly, the college essay thing has been twisted a long time. There are tons of people who help “edit” or “advise” college essays. Some do somewhat appropriate editing and advise– but it’s still help. Some do more– to the extent of ghost writing.
.
And then there is the someone twisted purpose of the essay. My sisters and I always joke that our about overcoming adversity would have gone,
“When I was 7 my father lost his job in El Salvador. My parents informed the four children we’d be moving to the US. Leaving behind our toys and dog, we traveled up through Mexico. The trip took two weeks. When we arrived in Texas, my father bought a used car from a friend he had known in El Salvador. The plan was to drive to Buffalo where my Grandfather and Grandmother had settled….)
And it goes on. Note what it leaves out: Yes, we spent 2 weeks in Mexico– on vacation in Acapulco and Mexico city. (We saw the cliff divers!!!)
.
We flew from El Salvador to Acupulco and flew from Mexico City to Austin Tx.
.
My dad’s friend was also American. It was a car big enough to fit all the kids. My (Irish-American) grandfather had “settled” in Buffalo– moving for Staten Island. We moved into their BIG house in the nicest section of Buffalo. Yada yada.
.
Obviously, losing a job is a tough thing. But the story can be made to sound *pitiful* by omission of information. And yet, every thing said is true.
.
And of course the story would convey “minority Latina”, not ” genetically mostly Irish-Anglo-American daughter of American born parents….” Sadly, essays to telegraph minority status weren’t as big a thing back in the day. đ
Malcolm Gladwell was so bad it seemed he was a counter agent for the no trust side. He was so unprepared, he didnât even understand the arguments. Arrogantly playing incoherent race cards was just confusing.
Michelle Goldberg just isnât too bright. She made a good point of being surprised the Canadian truckers were regular people, but the question should be how she became biased against them to start with. Answer: MSM.
Mike, another older article that addresses 155mm stockpiles
.
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/army-budget-artillery-shells/
.
The Army Plans On Stockpiling Thousands Of Artillery Shells Ahead Of The Next Big War
PUBLISHED FEB 13, 2018
.
â The Armyâs proposed fiscal 2019 budget calls for purchasing an eye-popping 148,297 155mm shells, including 1,189 GPS-guided Excalibur rounds designed for use in danger-close situations, officials told reporters on Tuesday. The order reflects a 825% increase from the 16,573 155mm shells the Army planned on purchasing this fiscal year.â
.
The US was clueless on the numbers needed in a hot conventional war with a major power such as Russia or China.
Lucia,
The insanity that is green energy has finally become apparent, today Dec 11. At 14:00 today, there was insufficent wind for ANY UK onshore wind turbine to produce electricity. The name plate wind 25GW capacity was actually contributing 0.78GW or about 1.5% of demand.
Of the roughly 40GW of demand, 56% is sourced from Gas, 14% from Nuclear and 12.5% from other sources including Biomass, Solar, Coal, etc.
The other 17.5% is coming from outside the UK, thanks to the insanity of green energy when times are tough the UK can no longer keep the lights on without begging from our neighbours.
Image of a windless UK https://i.postimg.cc/9fc6gCgS/u-Kwind-At14-00dec11-2022.png
Link to live UK National Grid data http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
Another item from last night’s missile barrage⌠Two HQ/ Barracks of the Wagner mercenary unit were hit. One was only 30 miles from Bakhmut and may have been directing the russian offensive there. These Ukrainian rocket attacks of HQ/barracks in the past have caused many KIAs.
âSerhii Haidai, Head of Luhansk Oblast Military Administration, has reported that there has been an explosion at the Wagner Group headquarters in temporarily occupied Kadiivka.â
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/12/11/7380278/
âUkrainian forces have struck a headquarters of Russia’s Wagner mercenary group in eastern Ukraine, Luhansk’s Ukrainian governor has said.
Serhiy Haidai said a hotel where the group was based in Kadiivka, Luhansk region, was hit. He added there were major Russian losses.â
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63933132
âUkrainian strike hits Russian barracks in occupied Melitopol According to witnesses 10 explosions were heard, although some of those may have been from Russian anti-aircraft systems. Ukrainian officials claimed scores of Russian dead and injured while Russia conceded a handful of casualties.
Video footage posted on social media showed what was claimed to be a Russian barracks in the southern city engulfed in a fierce blaze with some claiming the site was being used by the Wagner mercenary group.â
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/11/ukrainian-himars-missiles-hit-russian-occupied-melitopol
I’m clearly the conspiracy monger. I went back and searched the threads on this site back to Feb 2020 and did not find any mention of the origin of the virus until May 2021. This despite claims by Tom Cotton, Mike Pompeo and Radcliffe in Feb 2020 that US intel captured abnormalities in the Wuhan lab just before the December 2019 appearance of SARS2.
.
The first comment came in May 2021 by SteveF after reading the Nicholson Baker article. Two weeks later Judith Curry posted the blog Collapse of Fake Consensus on Covid Origins in response to my pointing to the Baker article and other earlier articles and revelations. The post go 1400 comments of which ~20% were mine.
.
By this time I had been suspended from Twitter for three months for likely posting those same points about the furin cleavage site and Yunan copper mine for 6 months on Twitter and CE. (Frank was my main opponent and supporter of the natural origin consensus).
.
I guess my point is that if you are willing to listen to ideas only when they become a consensus within your social circle are you (and we all) vulnerable to information control? Real question.
Ron Graf,
“Iâm clearly the conspiracy monger.”
.
On that you will likely find little disagreement.
.
What I think is the strongest argument that the virus was a product of lab research is the thin odds that the virus would emerge and spread from one of the very few cities in the world where gain-of-function research was being conducted on bat coronaviruses. No native bat population, no indication of a zoonotic jump, and plenty of very dangerous experiments being conducted on bat viruses closely related to covid 19. The CCP will make it very unlikely the origin can ever be proven (all relevant genetic data was certainly long ago destroyed, and those in a position to actually know what happened seem to have, well, disappeared), but Occam’s razor fairly well screams it was a lab accident.
Searching this forum is pretty sketchy. I did find a link to this article https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2020/09/09/alina-chan-broad-institute-coronavirus/ back in Nov 2020 from HowardW. I wouldn’t suggest that was the first mention though.
DaveJR, Ron Graf,
I found this comment from April 2020 by JD Ohio:
.
I didn’t search every thread, but I am pretty sure the origin of the virus was discussed a few times. As I said, Occams razor fairly well screams “lab origin!”
I am quite sure that we had mentions of the lab leak in spring 2020. I have no idea how to go about finding them.
Mike M,
You load each old thread and do a “find” search for specific words. I searched a few threads for “origin”, and JD Ohio came up. Maybe more efficient would be “lab” or “lab leak”.
.
But yes, I think you are correct that the origin of the virus was discussed more than once.
Thanks for the article Dave. I hadn’t seen it. But I found Alina Chan about a month later mentioned in another article. My interest was initiated after Li-meng Yan appeared on Tucker Carlson and mentioned her paper. Yan was right on some main points, including the evidence of lab insertion of the code the viruses uses to infect multiple species, the FCS. Yan also rightly saw Zhengli Shi’s obfuscation to the origin of RaTG13. A month or so later following Alina Chan’s Twitter I saw the revelations of Twitter @theseeker, who found and translated the Chinese Phd and masters dissertations about the 3 out of 6 dead Yunnan copper minors from bat guano exposure. Then they were able to track the RaTG13 as coming the from the same copper mine. Finally, in January 3, 2021, the first legacy news media(New York Magazine) by Baker that I went into high gear on Twitter and CE. This was the same time Peter Daszak and the WHO team were waiting in quarantine in Wuhan to be given the official conclusion for their investigation on origin, that it was likely from frozen food from Italy.
.
SteveF, all the points you cited were known in January and Feb of 2020, when Tom Cotton (and Tucker) pointed them out. What made you secure that it was not from the lab? Fauci? The published virologists community letter to the Lancet? All the above? Real question.
Ron,
Probably, IMO. Some time back, someone suggested we have an echo chamber going here at the Blackboard, and I thought they might have a point. I responded then, and I respond now: ‘so what’. We are all almost always vulnerable to information control, misinformation, disinformation, the whole span of the modern jargon. I’d suggest it’d be more useful to think of ‘misinformed’ as everyone’s default state, and think that sometimes we are fortunate enough to be able to find the truth, rather than worry about being vulnerable to information control.
Something else to think about: At end of the day, I don’t talk to my friends merely to find truth, but because I like talking to my friends.
Anyways, I rather think that we all probably do regulate our beliefs and information processing to some extent based on the response of our fellows. We probably actually do this for good reasons. Nothing is perfect, but, to the extent we use this heuristic it might be better than the alternative, in general. In my view, you’ll have to do better than point out that it can lead me astray. I *will* be led astray, no matter what I do. You need to demonstrate that less errors would be made using some other method to persuade me.
FWIW, I think there used to be more (wow it’s difficult to type this) diversity of thought and viewpoint here. (It’s difficult to type this because of all the sticky sweet nonsense out there in our society right now about valuing diversity. But actual different points of view can be valuable, rather than the superficial diversity the Elect of the Church of PC prefer, like skin color or sexual orientation)
Anyways – there used to be some more liberal viewpoints here. I think they left us though. John F used to be such a one. I dare say his opinion was valued and he wasn’t driven out, he chose not to read or remark here anymore.
Shrug.
Ron Graf,
“What made you secure that it was not from the lab?”
.
Nothing. As I said, there was always an obvious chance of a lab origin. No matter how much you search, I doubt you will find that I ever said any differently, here or elsewhere. Not in 2020 and not in 2021.
.
Of course, new evidence changes the probabilities of sources (eg discussions of the unusual sequence for the furin cleavage site makes a natural origin less likely), but there has always been some evidence it came from the Wuhan laboratory.
.
It could have been a simple escape of a natural virus collected by the laboratory staff in bat caves 600 miles south (they apparently had hundreds if not thousands of samples from those caves), but since AFAICT no natural corona virus has ever been shown to have a furin cleavage site (never mind one with a sequence that is very unlikely to occur in nature by chance), a simple escape from the lab of a natural virus seems much less likely than the virus being a product of gain-of-function manipulation and sloppy lab practices.
mark bofill,
“I think there used to be more (wow itâs difficult to type this) diversity of thought and viewpoint here.”
.
We have diversity, but it is limited in one sense. We have everything from conspiracy nuts to pretty rational people. What we don’t have is a lot of people who think comments should be censored. So I guess that means there is some ‘limited diversity of opinion’. You and I would both be ridden out of town on a rail at most any “socially aware” blog.
Mark, if I understand you correctly, it is OK to be misinformed as long as you are happy and in good company. I know that is likely a harshly truncated read, but yes, I am short on nuance, I admit, no offense.
.
My thought since the schoolyard is that if I am worried about what my friends think of my opinion they are not the best friends. Friends and ideally all good souls will forgive honest differences of opinion.
.
“You need to demonstrate that less errors would be made using some other method to persuade me.”
.
The only alternative I suggest is withholding judgment in the face of uncertainty, even when or especially when, uncertainty is everywhere. Not being completely staked allows one to be open to changing opinion. Other necessary ingredients for my system include the ability to admit a change of opinion based on new information. This opens the door to receiving new information. Also, being able to admit your oddities help. I realize that being unsettled in beliefs is difficult. A lot of things are. It’s not the same as being loosely attached to beliefs from not caring. That’s easy.
.
Today’s NYP on Fauci:
Steve, I agree that you never said it wasn’t from a lab before May 2021. That might explain in part you willingness to read the Wade article. I still ask that we ponder that after 14 months of discussion of Covid as the main topic the conflict between the obvious circumstantial evidence of the lab origin was not (that I could find) compared with the virologist’s official certainty on natural origin. This among a group that knows the official certainty on climate is manufactured.
No offense taken. It’s tempting to let that stand and argue it, because an argument could certainly be made that so long as you are happy and in good company it is indeed OK to be misinformed, but it’s not the argument I’m making or care to make.
We *are* misinformed. This should be our default assumption. Why would this be otherwise? We have a lot of rules of thumb and a lot of mental models that simplify reality and relatively few direct sources of information, we have limited time and data throughput. *Of course* we are misinformed. We get all sorts of things wrong all the time and never know it. This is all my opinion of course. I’m probably misinformed. đ
??? I don’t think I suggested otherwise? Perhaps I spoke poorly somehow and gave you a mistaken impression. I will go re-read my words and try to see how this attaches to something I said. Perhaps I misinformed you by inadequately expressing my idea.
.
Life is short, and decisions have to be made in the face of uncertainty. I think it is valuable to remember humility and that the possibility of error is almost always (always?) present, and certainty is extremely hard to come by. But withholding judgement isn’t a viable option, because we have to take action while we still can to accomplish our objectives, to live day to day, and month to month and year to year.
[Edit: I agree with most of the rest of what you say, being open to changing opinion, certainly. I don’t think that’s a problem here though. Most technical people I’ve met are receptive to new information and open to changing their opinion. In the end, it is what it is, seems to be the view of scientists and engineers.]
Steve,
~grins~ Fair enough.
I’d like to think there are still positions Left of where I stand that are legitimate; that it’s not all just the illiberal progressive nut jobs to the Left of me. But I don’t really know anymore / not sure.
Look I don’t mean to hog the forum, but regarding this:
and other statements, maybe it would help to realize that these people are my friends and part of the reason they are my friends is that our life experiences have led us to similar conclusions. The similar conclusions are the result here, not the cause. The common life experiences are probably the cause of the friendship. At least that’s how I view it.
[Edit: I probably should have put more thought into this. It’s not common life experiences exactly. … I’ll return to this and clarify further if there is need. Until then. I must leave you. MISINFORMED! Heh]
Ron Graf,
“I still ask that we ponder that after 14 months of discussion of Covid as the main topic the conflict between the obvious circumstantial evidence of the lab origin was not (that I could find) compared with the virologistâs official certainty on natural origin. This among a group that knows the official certainty on climate is manufactured.”
.
I am not at all certain what you are trying to show, but if you are suggesting I personally accepted the official line of ‘natural origin’ without doubt, then you are simply mistaken. But please do show links to prove I am wrong about that.
.
I have (as best I can remember) always considered a lab leak a very plausible explanation, if not the most likely. With all available evidence, I put the chance of a lab origin at 85%… or higher.
.
The virologists who publicly discounted a lab origin as ‘virtually impossible’ and “conspiracy theories” were lying, of course, and no doubt they were pressured to do so by the evil elf himself… who was trying mainly to save his own sorry ass. I do wish I believed in Hell so I could be think he wil suffer an eternity. Bit sadly, I don’t and he won’t. He’ll retire in luxury, even if wholly undeserved.
.
But you should remember it was only much later that their (FOIA’ed) email messages showed they were all lying.
Ron,
Although look here. I thought you were complaining about our social circles impacting our beliefs up top. Nothing in what you laid out in your approach / alternative answer (withholding judgement, being open to new ideas, being ready to change our opinions, being aware of our own quirks) really speaks to the social circle influencing beliefs idea, does it? If so I’m not following.
mark bofill.
“Iâd like to think there are still positions Left of where I stand that are legitimate;”
,
And there surely are: Taibbi, Bari Weiss, Michael Shellenberger, Johnathan Turley, and a host of others. But each of those has been disowned (and loudly accused of ‘selling out’) by those currently in charge of “the narrative”. I would welcome the participation of any of the above, and many more, willing to argue in good faith in substantive conversations. But it seems substantive conversations are almost never allowed where people who differ in opinion from the dominant narrative (you know, “the USA is a hopelessly racist country, with very nearly half the population either Nazis or at least avid supporters of Nazis”) are allowed to participate.
SteveF: “I am not at all certain what you are trying to show, but if you are suggesting I personally accepted the official line of ânatural originâ without doubt, then you are simply mistaken.”
.
Steve, I do indeed believe you had doubts, which is why you were interested to read Wade’s article and share it. My point that in the absence of other scientists putting their necks (careers) on the chopping block the semi-retired reporters would have had nothing to report. But the information was out there even before they got the editor’s approval. I was following it from Chan’s and other’s Twitter posts and the science group that named themselves DRASTIC. My point is that everyone here had an opportunity to read Yan’s paper and follow the references and co-authors and biology. (I took a crash refresher course.) But you did not share your doubts out loud (that I saw), perhaps self-censoring to avoid ridicule. At least this was the case before May 2021, when the consensus shifted in MSM.
.
My bigger point is that Fauci and the pre-eminent virologists believed they could get away with it. They were comforted by the enormous backing of power that they must see that we do not see so clearly.
.
In this case luckily there were just enough anti-GOF scientists, combined with “conspiracy buffs” or whomever to get to the critical point to expose the fraud.
.
I am hoping we are going to turn in a better direction as a society on this issue after what I believe has been a steady decline.
.
Mark: “I thought you were complaining about our social circles impacting our beliefs…”
.
Certainly Sharyl Atkinson believes that the powerful are very tuned to this belief and are expending great sums to control social circle consensus.
Steve,
At risk of providing further evidence of the echo in here, I still have no choice but to agree with you.
It’s a real b1tch sometimes.
Ron,
That answer
doesn’t address my question
at all. Should I take this to mean you are not interested in further pursuing this thread of discussion with me? This is fine of course. Is this yet another example of me being misinformed?
I’m not a psychologist, but my impression is that there have been plenty of experiments done that support the idea that people will override their own judgement to conform to the judgement of a group under certain circumstances. (example) . This doesn’t surprise me, seeing that humans have been cooperative tribal social animals since before we even were humans. I expect there are evolutionary reasons for it, although I won’t pretend to know exactly what they are.
At any rate- yes. We are probably all more or less susceptible to this. I assure you, we all of us here try our best just like you to be open minded, and to listen to new ideas, and not to rush too quickly to judgement. Two things though:
1) I’d suggest avoiding pretending that this makes you immune to your psychological vulnerabilities, because you’re probably kidding yourself. It’s not nearly that simple to overcome such pressures. Realizing that you have no wings doesn’t magically give you the ability to fly; realizing your nature doesn’t automatically empower you to transcend your nature.
2) We ALL have to draw a line somewhere and decide what is not worth listening too. ALL OF US. You do it too. You’re not out there listening to the Flat Earthers, or the Cold Fusioners, or pick your group. Life is too short; it’s impossible not to draw the line someplace and just say ‘Nah, that’s a waste of my time.’ You wouldn’t have time to get anything done otherwise. So, there’s a judgement call there someplace. Maybe it’d be worth figuring out how and why we draw these lines differently.
One more thing, saying this to Steve:
is very unbecoming as far as I am concerned. You are presumptuous as heck, that’s for sure.
.
If you look back far enough, you’ll find I’ve put forward plenty of harebrained, conspiracy minded ideas that have not been particularly well received by the group, and presumably I’m just as hobbled by groupthink as anyone else here. I don’t know what you think your point is. Other than giving offense.
Ron, I will put my thoughts on your recent sories posted here recently as bluntly as I can. It appears you want to put yourself ahead of the crowd here in seeking out and finding where information has been kept from the public.
It is no longer sufficient for you to argue specific cases where in my judgment the powers that be might be prone to be less than forthcoming in general, can be in some instances correct in their conclusion. You appear to be putting yourself against all or most of the posters here by using the timing on talking about evidence for a laboratory source of Covid-19 and implying a group affliction here at the Blackboard for being late to the game.
There would have to be more evidence provided about the discussions here at the Blackboard – even though I do not see the great importance of the timing. I suspect most posters here read the early papers presented on the cases for a lab source and those of it having developed naturally. I also believe that the lack of information about the flu and mitigation was given a lot of discussion here as well as Covid-19 quickly becoming a polarizing political topic. MikeM has referred to Covid-19 as the Wuhan flu from the very beginning. You might ask him what he was implying with that reference.
Of course, the issue of lab versus natural source has not yet been conclusively decided, although there are some on both sides who talk as though it has been.
Perhaps you feel put upon by the number of posters here that disagreed with you on the autism/vaxxed issue.
I do have a question for you. What has been the summary/main thrust of your public pronouncements on the legitimacy of the 2020 Presidential elections? Did it evolve over time?
Mark, again I agree with 90% of what you and Steve say. I appreciate your hearing out the 10% difference.
.
You are right that it was presumptuous, and impolite, to make a point of something not said. It was not an attack. The point is that not bringing up topics that are too controversial is NORMAL. The question is a very uncomfortable one of whether knowledgeable experts on our human instincts are taking advantage of those instincts to control. I am not saying there is a Dr. Evil at Langley who is the power broker or a Davos clan or whatever imagined conspiring powers there could be are working to control information. But it is unmistakable to me that information control is becoming a more an more important battlefield of business and power.
.
I consider this blog post a very rare sampling of extremely intelligent people talking freely on all topics of current events. I also realize that everyone had biases and that the only way to validate thoughts is to test them against other people’s reasonings, with bonus points for gaining support from those neutral or even unfriendly demeanors toward one’s views.
.
The balance to trusting feedback is that it is not too unfriendly to be invalidly negative due to bias, yet not so friendly as to be polluted with positive bias.
.
We all understand this intuitively yet we fool ourselves sometimes in unconsciously seeking validation with too friendly a source. This is the basis of echo chamber, group think and also tribalism, IMO.
.
If you agree so far then my point was that normal human behavior may no longer be safe for society. We may have to intentionally look harder for invalidation to counter all the forces that are pushing us and profiting from our social biases.
Well, I’m not unaware of the irony, but I’ll wait to see what the group makes of this before I open fire. I’m not impressed so far.
FWIW – I like talking with people who disagree with me yet who can stay within the bounds I consider mandatory for civilized conversation. Here is my little corner for such discussions. Mostly I’ve used it to discuss stuff with Joshua. We haven’t talked recently. I can’t say doing this has led me to any brilliant insights, much as I’d like to. Obviously this is not a valid experiment, but I guess it’s no less valid than looking back over Steve’s comments here to draw conclusions.
I’ll shush for abit. Thanks for your response though.
mark bofill
Well… there were more people commenting when the blog was active.
.
My reaction to Ron G. intimating that (based on his search) people weren’t discussing lab origins theory “early enough” for his taste is both (a) is his search thorough enough? and (b) so what? He certainly could have posted about it earlier than whenever he thinks it first appeared here. No one would have blocked him. But wrt (b) if (for whatever reason) he didn’t post about it earlier than whenever he now thinks it first appeared. If he doesn’t think his own motives for not posting here are not suspect, then it would be odd to suggest other people motives for not posting about that here are suspect. wrt (a) it’s hard to search comments. I’m dubious that someone can easily find the “first” references to lab origins. There is no particular set of key words that is certain to identifiy a first discussion of origins.
.
But mostly (b): So what?
Lucia, Ron,
In response to the ‘so what’ question, I think Ron would say that efforts to manipulate us via conformance psychology (I’m making that term up for brevity) and information control are increasing or becoming more sophisticated, and that this is a danger to society. He hasn’t yet fleshed out these ideas or supported them but he has mentioned them in passing at least.
.
Ron, do I summarize your position accurately?
.
[Edit: my answer was a little incomplete. He has a remedy in here that I’m a little hazy on. He said We may have to intentionally look harder for invalidation to counter all the forces that are pushing us and profiting from our social biases. to which I pointed to my entertaining but mostly fruitless discussions with Joshua at my own ‘blog’. I’m not sure I get this part yet.]
Ron G.
Not harping on topics on which one has little information is also normal.
Not harping on topics on which one has not formed an opinion is also normal.
Not harping on topic in which one is not interested is normal.
I’ sure I can thing of more reasons why someone would not bring up the topic.
.
You seems to be jumping to the conclusion that if someone (other than you) did not bring up a topic here, it was because the topic was controversial. Meanwhile, you also did not bring up the topic — otherwise it would have appeared here. I have no idea why you didn’t bring it up here. I’m not going to jump to the conclusion it was because the person not bringing it up thought it was too “controversial”.
.
You think the topic is “controversial”. And yet you did not bring it up (according to your research. My impression is your silences was not motivated by worrying it was “too controversial”. So it’s odd you should assume that would be why other people didn’t bring it up.
.
As for my opinion: I’ve always thought we don’t know what the origin is and never will (because, among other things the Chinese will not be transparent.) I don’t think any amount of searching on your part will reveal otherwise. Could it be from the lab (either because of a “spillover” or because they created it? Sure. Coult it be entirely unassociated with the lab? Sure.
.
As for my motive for not discussing it much: (a) I don’t think discussion will lead to us knowing. And (b) I don’t think the origin is important to one mega-sh*t ton of other more important decisions at my own personal level. These are: should I get a vaccine? Should I wear a mask.
.
I have no trouble with others discussing the topic and consider it important at some level. But that doesn’t mean I’m going to bring it up. I’m also not bringing up questions about the National Football League or professional sports. My motive for not bringing that up has nothing to do with whether an issue is “controversial”.
.
My main reaction to your intimations: You tend to decide you know the single true motve for a behavior. You ignore that there are tons and tons and tons of motives for a particular behavior. (I’m also not sure your research skills in identifying the behavior are stupendouce– but I’m not going to hunt for the comments to find the first date when somone discussed the origins of the Wuhan virus.)
Mark, I’m interested in other’s input as well and anxious to see my unintended irony.
.
Lucia: “is his search thorough enough?” I went from Feb `20 to May `21 using ctrl F “Wuhan”.
.
“..he didnât post about it…” True but that would have blown my analysis since I am comparing my oddity to the group’s normalcy.
.
“But mostly (b): So what?”
.
Think, they got away with lying to the world about one of the most scientifically important questions of the day. Remember, they thought it was worth the risk of triggering a pandemic of known death and misery in search of the answer of how likely the natural risk of pandemic. Then when they had the pandemic they either a) suddenly no scientific interest in the origin of the pandemic, or b) knew the origin but covered it up to the world, including leaders in science and policy.
.
I think that is a big deal. We saw the FBI and USIC collude with the DNC and legacy media to run an information op for 3 years to take out a president. And they got away with it clean even after being caught. If we can’t talk about these topics because they are too arcane then maybe an idea I heard in college poly sci is true. The professor said that the WWII genocide was accepted by the German people in plain site because “the bigger the lie the more people will believe it.” I thought I understood that to mean that people will not tend to talk about the unspeakable, which is a provides evil the enterprise the luxury of passive acceptance, as long as it is sufficiently powerful and evil, and thus dangerous.
.
That may not be what is going on but it seems like people like Fauci are unafraid to gas light and people like William Thompson afraid to tell the truth (for long).
.
Do you think that Thompson was just mistaken? Did you watch the full movie link I provided yesterday?
Ron,
Oh, that was me poking fun at myself. We’re referring to psychological behaviors where people are inhibited from expressing their own ideas as opposed to supporting a consensus position, and I thought it was ironic therefore that I’d be waiting to see what the group thought about all this before expressing my opinion. đ I prefer to mock myself in advance when I do something cringeworthy. [Edit: as opposed to waiting for somebody else to mock me for it. Stings less that way.]
ChatGP is not yet ready to replace Chegg. Or even a gifted high school student.
LOL. I just got put in my place! I signed up and asked it ‘What causes intermittent software failures?’ and got this answer:
That’s a pretty good answer! Maybe I need to ask more specific questions.
Hmm, no. I see now. If you prod and poke for awhile you eventually get to the flakiness.
Ron
I would suspect that would be wildly under inclusive.
Consider: My comment Comment #217221 engages lab origin and never uses “Wuhan”.
UhmmmOk. But how is that mean we here are required to be discussing that topic? I don’t see any reason. And you didn’t feel compelled to do so (evidently). So we are back to “so what” if people here (including you) didn’t discuss it as early as you now which they discussed it.
.
Sure. And yet (according to your research– which ma be flawed) you didn’t bring it up here.
.
Ok… now you are going onto a tangent that has nothing to do with the origins of Covid. Do you want to talk about the origins of Covid? Or FBI/USIC/DNC? You need to decide. (And might I note that perhaps the reason you didn’t bring up Covid lab origins is you were busy bringing up other topis that interested you more or you wanted to spend time somewhere else. Those a pretty NORMAL reason that doesn’t require all your psycho-political theories or any arm chair psychology of people (other than you) here at this blog.
.
And we return to the vaccines leaving behind the discussion of lab origins. . . (Guess the latter isn’t that important anymore.)
I can’t answer that because you haven’t provided a clear question. Mistaken about what?
.
I’ve watched some of the movie. Enough to see it it tendentious emotional and doesn’t back up simple things. Life is finite. I’m happy to watch the bits you specifically point to when you explain what those specifically back up. If they do–or there is something that seems meaty there, I’ll watch more. (They way I watched the Munk debates.)
.’
But there is not enough time in the world to watch all the full length videos people suggest just because they link them. This was my answer to all the zillions of videos Joshua used to suggested with “here” or “watch this”. If the person recommending an 15 minute or longer video can’t give me a time stamp to the bit related to a point, then no, I’m not going to watch the whole thing. I’d rather spend time watching reruns or Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer.
.
Either tell me what minute to watch to support your point, or… no…
Mark,
Occasionally ChatGP was right. But it was wrong more often than not. I posted screenshots on my twitter. đ
Lets see if this shows
I’ll look at your twitter. Thanks!
In the above, the correct answer is 3?r/r not ?r/r. So: ChatGP gives the correct volume of a sphere, but gets the fractional uncertainty wrong.
What ChatGP says is not incorrect. But it doesn’t answer the question asked. (Retry did get the right answer. )
This was correct:
Even a HS student would know he correct answer ought to be one of the options. . .
Well… ChatGP has lots of good words here. But the answer is wrong
The AI prbably read a lot of correct answers. And it says lots of true things. Sometimes it even gets simple quantitative answers correct. But it isn’t going to get an A on a test. (Some typical questions I can’t even submit because I can’t submit sketches or graphs.)
Lucia,
Yes. It appears to me that ChatGP uses the shotgun approach and says as much as it can that seems to relate to the topic in the hopes of getting the right answer in there someplace. It’s still fairly impressive in my estimation. Maybe I’m too easily impressed though, I’ve never really had anything to do with chatbots. As far as I know anyway!
mark bofill,
It’s probably just as good as lots of humans in a meeting. When presented a question they don’t know how to answer they babble. Sometimes something hits the target. Sometimes people just get lost and distracted. Sometimes those listening are day dreaming.
.
But we really don’t need to worry about chatGP picking the right answer on multiple choice anytime soon. Even if you include the answer options in the questions, it will stick to its wrong answer– even if it’s not an option.
Lucia, if anyone asks you your opinion on the NFL you can tell them the safe bet is the Eagles take it all the way this year. đ
.
Thanks again for your thoughts. You point about Joshua was well taken.
L>
ChatGp
If you don’t know any better, that all sounds good. The correct answer is I and III only. II rms is constant because Temperature is constant during phase change. The internal potential energy increases, but random potential energy is constant.
.
mark bofill (Comment #217200)
âFWIW, I think there used to be more (wow itâs difficult to type this) diversity of thought and viewpoint here.â
Not meaning to be critical, but my bookmark for this page is âThe Echo Chamberâ
I find it useful in learning one side [often the extreme edge] of an issue. I round out my understanding of issues elsewhere.
Thanks Russell. That’s right, it was you I had that exchange with I referred to in comment-217199.
Russel,
Not offended by your bookmark. I used to post often, now it’s a small group. I’d be astonished if it now had a vast range of views.
I had no idea it was a race to find a conspiracy first. Very strange metric.
Iâm not so much tuned into conspiracies but more likely to notice when alleged experts state things with more certainty than they deserve. Things like appealing to oneâs own authority and emotionally shouting down counterarguments and forming support groups to protect the proclamation set off alarms. These things are probably still right but need to be questioned.
Nobody remembers how many times they questioned a theory that ended up being right all along.
I had no idea it was a race to find a conspiracy first. Very strange metric.
Iâm not so much tuned into conspiracies but more likely to notice when alleged experts state things with more certainty than they deserve. Things like appealing to oneâs own authority and emotionally shouting down counterarguments and forming support groups to protect the proclamation set off alarms. These things are probably still right but need to be questioned.
Nobody remembers how many times they questioned a theory that ended up being right all along.
Lucia,
It’s pretty clear the chatGP program doesn’t know anything, it just spouts words related to the topic at hand. It sounds very much like the hilarious answers to chemistry questions on tests my wife would sometimes read to me when she was correcting tests. Those kids didn’t know anything either, so just spouted words… devoid of any content except humor.
.
Factual questions (“What is the formula for the surface area of a cone?” “What is the temperature at the center of the sun?”) very often do generate correct answers. But any question which actually requires conceptual understanding (or heaven forbid, understanding two distinct concepts to answer a question) the program is as bad as any unknowing student. My wife’s hard test questions sometimes required three separate conceptual understandings to answer…. few kids ever answered the hard questions correctly.
.
Fluff subject matter (What was Dicken’s main point in A Christmas Carol?) seem handled pretty easily, and with better grammar and usage than many students.
lucia (Comment #217243)
âRussel,
Not offended by your bookmark. I used to post often, now itâs a small group. Iâd be astonished if it now had a vast range of viewsâ
Lucia, no offense intended! The one sided views expressed here were very useful during Covid when Twitter was filtering out all right wing theories.
Which has me thinking⌠If Musk is successful in weeding out most of the Bots, it should be easy to build your own right wing echo chamber there. Up to now, you could follow tweets from like minded scribes but the Liberal Bots would quickly overwhelm the comments. Musk said changing that was a priority. He claimed yesterday he was having success:
Elon Musk @elonmusk Dec 11
âThe bots are in for a surprise tomorrowâ
Elon Musk @elonmusk 17h
âCalling all & [Bots emojis]
Please attack me!â
Elon Musk @elonmusk 17h
âCool, the bots are so far unable to swarm to the top of my replies!â
If anyone is interested in the Dr. Jay Bhattacharya saga, there was another development yesterday:
âTwitter CEO Elon Musk invited a Stanford professor to the social media giantâs headquarters on Saturday to begin looking at why the old regime acted so âimperiouslyâ and placed the epidemiologist on a blacklist for arguing Covid lockdowns would harm children.â
https://nypost.com/2022/12/12/elon-musk-invites-blacklisted-stanford-professor-dr-jay-bhattacharya-to-twitter-headquarters/
WSJ Background:
âThe Twitter Blacklisting of Jay Bhattacharyaâ
Free link:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-twitter-blacklisting-of-jay-bhattacharya-medical-expert-covid-lockdown-stanford-doctor-shadow-banned-censorship-11670621083?st=xg9bjskocq93le3&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
I read preliminary reports of brief fusion net gain at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory using inertial confinement. Not a lot of detail as of yet. 120% of the energy isn’t enough for production levels of energy anyway, but it’s still pretty cool.
I think nuclear fusion is no longer perpetually 20 years off. I think it’s now more like perpetually 10-15 years off.
mark bofill,
Sort of like the Doomsday clock was at 100 seconds to midnight on Jan2022, and also always close to midnight.
.
Both time estimates use something similar to “dog years”, but the other way around. And at least we all know 7 dog years = 1 human year.
Exactly!
Mark,
âThanks Russell. Thatâs right, it was you I had that exchange with I referred to in comment-217199.â
Hah, I missed your comment and yes I was the miscreant who called it an âecho chamberâ.
I wrote a bit of sarcasm then but I decided not to post it. Iâm older and less wise now so here goes:
âA topic of conversation I think may be of interest here. Who was the more benevolent leader, Genghis Khan or Atilla the Hun.â
mark bofill,
That’s only a theoretical energy gain. It just looks at the energy in the laser pulse, not the energy required to produce the laser pulse.
Russell,
(holds hands up) Don’t know, don’t get the sarcasm, don’t care, we’re good right?
DeWitt,
LOL. That is extremely cute of them. How efficient are lasers? As I recall, not very!
From this random article.
Yeah. Quite a ways still to go there!
Lucia,
“Both time estimates use something similar to âdog yearsâ, but the other way around. And at least we all know 7 dog years = 1 human year.”
.
An even more relevant example (for me!) is airline pilot minutes: 1 pilot minute is actually about 4 real minutes…. if the pilot says “about 5 minutes for our gate to become available”, I automatically expect 20 minutes. Works most every time. And a corollary: if the pilot says more than 45 minutes delay, or, heaven forbid, uses the word ‘maintenance’, then there is a reasonable chance the flight will be canceled, and I start looking for alternatives.
mark bofill,
“I think nuclear fusion is no longer perpetually 20 years off. I think itâs now more like perpetually 10-15 years off.”
.
LOL.
.
Not likely in my lifetime, and probably not yours either.
Steve,
Yep. Sad but true I suspect.
Russel
They were both pretty decent to their own people and used diplomacy when they could. But I’m gong with Gengish Kahn as the more benevolent.
Mark: “I think nuclear fusion is no longer perpetually 20 years off…”
.
Don’t let them bully you. đ
.
Seriously, I have always been routing for fusion and, like many, am disappointed with its slow progress. One must realize, however, that the fast progress requires making in an international priority of green new deal proportions. That means huge prizes and recognition for benchmark achievements. We need to glorify the field to young people and mark this the savior technology, if not for the 21st century then for the 22nd.
Lucia, I agree. Genghis Khan is reported to have supported religious tolerance. Also supported the holding of power by people selected on the basis of their ability.
Ron,
Interesting take. For my part, I assume that the trouble is that we don’t know how to do it, and so it’s a perpetual R&D iteration on a really difficult problem and every iteration can be insanely expensive. I don’t know if I agree that increasing the priority level, prizes for benchmarks, or international cooperation would have much impact, but I guess I’m open to hearing your argument about it.
Russell,
It’s not unlikely that my response (Comment #217254) contained unwarranted rudeness, now that I think it though. Unwarranted by my own standards. I apologize for that comment.
I really do have no opinion on the question you asked though.
mark bofill,
“I assume that the trouble is that we donât know how to do it, and so itâs a perpetual R&D iteration on a really difficult problem and every iteration can be insanely expensive.”
.
Yes, those are the real issues. Even if the current approaches got far enough past “energy break-even” to actually generate a useful amount of electricity, the scale of the physical equipment and cost might put the technology economically out of reach. And that doesn’t even address other serious technical problems, like neutron damage to the reactor itself and the entire structure becoming (somewhat) radioactive. Alternative fusion approaches might end up being more practical than the deuterium/tritium reaction.
.
But in any case, fusion is decades (maybe many decades or never!) from being practical technology. The weird thing for me is that a relatively simple technology like a thorium breeder reactor is not being vigorously pursued/supported. That is the kind of technology which could make a significant impact within a decade or two and help power the “transition away from petroleum” toward an electrically powered civilization. Of course we are not going to just stop using petroleum, but its long term use as a feed stock is more sensible than burning it for its energy content. Which is to say: carbon in a chemically accessible form for polymers/plastics/chemicals/pharmaceuticals adds far more to global wealth (on a per barrel basis) than combustion for energy. Energy is fungible. Reduced carbon feedstock? No so much.
If anyone is interested in the bloody Battle of BakhmutâŚ. One hour old situation report from the OSINT site âWar Mapperâ. https://twitter.com/war_mapper/status/1602367642135891968?s=61&t=I9CxX35yRAiXc7PGZ1nSUg
Russian forces have reached the city limits but the Ukrainians hold the town.
Mark, No problem, I invited some flack by posting sarcasm. Weâre good.
Steve, I agree with your all of the above approach on nuclear, however, I disagree on the “maybe never” on fusion. It is the basic energy of the universe. If it is “never” it means we have failed to become an interplanetary species, which means doom. Because of or irreversible course of technological advance we will necessarily be creating problems like terrorism, pandemics, political division and war that are more severe than in the past. Without harnessing a limitless energy source it will more and more be realized to be a zero sum game.
.
We need fusion, not just for the energy, but for the psychological foundation that we are on a sustainable and permanent course.
.
I think the fundamental difference between left and right on this issue is that left believes that wind and solar can fill that mission. We need a political paradigm shift in promoting fusion as the ultimate goal, and an attainable one. We need a JFK of manned space program to inspire that vision. We need a Musk-like person taking the political lead.
Another OSINT graphic about the five-months long bloody Battle of Bakhmut. Shows the same current status, with the russians at the city limits and Ukrainians holding the townâŚThis just shows the progression over time. Summary:
âIn the past 200 days Russia has moved 12.28km in the direction of Bakhmut. 61.4 meters per day. This is furthest extent on May 26th to furthest extent today. â
https://twitter.com/thedeaddistrict/status/1602387398716948501?s=61&t=vuls29LMyqdKK5u7FZMlAQ
Ron Graf,
You are clearly more sanguine about fusion power than I am. The Idea that wind/solar are going to power our civilization is way beyond nutty. That said, I don’t think fusion power is anything like Kennedy’s Apollo program. There were no breakthroughs or need for ‘new physics’ to get to the moon. The question was mainly available funding, which Kennedy got. SpaceX is able to do the same today as Apollo, but at 5% -10% of the cost: better computers, better materials, no unlimited budget (so motivation to control costs and improve efficiency), and a ‘move fast and break things’ philosophy. Just the opposite of NASA’s Apollo program. And lest anyone think NASA has changed look at the cost of the Artemis program compared to Musk’s big rocket set to launch in January.
Ron,
The thing is, we knew how to get to the moon. It was ‘just’ a matter of spending enough money to build the rockets. We knew a 235U fission bomb would work. We didn’t even bother to test it. The hard problem was generating a sufficient amount of 235U to build a bomb. At the time, every scrap of 235U we had went into Little Boy, including lab samples. Both methods of isotope separation, giant magnetic field mass spectrometers called calutrons and gaseous diffusion were both likely to work but they were developed in parallel just in case. In comparison, building a Tesla was trivially simple.
We still don’t know how to build a fusion reactor to generate electricity efficiently. It’s a physics problem, not so much an engineering problem. There’s only so much money you can throw at a problem like that. And we’re already throwing a lot. The cost estimate for ITER starts at $25 billion. Having a General Leslie Groves (Manhattan Project), a George Low (Apollo Project) or an Elon Musk won’t make a significant difference at this point.
Wind and solar depend on the fusion reactor currently sitting 93,000,000 miles away. But ground based solar arrays only work for about half the day and the wind doesn’t blow all the time. Efficient battery storage is expensive. Battery development isn’t likely to follow Moore’s Law either.
A pretty good dally overview of the entire Ukraine front lines and also about as neutral a view point as it gets.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkmIHRwP5xE
.
Russian strategy seems to have gone almost entirely WWI style where artillery is doing most of the work. The Russians seem to be content to stay pretty much in one place as long as Ukraine is will to come to them. Reduces Russian losses and heightens Ukraine losses with short supply lines for Russia and long supply lines for Ukraine.
.
Consensus in blogs is forming that Russia may not attempt do a major breakthrough assault with its newly mobilized 300,000 troops. Instead to keep the artillery âmeat grinder â going to attrit Ukraine forces to the point of collapse and use the new forces as fresh and mobile forces in pursuit and from the north to size Kiev at that point.
.
( Shrug ) who knows? The Russian high command is not talking.
.
Artillery fire at Bakhmut is running over 9:1 in Russian favor, making life hell in Ukraine positions.
.
Ukraine artillery ammunition shortfalls are thought to become critical about March of next year, depending on Ukraine usage at current rates and how far the US is inclined to reduce its own stockpiles.
Some good news!
Sam Bunco-Freak has been arrested in the Bahamas, apparently in the expectation that the US will request extradition. DoJ has filed charges.
.
Let it not be said that the Biden Administration does not know when to throw their supporters under the bus.
Steve, DeWitt,
1) Every problem is exponentially easier once you know how to do it.
2) Every problem gets solved faster with increased resources applied to it, especially brain power.
3) Every problem can be broken down into smaller problems.
.
These are universal principles that are proven again and again in history. AOC was not completely wrong when she said this is our WWII, (which shows she likely was not the originator of the thought). But WWI and WWII saw a huge acceleration in engineering solutions in many fields. There were very few not contributing to society (the war effort).
.
A top Dupont engineer gave me something long ago when I started my business, a plaque which I still have.
.
We need leaders to convince us not only that it’s possible but that there is no other choice.
Mike M,
“Sam Bunco-Freak has been arrested in the Bahamas”
.
The guy should be in prison for decades. I doubt he will be. Billions of theft while you support the progressive left (with $50-$60 million in campaign contributions) means probably only a wrist slap. Maybe Biden will decide to make an example of him and ask for a long sentence…. but I doubt it.
.
Bernie Madolf was no less innocent than this scumbag. Madolf died in prison…. seems about right for this guy.
Ron Graf,
“Every problem is exponentially easier once you know how to do it.
Every problem gets solved faster with increased resources applied to it, especially brain power.
Every problem can be broken down into smaller problems.”
.
Yes, no, no.
.
Some problems (oh say, dark matter) don’t need money, they need a change in understanding. The “fusion problem” has been the focus of millions of highly talented man-hours of effort, costing untold $billions. It is not a simple problem, and AFAICT, the issue is not a lack of money, it is a fundamental lack of progress. Since I was in my teens (an eternity ago!) the promise of ‘endless fusion power’ has been talked about constantly, especially by those working in the field. I doubt that talk will stop any time soon. That doesn’t mean we will have practical fusion power, but we will have endless talk about fusion power.
I am guessing there are a dozen different basic designs for a fusion reactor. I also am guessing that each one is lacking certain breakthrough in materials science. I think you are both mistaken in believing we possessed the necessary materials science in 1963 to go to the moon. There is a famous list on inventions created to allow Apollo. As I said everything looks easy in hindsight, once you know how.
Steve, dark matter is not a fair example since if I remember correctly you and I disagreed with DeWitt that it even exists.
.
Confining plasma is easier than creating or confining something that is untestable except by the gravity of the universe.
One reason why piercing the break even point in laser fusion, i.e. inertial confinement ignition, is that it opens the possibility of creating a multiple ignition reactor. Imagine a central master reaction core that is powered by the focusing of beams on all sides from smaller fusion ignitions that were initiated by grid powered lasers. This does not solve the problem of sustained confinement of the core. But I stand that #2 and #3 are yes, yes.
Ron and SteveF,
Since you brought up the subject, try looking up NGC 1052-DF2 and 1052-DF4. They are galaxies that have decreasing rotation curves. They’re a stake through the heart of MOND hypotheses.
I’m still wondering how you can apparently accept MOND, but not dark matter/dark energy. MOND is pure hand waving. There is no theoretical reason for the gravitational field to decay at 1/r rather than 1/r^2 at some arbitrary long distance. Gravity meters are incredibly precise and people, including someone who used to comment here, did experiments looking for changes in g with distance. They didn’t find it.
Neutrinos weren’t easy to detect either. There are some large tanks of liquid xenon that may yet detect dark matter particles.
By 1963, going to the moon was an engineering problem. There were a zillion specific problems to be solved, but all the fundamentals were understood.
.
Fusion is still a research problem. It needs breakthroughs, not just a ton of money and hard work.
.
The “breakeven” reached is not a breakthrough, it is a milestone. It is not even all that significant a milestone. For laser fusion to be practical, the efficiency will have to be improved at least a thousand fold.
.
Sort of like a football team breaking out the touchdown celebration because they managed to move the ball across their own 1-yard line.
“By 1963, going to the moon was an engineering problem.”
.
I swear there is an echo in here.
.
This statement to me is like saying powered flight in 1903 was just a bicycle repair shop problem.
Breakeven on fusion is an arbitrary threshold. Obviously fusion works and can produce excess energy. We shall see where it goes.
Dark energy to me is like saying we know from observation that 2 + 2 = 5, we understand the 2 + 2 part and are calling the extra +1 part dark energy.
Apollo was an extension of the ICBM program from the military to deliver nuclear weapons to our friends in Russia. Much of the engineering was done here.
Interesting [to me] video about the seesaw battle between tanks and infantry anti-tank weapons, from WW1 to Ukraine. Lots of scientific detail about things like shaped charges and Explosive Reactive Armor. Cut to today and the pendulum has swung decidedly against the tank. A lone infantry man or woman with a $200,000 shoulder fired Javelin missile can take out any tank on the planet from a distance of 2.5 miles. [and tanks cost $12,0000,000]
âWhy Protecting Tanks is Getting Much More Difficultâ
https://youtu.be/C4NmOss83XI
DeWitt,
Donno, looks to me like there is plenty of conflicting data, and some do think the galaxy has dark matter: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGC_1052-DF2
A paper published about 18-24 months ago suggests that the constant rotation curves deviate toward declining curves when a galaxy is influenced by a strong external gravitational field…. which is not consistent with dark matter. In any case, I think there is a fundamental difference between a formula (like Newton’s law of gravity) that describes deviation from Newtonian gravity at extremely weak gravitational fields and a hypothetical material that can be neither detected nor described, and which always assumes a distribution that is perfect for each galaxy. We should agree to disagree.
.
Ron Graf,
Like I said, you are a lot more sanguine about fusion than I am. I wouldn’t count on fusion being important in your lifetime (maybe if you are under 40, but probably not), and maybe not in your kids lifetimes. The parallel with heavier than air flight is not convincing at all. There were not tens of thousands of people with advanced degrees working on powered flight for 5 decades before the Wright brothers essentially scaled up a box kite and added a motor and prop. We know exactly the conditions needed to produce copious power from fusion (yielding multi-megatons of equivalent chemical energy over a microsecond), we just can’t do it at a slow rate.
Tom Scharf,
Yes, and the ICBM program was just an extension of the German V-2 rocket program in WWII. Heck, we even had our own Nazi SS officer and V-2 scientist (Wernher von Braun) helping the DOD and NASA build better rockets. Who says deplorables (and even Nazis) can’t make a real contribution. đ
Ron Graf (Comment #217282): “This statement to me is like saying powered flight in 1903 was just a bicycle repair shop problem.”
.
Not at all. By 1963 we had made several successful orbital flights and had crashed probes into the moon. And the Russians were well ahead of us. All the basics were known.
.
The space flight situation in 1963 was more analogous to powered flight in 1908, after the Wright brothers made their first public flights and everyone realized “this is real”. After that, getting to Lindbergh was mostly just incremental improvements.
“The parallel with heavier than air flight is not convincing at all.”
.
My point was that our tools of technology geometrically advanced between 1903 and 1963. A large portion of that advance was due to war caused competition for survival. There were plenty of people working on flight in 1903 but not government war departments because they did not envision the utility of aircraft.
.
If half the people on the street never heard of fusion energy that’s a sign that it is not on a wartime survival type of footing. When you and I were kids I bet you knew what a Messerschmitt 109 and P-51 Mustang were. We knew all about the Apollo program. How many kids are being taught about fusion? Probably they are the same amount that was being taught in 1860 about the possibility of manned flight being powered rather than limited to balloons. If we made fusion the national priority in every nation we would certainly have it very soon. For the past 50 years we have been treating it like theoretical physics, like building larger colliders. Without JFK making it a priority, motivated by Soviet competition, we would be sending men to the Moon about now for the first time.
.
“Breakeven on fusion is an arbitrary threshold.”
.
Exceeding the break even point opens the avenue for chain reaction. I am not saying anyone is doing this but imagine a laser fusion pellet reactor that had an output beam aimed at another pellet reactor, which aimed at another, all in a matrix that self-perpetuated while allowing alternating pellets to be taken out of the power cycle to refuel, i.e. an engine design. BTW, this also answers Steve’s question of how does one maintain a control.
The situation with fusion is like rocketry in the late 1920’s, when first Goddard, then others, started to successfully launch liquid fuel rockets.
Ron Graf (Comment #217290): “Exceeding the break even point opens the avenue for chain reaction.”
.
There is no sense in which that is remotely true. There is no chain reaction in fusion. And at “breakeven” the reactor still has massive net energy consumption.
This fusion stuff is way above my pay grade, but I do have one conspiracy theory to contribute. I remember the cold fusion fiasco. Two renowned scientists were able to generate energy from a lab bench top reactor at room temperature. The world’s future energy supply was solved! But it actually didn’t work and the scientists were disgraced. My theory has always been that it was all a hoax, the scientists were angling for a fat government research contract and it backfired.
https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.2808784?journalCode=pto
Cold fusion, declared first by Pons and Fleischmann in the 1989 was indeed a bad episode in science. Then cold fusion was resurrected as LENR (low energy nuclear reaction) about 8-10 years ago by an Italian con man, Andrea Rossi. I remember a potential investor was touting the research here and SteveF and DeWitt shut him down. Years later I saw his fraud was exposed as sneaking energy into the experimental reactor by using the electrical ground lead as a hot. Cold fusion/LENR may still be going on. A new investor is born every minute.
.
Mike M, I think you misunderstood what I meant. I did not mean nuclear chain reaction. I meant it in the mechanical sense, in circular fashion. One pellets energy output could be directed in a beam to enhance another pellet’s reaction. The lack of net energy you are talking about is the non-nuclear reaction powered beam that would need to kickstart the chain. Once the chain is self-perpetuating each pellet reactor only needs to output more than it takes in.
Yeah. To complicate the cold fusion mess, NASA has never quite let go of it. here they have rebranded it as ‘lattice confinement fusion’, but it seems to me to be essentially the same beast. Load up a metal with deuterium and play with it at ambient temperatures to see if you can make fusion happen. In this case, I think they blast the holy hell out of the metal with energetic X-rays and they claim to see some evidence of fusion as a consequence. They acknowledge that they produce way less energy than they use in the process. So, whatever and meh.
Mike M, Funny you mention Robert Goddard. I was thinking of him too but as an example of one investing himself in what the consensus at the time believes is a practical fantasy. Goddard was likely inspired by HG Wells, whom also inspired a kid in Germany named Werner Von Braun to build homemade rockets. They both were motivated by the vision of Moon colonization, not unlike Musk relating to Mars.
Ron Graf (Comment #217294): “One pellets energy output could be directed in a beam to enhance another pelletâs reaction.”
.
That is absolute nonsense.
“If half the people on the street never heard of fusion energy thatâs a sign that it is not on a wartime survival type of footing.”
.
Wartime survival footing?
Please, stay grounded.
.
There are many, many millions of engineers and scientists all over the world who are perfectly well aware of what nuclear fusion is, know about ongoing work in the field. People on the street in WWII were not jabbering about V2 rockets, radar, or nuclear fission either.
.
Which reminds me: I used to make fun (not too often, and only in private… I needed the job) about the nit-wit company president I worked for (indirectly) 35+ years ago. He was a Brit, came up through the sales and marketing side of the business, was a relentless, shameless, incorrigible skirt-chaser, and knew exactly as much science and engineering as my daughter’s cat. He would sometimes (in more sophisticated words) say “you technical types really need to come up with a real breakthrough here”… when what he was proposing was a physical impossibility. That’s not how it works.
While I think itâs nonsense to assume we would know accurately the military stocks of russia or the US [or any country] I am gonna join in this foolish game. My analysis; Itâs very likely that russia is having more problems with artillery ammunition supply than Ukraine, and it will trend heavily more in Ukraineâs favor as time goes on.
From Reuters, 2 hours ago: âBurning through ammo, Russia using 40-year-old rounds, U.S. official saysâ âThe United States accuses Russia of turning to Iran and North Korea for more firepower as it exhausts its regular supplies of ammunition.â
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/burning-through-ammo-russia-using-40-year-old-rounds-us-official-says-2022-12-12/
From Forbes, 4 DEC 2022 :âWhile some NATO countriesâPoland, for instanceâare sitting on significant stocks of Soviet-caliber ammunition they can transfer to Ukraine, almost all NATO countries have large stocks of NATO-caliber ammo. And many of those countries have their own production lines for 105- and 155-millimeter shells and 227-millimeter rockets.â
Indeed, now itâs the Russians who are running out of ammo. As the Ukrainian army this spring reequipped with farther-firing American rocket-launchers and European howitzers, it also launched a counterlogistics campaign targeting Russian ammo dumps as far as 50 miles behind the front line.â
âWhile Russiaâs arms industry is bigger than Ukraineâs is, it also is fragile from a lack of modernizationâand hamstrung by corruption. Anticipating shortages of shells and rockets, the Kremlin already has drawn down Belarusian ammo stocks. Itâs gone shopping in North Korea and Iran, too.
Ask yourself this: if youâre waging a potentially yearslong artillery war along a 500-mile front, which countries would you want to supply your ammo in order to keep you in the fight? The United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany and Poland? Or Belarus, North Korea and Iran?â
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/12/04/in-eight-years-russian-agents-blew-up-210000-tons-of-ukrainian-ammo-and-nearly-silenced-kyivs-artillery/?sh=5667d51c6401
From English version Eurasian Times, 13 December 2022:âRussia To Run Out Of Ammunition By 2023; Relying On âDegradedâ Soviet-Era Weapons With High Failure Rate â Pentagon
Beyond the ammunition shortage, Russia has faced a raft of troubles including logistics breakdowns, low morale and high casualty rates after nearly 10 months of fighting in Ukraine.â
https://eurasiantimes.com/russia-to-run-out-of-ammunition-by-2023-relying-on-soviet-era/
I don’t want to get too hung up on something that maybe wasn’t meant, but to clarify:
The ‘Every’ part of this is a generalization, right?
.
Because some things are plain intractable due to their combinatorial complexity or combinatorial explosion, like algorithmic solutions to ‘exptime’ or ‘np-hard’ problems. You can’t divide and conquer these, and since the work required to solve grows exponentially with the size of these problems, it doesn’t really matter how many resources you pile on, either. Then there are other things that might be flat out impossible. Time travel. Immortality for humans, perhaps. [Edit: The halting problem might be another good example.]
Most solvable problems gets solved faster….
(Honestly, some solvable problems get solved faster by cutting resources because too many resources and result in excess staff who want to have vision and planning meetings.)
Complex problems can be broken down into smaller problems.
I think when you break some “problems” down to smaller and smaller bits you sometimes find a particular bit is crucial and impossibLe.
For example: people once wanted to find a stable solution to the three body problem. Poincare won for a prize showing that solution doesn’t exist. Not all problems can be solved.
.
Not all problems are solvable. Not all problem (or parts of problems) can be broken down into smaller problems.
Russell,
Fun facts on 155mm production
.
https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2022/12/05/army-plans-dramatic-ammo-production-boost-as-ukraine-drains-stocks/
.
â Army Secretary Christine Wormuth separately told reporters that the U.S. will go from making 14,000 155mm shells each month to 20,000 by the spring and 40,000 by 2025.â
.
Letâs do the numbers then. 6,000 rounds per day is current Ukraine expenditure. Over 1 month, 30 days, thats 180,000 rounds per month.
Over 1 yr, 365 days, is 2,190,000.
.
.
âAs for other NATO industrial countries, such as Britain, France, Germany and Italy, the production of artillery shells is almost abandoned. Only Sweden, which is temporarily non-NATO, still has the ability to produce tens of thousands of 155 shells per year. â
.
https://min.news/en/military/9d5f2a40bf731a8a5683582a94cf9e51.html
.
To stay competitive on a full scale war, heavy artillery ammunition needs to be produced in the millions, not thousands.
Ed Forbes (Comment #217302): “Letâs do the numbers then.”
.
OK. Modern artillery have sustained rates of fire of around one round a minute, plus or minus a factor of two.
.
So one year’s production of 168K rounds would be 2800 gun-hours. So we can keep 100 guns supplied for a little over a day.
.
I am skeptical.
Russell,
some thoughts on the âobsolescence â of tanks.
.
i do not see much as changing on tanks vs infantry since the end of WWII. If anything, I see it as tilting somewhat in the tanks favor if used in a combined arms situation as tanks have always needed to be used effectively
.
Whether infantry was defending with anti tank artillery, panzerfausts, or bazookas, infantry formations had the ability to hurt unsupported armor assaults during, and after, WWII. Both German and allied forces had man packed anti tank weapons, and Russia developed the RPG, all of which could penetrate all MBTâs of the time. They were also cheep and could be, and were, deployed in very large numbers.
.
The current generation MBTâs are pretty much immune to all the cheeper infantry carried anti tank rockets. Only the much more expensive Javelins and other such multi phase weapons can hurt the newer MBTâs. I consider javelins to be the operational equivalent of the anti tank artillery of WWII.
.
You point out the cost difference between a single javelin and a MBT.
Unfortunately, if costed on the numbers of javelins needed to protect an entire front against a concentration of armor, artillery, and infantry at a single point of attack, on a point of the attackers choosing, then the cost differential narrows significantly due to the extreme numbers of Javelins needed to defend the entire line.
.
Armor is useful on the attack, defense, as a mobile reserve, and in the pursuit, where the javelin is only really useful on defense.
.
I think we are a long way from the âobsolescence â of the tank.
Mike, these are published numbers. What exactly are you skeptical about? Break it out a bit and I will see about addressing what you have an issue with.
Mike,
For one thing, artillery is not capable of long and stained fire. Many more than the 100 guns you noted are needed for this amount of rounds fired.
.
â WASHINGTON â Ukrainian troops fire thousands of explosive shells at Russian targets every day, using high-tech cannons supplied by the United States and its allies. But those weapons are burning out after months of overuse, or being damaged or destroyed in combat, and dozens have been taken off the battlefield for repairs, according to U.S. and Ukrainian officials.
.
A third of the roughly 350 Western-made howitzers donated to Kyiv are out of action at any given time, according to U.S. defense officials and others familiar with Ukraineâs defense needs.â
.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/25/us/ukraine-artillery-breakdown.html
Mike M: “That is absolute nonsense.”
.
That is exactly what Orville and Wilbur’s friends and families thought about their hair-brained ideas. Nobody was visiting Robert Goddard to watch his rocket demonstrations except for a few reluctant generals who said yes if might be useful in 100 years. The only loyal supporter was Charles Lindbergh, a man known once as the flying fool. Lindy used his fame to influence Guggenheim to back Goddard. Harry Guggenheim was a visionary who funded Lindy’s national tour to promote another hairbrained idea: commercial aviation.
.
“Wartime survival footing?”
.
This is what the liberals are trying to do for wind and solar. Their base is resistant to the word nuclear, as James Hansen found out.
If a problem is deemed by physical law insoluble then it is no longer a problem. Although mortality is going to become ill-defined once bionics, neural implant and organ culturing are mastered, there is always an end to every system’s life. Time travel to the future will happen – going back in time will not, although the movie Twelve Monkeys is one of my favorite.
Mar-a-Lago, We have a problemâŚ..
âRepublican support for Donald Trump’s presidential bid in 2024 has crateredâ
I am not a fan of polling, but I like the results of this oneâŚ..
âBy 2-1, GOP and GOP-leaning voters now say they want Trump’s policies but a different standard-bearer to carry them. While 31% want the former president to run, 61% prefer some other Republican nominee who would continue the policies Trump has pursued.â
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/12/13/trump-support-gop-2024-presidential-race-poll/10882346002/
Ed Forbes,
On the invulnerability of tanksâŚ. russia entered the war with a vast superiority in numbers and quality of tanks. In the initial shock attack, russiaâs armor raced throughout Eastern Ukraine and almost reached Kyiv in the west. Then they stalled, and for the last six months, they have been in retreat. If ever tanks were going to be decisive in a war, it should have been here, russia vs Ukraine. But the battlefield is littered with the carcasses of destroyed russian tanks. ORYX had photo documentation of the following russian tank losses: 1570, of which destroyed: 914, damaged: 65, abandoned: 57, captured: 534
Maybe itâs just the rotten qualities of the russian war machine; maybe the day of the tank has come and goneâŚ. Maybe both are true.
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html
Russell,
Many of the MBTâs lost by both Russia and Ukraine were not the most modern upgrades, so lighter AT weapons do work better against them. My comment was for the more modern units of both Russia and NATO, which are not at much risk from light ATWâs, such as the AT4 and RPG.
.
All the lighter APCâs are easily taken out by all infantry ATWâs at close range.
.
As to Russian problems in the first part of the war, a lack of proper infantry support was the main culprit, along with inadequate force levels in total close behind. Many of their BMPâs only had 2 or 3 infantry attached instead of a full squad. Tanks are very much at risk without proper infantry support.
.
The Russian army was structured to deploy after a mobilization, which would fill out the infantry needed to fill out the units. Mobilization didnât happen prior to the war and bit Russia in the a** big time because of this.
.
So donât base the supposed âobsolescence â of the tank on the first 6 month of this war. Lessons were learned by both sides. Note that Ukraine is begging for all the armor they can get, regardless of age or weight of armor. Ukraine does not think the tank, or any other armor, is obsolete. Russia obviously doesnât believe the tank is obsolete.
.
Ed Forbes,
The ORYX site breaks out the russian tanks lost by type. Even the modern T-80s and T-90s were destroyed.
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html
Russell,
Yes, of course some of the newer tanks were lost. Javelins will do that.
But the topic is âare tanks obsolete â. Using a battle that saw tanks committed with inadequate infantry and artillery support does not support the answer as âyesâ.
.
The last 4 months have shown that in either attack or defense, combined armed forces using artillery, infantry, and tanks, generally do better than opponents without tanks. This is why Ukraine is screaming for NATO to replace its armor losses, specifically tanks where possible.
It became an artillery war because the armor war failed to produce the expected results primarily due to antitank weapons. Russia doesnât have a lot of modern tanks and isnât choosing to use them here for whatever reason. It is clear that the last couple months has seen much less armor engagement.
A factor for Putin invading now may have been his aging armor fleet was becoming obsolete. Use it or lose it. T-72âs in ten years may be worthless.
If NATO establishes air dominance then all Russian armor would be useless. It was shooting fish in a barrel in Iraq. Russia may still prevail in Ukraine but it has exposed serious weaknesses. If they donât recognize that due to pride then all the better for NATO.
Tom Scharf, right! I forgot about air power, Ukraine managed to destroy russiaâs mighty tank invasion with almost no air power. Imagine what air superiority would have done to those russian tanks.
âStop Saying the Tank Is Obsolete Just Because Russia Sucks at Using Themâ
Yes, I said that might be the case. AndâŚ
âThe Russian military lost more tanks in the first three weeks of the war than the British army has in total.â
âSo it was already a fundamentally bad strategy, bad tactics, poor leadership, appalling logistics, and very slow to change that approach when they realized it was going wrong.â
Maybe tanks aren’t obsolete, they do function well as crematoriums for russian soldiers.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7dkjm/stop-saying-the-tank-is-obsolete-just-because-russia-sucks-at-using-them
Interesting article on lessons from the Ukraine war:
https://www.economist.com/europe/2022/11/30/what-is-the-war-in-ukraine-teaching-western-armies
Ed Forbes,
I am not disputing your claims that Western armies don’t have sufficient supplies of artillery shells. I have been pointing out that the numbers provided by your sources are so out of whack that something is seriously wrong. Those numbers, if correct, indicate that “inadequate” is a gross exaggeration of how much production capacity we have. If true, they imply far more than normal incompetence.
Ron Graf,
And before it was deemed insolvable? Was it a “problem” then? If it is insolvable, it’s insolvable whether science is able to recognize that yet or not. The only thing throwing teams and money at it does is (possibly) hasten the time when we discover it was insolvable.
.
Bringing up a list of difficult problems that may not be insolvable doesn’t contradict this.
.
Throwing teams and money at “problems” doesn’t always solve them. We throw a lot of money at Chicago public school. The continued failure is consistently deemed to be lack of money and resource. Might even more money and resources work? Maybe, but I suspect the big problems are likely not money.
Yeah we could redefine words to support our position, or maybe we could just use words to mean what they mean. How about no. How about we just use words to mean what they mean.
Problems without solutions don’t cease to be problems. Somebody dying of cancer wouldn’t say the cancer isn’t a problem just because there isn’t anything anybody can do to fix it.
.
It would have been better in my view to admit that the ‘Every’ part of the problem proclamation was a generalization. Just saying…
Sam Bankman-Fried has been arrested and charged. If there is any justice, the guy will get 25+ years, but my guess is the DOJ with let him off with much less…. good democrat donor that he is. Of course, he, his friends, associates, and relatives, who all received a lot of the stolen money, will be subject to civil suits, which may bring the financial ruin they all richly deserve.
Lot’s of lesser financial criminals than Bunco-Freak have received sentences of ~20 years. Madoff got 150 years. That would seem about right for Sam the Scam Man.
.
It is interesting that he got arrested one day before he was to testify under oath before Congress. It is unusual for prosecutors to intervene to stop crooks from confessing.
Notwithstanding that every statement can be deemed a generalization, including that statement, since the only agreed upon certainty is death and taxes, I admit my statements were to a minor degree generalizations.
.
I stand by my central points that harnessing fusion energy solvable and that more priority given to it will make it arrive faster.
.
Here is the scientific paper covering the recent fusion breakthrough at Lawrence Livermore.
.
I thought that a movie a saw about mining He3 from the Moon was pure science fiction. Apparently the main Russian, Chinese and possibly US interest in the Moon is that of mining He3. https://www.technologyreview.com/2007/08/23/223985/mining-the-moon/
âDOJ Arrests Sam Bankman-Fried For Running Out Of Bribery Moneyâ
“As we speak, agents are holding the suspect upside down and shaking him in hopes that a few crypto coins might fall out.”
https://babylonbee.com/news/lawmakers-prosecute-sam-bankman-fried-for-running-out-of-bribery-money
AOC has some sort of climate movie out in theatres called ‘To the End’. Sadly, it does not appear to be playing nearby to where I live as far as I can tell (although I do find it running in theatres around Atlanta GA).
.
It’s a bummer that it isn’t playing here. I’m wondering if it couldn’t be turned into a conservative cult classic, much like the Rocky Horror Picture Show became an interactive cult classic.
.
Oh well. I probably don’t have the free time I’d need for something like that anyway, maybe it’s for the best.
You can give dogs all the money in the world and they wonât get to the moon. They might eventually figure out how to buy dog chow at the supermarket.
Human intelligence is not infinite. There are no doubt classes of problems we cannot solve yet, such as stopping a pandemic or certain mathematical problems. Fusion for energy will probably be solved but like fission it needs to be economically viable. Fusion for destruction has already been solved. Low cost energy is a big deal for economics but beyond that Iâm not sure it changes things fundamentally.
Itâs possible that large AI systems will break the barrier of certain problems and that will constitute a much bigger breakthrough, or threat to some. The internet in my view is the biggest breakthrough in the past 50 years. Low cost global distribution of knowledge and communication. This was primarily an engineering and logistics problem. Fairly mundane but huge impact. Not everything has to be a glory project. Boats, railroads, sewers, etc.
The EU is going to tax trade based on emissions. This is just another economic shakedown under a cloak of environmentalism. These guys are just thieves in suits who go to Davos global summits. They need to be strongly discouraged from this madness. Regulatory wizardry is just white collar crime and global income distribution to benefit themselves.
Thankfully DeSantis is leading Trump in a new WSJ poll by a sizable margin. Still a long way to go. Trump has nobody to blame but himself. A few moments of grace would have saved him.
On the topic of the recent fusion “breakthrough”:
According to this article, while approximately 2 MJ of laser energy was expended to create 3 MJ of fusion energy, the amount of energy input to the lasers was about 400 MJ.
The wonderful era of unlimited fusion energy remains well into the future, I conclude sadly. I’d love to be wrong about this.
[On the same website, another article optimistically writes, “We really have passed the breakeven point: where the energy incident on a target â the key energy that triggers a fusion reaction â is less than the energy we get out of the reaction itself.”]
Tom Scharf,
“A few moments of grace would have saved him.”
You remember the parable of the frog and the scorpion?
.
That pretty much defines Trump. He can no more show a moment of grace than he could sprout wings and take his 250 lbs to the air as Trump the angel.
That’s a strangely disquieting image.
Most cherubs are overweight but fly despite the laws of physics.
Trump doing a Buster Scraggs is, I agree, strange but not disquieting as he goes to take his rightful place in the quartet.
We keep posting here about the US Javelin ATGG [anti tank guided missile], but the videos that are most prevalent on social media are the Ukrainian made Stugna-P ATGM blowing up russian armor. It is tripod mounted not shoulder fired, but it is man [or woman] portable. It has a longer range than the Javelin [5 vs 3 km] and costs 10% as much as a Javelin [$20,000]. The soldier aims and fires it from a safe location by remote control. It can take out a tank that has modern explosive-reactive armor. The time to target at maximum range is only 20 seconds. They have a ferocious explosion on impact with the unsuspecting russian armor.
Here is a video of the control screen of the remote control as the missile takes out a piece of armor. https://youtu.be/MKGsJOpxpgk
[the follow-up videos are also Stugna-P]
Angech, you’re right. It’s not disquieting. It’s disturbing.
Tom Scharf,
“The EU is going to tax trade based on emissions.”
.
I think the most practical responses are:
1) Prohibit by law shipping any LNG or petroleum to the EC
2) Withdraw from NATO, leaving them to the tender mercies of the Russians.
.
IMHO, the EC is a force for harm, and needs to be directly confronted until they relent from their crazy policies.
A follow up on my post about the Ukrainian Stugna-P ATGM from âThe Dead Districtâ [an OSINT site I follow] âŚ.Just posted today. This illustrates how the Stugna defeats the counter-measures on the latest russian T-90M tank. The author is from Georgia and his English is not great but I think I get it. The missile and operator do not âpaintâ the target with lasers until the missile is up close and itâs too late for the counter-measures to activate.
https://twitter.com/TheDeadDistrict/status/1603301344445485056?s=20&t=qt4ES41htiddICxmjQcpPw
Ukrainian made Stugna-P ATGM – better than a Javelin at $20,000.
.
I wonder how quickly this technology was produced and if having a war of survival had anything to do with the rate of innovation. Just sayin.
.
We don’t need no stink-n glory projects. Wrong.
We do have some glory projects…. just ask SpaceX. And done very cheaply.
.
I din’t know anything about the Stugna-P and I bet very few people do, but I would be cautious about believing much of anything announced during a war.
Ah, yes the glories of war. Just think if we could somehow get to perpetual war we would have breakthroughs every day. Lots of destruction and victims of war but breakthroughs to maintain the perpetual wars.
There are dozens and dozens of videos of Stugna-p taking out russian armorâŚ. Dating back to April. It also has knocked out helicopters. It was developed long before the war in conjunction with Belarus.
https://www.historynet.com/stugna-p-ukrainian-missile/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB6r1RuG0lM
I just remembered the historynet.com Stugna-P link is behind a paywall⌠This one is free:
â The Stugna-P is a Ukrainian man-portable anti-tank guided missile. It was developed by Luch design bureau. This weapon was adopted by Ukrainian armed forces in 2011. In 2019 around 50 launchers were delivered to Ukrainian military, plus around 50 another launchers were on order. During the 2022 Russian invasion to Ukraine, the Stugna-P was widely used against the Russian armor. Many Russian tanks were destroyed with these missiles. The Stugna-P recommended itself as an very capable weapon.â
http://www.military-today.com/missiles/stugna_p.htm#:~:text=The%20Stugna%2DP%20is%20a,another%20launchers%20were%20on%20order.
Interesting to see two major changes of heart in recent times:
(1) Wall Street was in love with the Federal Reserve when it was free money, but when that dream caused a rude awakening there are now many critics on the street. Even Steve Liesman, the former apologist for the Federal Reserve, has become grumpy about the Fed. One even hears talk on the left that the Fed should target 5 to 6% inflation. They do not really care that the underclasses suffer most with inflation when they say that all will eventually adjust to higher price inflation rates.
(2) Elon Musk was the great hero making EVs with tax credits out the wazoo and always voting for the Democrats because the Republicans were mean and now since seemingly changing his politics has become an anti hero on the left.
Ron Graf (Comment #217339)
âUkrainian made Stugna-P ATGM â better than a Javelin at $20,000.â
They are different missiles. The each have their advantages:
Javelin is a âFire and Forgetâ systemâŚafter launch all guidance is transferred onboard the projectile. With the Stugna-P the soldier has to guide it home. It is done by remote control to the launch unit, so the operator is not in harm’s way.
The Javelin is much lighter and is truly man [or woman] portable. The Stugna-P needs to be broken down and carried by several soldiers.
Reading the Stugna-P link you provided, Russell, it seems the two main shortcomings compared the the Javelin are weight of the entire system and needing to continuously paint the target rather than fire an forget. Still, at $20K, longer range and domestic production, this must be a major factor for Ukraine’s success so far. I am surprised it was not been more talked about.
Ron, Hah! Our posts crossed, but we got exactly the same conclusions.
Russell, at least our echo was certainly unbiased then. đ
.
Regarding the fusion breakthrough, the Livermore lab’s primary job is the testing of US nuclear stockpile. Laser fusion to produce energy is just an aside. https://www.yahoo.com/news/one-thing-everyone-ignoring-fusion-095819172.html
The Sutga looks to be a general type of clone of the TOW 2.
.
https://www.military-today.com/missiles/tow_2.htm
.
Ed,
“The Sutga looks to be a general type of clone of the TOW 2”
Looks like a TOW, but No wires like the TOW [Tube-Launched, Optically Tracked, Wire-Guided]. The Stugna-P is not wire guided like the TOW 2 but laser guided.
Also the operator aims and fires it remotely with a tablet like screen, out of harm’s way.
Americans can order four more free COVID-19 tests through the mail, starting on Thursday.
https://www.covid.gov/tests
Thank you Joe Brandon
Getting some interesting comments on Russian artillery ammunition. It is said to come from the UK Financial Times, which is paywalled.
Not interested in buying a membership, so take this as you will.
.
The Financial Times is said to say Russia started the war with a stockpile of 17 million rounds and has burned through 10 million so far.
.
Thatâs, on average, over 35,000 rpd. That leaves 7 million rounds, plus a years production, what ever that is, still in stockpile.
.
Granted Ukraine has destroyed some ammunition stockpiles, but likely only in numbers listed in the low 100kâs, which would amount to be a rounding error for the total estimate.
.
If you look at most drone shots the artillery craters are many and most off target. Accuracy is a big deal. I would not want to be under a constant barrage though. One guided shell is worth many unguided. All the misses donât make the highlight reel.
More on the US 155mm
Cost
$820 for a dumb round
$176,000. For a smart round
215 dumb rd vs 1 smart round
.
âThe Army wants to cut its spending on 155 mm artillery rounds to $174 million in fiscal year 2022, down from the $306.3 million Congress appropriated for FY-21.â
.
â The budget request would provide for the Army to buy 75,357 M795 rounds, which would support training and the service’s war reserve.â
.
â Much of the difference in funding will come from cuts to the M795 high explosive round, the Army’s standard combat projectile. Under the budget request, procurement funding for the M795 would be $61.8 million in FY-22, down from the $145.6 million appropriated for FY-21.â
.
â The unit cost would be $13,656 for each regular XM1113 round and $14,484 for each XM1113 Extended Range round. That is a reduction from previous years for the regular XM1113, and this is the first year for which unit cost of the extended-range version is available.
.
Funding for the M982 Excalibur precision-guided round, which is reported separately from other 155 mm ammunition, would fall slightly under the FY-22 budget request, to $73.5 million, from $76.8 million in the FY-21 budget appropriation.
.
Unit costs would more than double to $176,624 per round in FY-22, from $80,948 in FY-21.â
.
https://www.fieldartillery.org/news/army-to-cut-155-mm-artillery-spending-citing-budget-pressure
Most of russiaâs neighbors hate russia [and for good reason] and russia lives in a tough neighborhood. Internally, it has a security issue within the independant republics of russia. These are semi autonomous regions of non-russian ethnic peoples living under kremlin rule. Similar to Georgia and Ukraine, these areas may want freedomâŚ.and they are huge.
And then there is that pesky problem to the West called NATO. NATO is feeling its oats these days.
I am not a military person but it seems to me that russia needs some base level of military capability to meet all these potential threats. They canât go all-in on Ukraine. The russian air force and Black sea fleet have all but withdrawn from combat. Can the army be far behind?
Or, maybe when the russians approach the critical lower limit of military readiness, they unleash the WMDs.
I think President Zelenskyy is pulling a fast one, but Iâm not sure. I think the level of power outages in Ukraine is much less than he is broadcasting. You can see screenshot comparisons between this year and last here: [the dates are shown in the lower left] https://twitter.com/rklier21/status/1604019074555645953?s=20&t=ng08DKj1W_T2C2GRjfAM9A
I compare the lights from the electrical grid each night between this year and last year. I have been doing this for three weeks and every night there is some degree of cloud cover, so I canât be sure. My guess is there are about 10-20% less lights this year.
If someone here is good with GIS systems I would appreciate your review of my work. There is probably a way to reduce the opacity of the cloud layer and get better pictures, but I canât figure it out. You can access NASA Worldview Black Marble here: https://worldview.earthdata.nasa.gov/
Russell Klier (Comment #217358): “I think President Zelenskyy is pulling a fast one, but Iâm not sure … My guess is there are about 10-20% less lights this year.”
.
Some questions.
What is being claimed? My impression is that power loss varies and is sometimes up to 50%, although I am not sure if that is nation wide.
Can you tell the difference between an urban area with normal power and one with, say, 20% loss of power?
How can you tell where the clouds are? Does the system provide separate data on that? If so, how does it know? My first guess would be that the clouds are where you can’t see any lights.
Mike,
â My first guess would be that the clouds are where you canât see any lights.â
Ukraine has vast areas with no lights. It normally has a lot of dark areas. See a comparison of Amsterdam and Kyiv on a clear night last year:
https://twitter.com/rklier21/status/1604160466825236480?s=20&t=GK2EK7g9TYp2aLg5sudNeg
âHow can you tell where the clouds are?â
I chose the nights I posted because they had thin continuous layers of stratus clouds nearly everywhere. If you look in the above photo of Kyiv you can see a cloud area to the South. Ukraine must have crappy weather in December.
âWhat is being claimed? â
My claim is there is not a lot of difference between the amount of area with lights now and the amount of area with lights last year. I am not able to adjust the photos for cloud layer and time of day, so I may be wrong. I was hoping someone here was a whizz with GIS.
Here is the link to NASA GIS:
https://worldview.earthdata.nasa.gov/
Maybe Ukraine is starting to fight dirtyâŚ
âHas a previously-unseen munition been revealed in #Ukraine? Recently video appeared showing shelling of a Russian position in the vicinity of Bakhmut, #Donetsk Oblast. The unusual explosions have led to to many theories- but we have a strong idea about what was really used.â
Cluster munitions!
These are controversial and subject to international bans. Unexploded bomblets are hazardous to civilians for years. We have them but strongly limit their use. We are not part of the international treaty. There are some newer types with timed self destruct mechanisms.
Not sure Ukraine has them but video from Bakhmut sure looks like they do. No tellinâ who supplied them.
https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1604208852169363458?s=20&t=LTI_uFpnYfuABegDiJElyA
I have said repeatedly that russiaâs negotiation offer is just a ploy:
âThe US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) assesses that the Kremlin is not serious about negotiations with Ukraine, agreeing with a longstanding ISW assessment.â
âPutin has consistently weaponized invocations of the negotiation process to isolate Ukraine from partner support. Putin has routinely framed Ukraine as refusing concessions and likely seeks to use any ceasefire and negotiation window to allow Russian troops time to reconstitute and relaunch operations, thus depriving Ukraine of the initiative.â
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-december-17
A man on a serious mission, the soccer GOAT, Lionel Messi, leads Argentina to their first world cup in decades.
.
The only question is if he will retire or continue making US$35 million per year for a while. I suspect he hangs on âtill the next World Cup. He is still way better than those who defend him. At 39 in the next world cup? Not sure how he will do. Of course, he is the great Messi, so maybe he defies age and plays well in 2026.
The NYT apparently got access to the Russian war plan, no doubt through their CIA contacts. This is a very long read but is a good summary of what the US thinks it knows about the war so far.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/12/16/world/europe/russia-putin-war-failures-ukraine.html
.
Parts of this are no doubt misinformation and propaganda, but still an interesting read if you have the time. The Russians thought the war would end fast, Putin was dangerously misinformed and paranoid, morale is low, and Putin will sacrifice as many of his people as necessary. The biggest revelation is that the CIA chief visited Russia in November over a year ago to warn Russia off the invasion.
Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko is a man with no good options. He could agree to integration with russia and attack Ukraine to the South. He would likily see his army shredded by a superior force and also open his county to counter strikes. Or, he could defy putin and be the next hapless putin associate to fall out a window. Those are his only choices.
âOn December 19, Vladimir Putin will make working visit to Belarusâ
âThe two leaders will discuss key aspects of the further development of Russian-Belarusian strategic partnership and alliance with a focus on the integration within the Union Stateâ
http://en.kremlin.ru/press/announcements/70091/print
I thought Elon Musk was doing great shaking things up at Twitter, but I think he’s made a fatal mistake. One doesn’t pay 44 billion USD for a company and then relinquish leadership because “democracy”. In my view, that’s just dumb. There is no inherent virtue in democracy other than the obvious (difficult to oppress the majority) and a democratic mob can and often will do stupid and evil things just fine; democracy doesn’t prevent that.
Oh well. Easy come easy go!
Were this not the case, we wouldn’t need the Bill of Rights in the Constitution.
Mark,
âShould I step down as head of Twitter? â
Doesnât mean he will no longer own Twitter. Whoever âhead of Twitterâ turns out to be (and I bet Elon knows who this is) will report to the owner. I think itâs just another Elon caper, toying with the proletariat.
Russell,
Yeah.
Here is an article
https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/12/19/elon-musk-to-step-down-as-head-of-twitter-after-bombshell-poll-results-go-final-n675699
which agrees with you essentially.
Tom Scharf (Comment #217367)
That NYT article is behind their paywall.
Mark,
âShould I step down as head of Twitter? I will abide by the results of this poll.â
If âyesâ wins:
Musk will remain CEO for 30 days and hand pick a successor, who will report to him.
If âNoâ wins:
Musk will remain CEO for 30 days and hand pick a successor, who will report to him.
https://twitter.com/rklier21/status/1604892101296197632?s=20&t=efXnuvY9sScTmhji9xfcOA
Gibsonâs Bakery finally gets paid: â Oberlin College finalizes $36,600,000 payment to bakery it defamed as âracistââ
Get Woke, Go Broke!
https://www.thecollegefix.com/oberlin-college-finalizes-36600000-payment-to-bakery-it-defamed-as-racist/
Russell Klier (Comment #217369): “Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko is a man with no good options.”
.
He is certainly in a spot, but I expect he will survive. My impression is that Lukashenko relies on the military both as a power base and to control the population. If he sends troops into Ukraine, that will both create unrest and tie up his means of suppressing that unrest. Even worse, the military might turn on him.
.
So his only option would seem to be to keep his army at home. That would also likely be the only option for any successor. So I don’t think there is much that Putin could do to change that.
Mike,
I am not predicting how this will end. I am thinking about how hard it will be for Lukashenko to look a desperate putin in the eye and say no. [I doubt that I would be able to say no] If he defies putin in this time of need, he will spend the rest of his days a marked man. Every time he sips a cup of tea, he will be thinking about polonium-210.
Putin sounded today as if he got at least something âI would like to state with satisfaction the successful implementation of the 28 sectoral integration programmes that were drafted in the context of implementing the Union State Treaty. â [âintegrationâ is russian for taking over]
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/70148/print
Russell Klier (Comment #217379): “to look a desperate putin in the eye and say no … Putin sounded today as if he got at least something”.
.
It sounds to me like two things might be going on. One would be Putin using pressure on Belarus entering the war to get concessions on other matters. The other is that the pressure on Lukashenko might be just for show.
.
Belarus joining the war would at most have a small effect. And Lukashenko getting overthrown would do Putin no good at all. But the *possibility* of Belarus attacking pins down Ukrainian forces in both the Chernobyl area, where Russia invaded, and near where Ukraine, Belarus, and Poland all meet. Maybe in winter there might even be a risk of an army crossing the marshes in between.
.
So keeping the “Belarus might enter the war” pot simmering is a headache for Ukraine even if there is no actual intention of Belarus entering the war.
.
Also, publicly resisting pressure from Putin might be useful to Lukashenko domestically. That would be in the interest of both Lukashenko and Putin.
Incredibly the Jan 6th committee referred charges for Trump. Never saw that coming, ha ha. They must have agonized over that decision, those brave defenders of democracy.
In other news the pandemic is apparently over for illegal immigration, but not for student loans. It all makes perfect sense. Not. Emergency powers need to be time limited and validated by the legislature or you get this kind of sh** every time.
Tom Scharf,
Yes, all emergency powers, both state and Federal, should be strictly time limited and explicitly limited in scope. Unfortunately, they won’t be anywhere there is a Democrat executive or where one house of the legislature is not dominated by Republicans. Limiting Federal executive emergency power in any way would require a Republican President, a Republican House, and 60 Republican votes in the Senate……. not going to happen.
.
Progressives” see forcing people to do things they clearly do not want to do as a positive, not a negative…. it is just a manifestation if the hive mind of the left: the collective is all that really matters, not the individual. It is but tyranny by a different name.
Tom
Yes. It’s useful to give an executive powers to act when something needs to be done in less than 2 days. But presumably a legislature should be able to act within 3 to 6 months. Even if the “action” were to extend emergency powers 6 months, it’s still an action!
I think Lukashenko may have told putin NYET!
ISW:
Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko likely deflected Russian President Vladimir Putinâs efforts to coerce Belarus into further Russian-Belarusian integration concessions during a meeting in Minsk on December 19.
https://www.understandingwar.org/
TASS:
âAt their talks in Moscow on September 9, 2021, Vladimir Putin and Alexander Lukashenko agreed on 28 union programs for further integration of the two countriesâ
âAmong other things, Moscow and Minsk agreed to pursue a common macroeconomic policy, harmonize their monetary and credit policies, and create a common payment space on the territory of the Union State.â
https://tass.com/politics/1552713
The fact that we do not limit the emergency powers a priori is telling and even more so when it is not done post facto. There is no great public or media outcry that the Biden administration stop using emergency as an excuse to continue programs that where instigated during a declared emergency. Further the Democrats want to continue permanently a number of programs initiated in an emergency. I do not hear a significant number of the public realizing that emergency powers too often become permanent. I think if the power hungry governments were looking at my neighborhood for hints of what they can get away with when instigating emergency powers they would be most pleased with the Covid-19 experience.
I think before problems like these are addressed one has to be very honest about where we currently stand. You could hypothetically put a brake on executive emergency powers but that does not preclude the legislative branches from prolonging the agony.
The failed red wave made few waves about emergency powers. I think looming in the not distant future is a permanent emergency involving climate change.
Kenneth,
“I do not hear a significant number of the public realizing that emergency powers too often become permanent. I think if the power hungry governments were looking at my neighborhood for hints of what they can get away with when instigating emergency powers they would be most pleased with the Covid-19 experience.”
.
Donno. There were many states which instituted limits on executive emergency powers, a few even over the veto of a Democrat governor. Those were pretty much all Republican dominated states. AFAIK, no Democrat dominated state passed any limitations on executive emergency power. Which I think is a clear example of the divergence of political philosophy between conservative Republicans and ‘progressive’ Democrats. The ’emergency powers’ have brought mainly policies progressives wanted anyway; covid was just an excuse to institute them without legislative approval.
To say the USA is today suffering a pandemic emergency is absurd on its face. That is OK with progressives: a declared ’emergency’ which is absurd on it face is fine… so long as it allows progressive policies to continue to be forced on the public, without having to pass any legislation.
.
As always with the left, the ends justify most any means. As always with the left, there is no respect for honesty, the rule of law, nor the Constitution’s limitations on government. ‘Progress’ is all that matters; it is pure evil.
I have frequently complained here about how arbitrarily laws are enforced or not and now we can see arbitrariness in emergency measures, for example, the emergency has ended for Title 42, but not for student loan payments.
I have continued to look more deeply into the arbitrariness of decisions for asylum in US immigration courts and the more I look the more arbitrary decisions I see.
I believe this general affliction of government has come to the point of being considered a natural result of government and as such is accepted without much thought of consequences and mitigation.
The 1.65 trillion dollar and 4,155 page Omnibus bill is another mockery of government restraint after its going on an historic spending spree by way of Covid-19 as an excuse. No debate, no opportunity to digest it contents, give the Republicans a big defense budget to win them over for large amounts of domestic spending, put in the bill items that would not pass on their own, give Ukraine an addition 40 billion dollars for our proxy war and there you have it: total irresponsibility by the ruling class in Washington. Again, an example of the US citizenry not feeling a thing, much like the lobster in the pot that goes from cold to boiling.
Marcuse’s “repressive tolerance”, which is simply applying rules fastidiously and with prejudice to those you oppose while giving favored groups a literal ‘get out of jail free” card.
Recent finding from JAMA:
âThe US continued to experience significantly higher COVID-19 and excess all-cause mortality compared with peer countries during 2021 and early 2022, a difference accounting for 150?000 to 470?000 deaths.â
âŚwe were the worst! âŚAnd we also had the lowest vaccination rate.
Way to go freedom loving Conservatives! Your efforts paid dividends.
COVID-19 and Excess All-Cause Mortality in the US and 20 Comparison Countries, June 2021-March 2022
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2798990
Good stuff over here.
Advocates for peace negotiations to end the war in Ukraine are on a foolâs errand:
ISW:
âNegotiations, ceasefires, and peace deals are not off-ramps but rather on-ramps for the Kremlin to renew its attack on Ukraine in the future under conditions that advantage Russia. They are means to the same endsâfull control of Ukraine and eradication of Ukraineâs statehood and identity.â
And:
âRussian President Vladimir Putinâs intent toward Ukraine has not changed and likely never will. Putinâs intent will most likely outlast himâby design. Russia will use any territory it keeps in Ukraine to stage future attacks.â
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/target-russiaâs-capability-not-its-intent
I have been trying to track The flight of President Zelenskyy coming to the US but no luck. It must have bee flying dark. But suddenly there is a flurry of military aircraft off Cape Cod. Here is a screen shot. https://twitter.com/rklier21/status/1605619714675310595?s=61&t=3TRdPy7W9Cyq2n4h0rlYEw
Russell Klier (Comment #217391): “Advocates for peace negotiations to end the war in Ukraine are on a foolâs errand”.
.
Indeed. Much of what ISW says on the subject seems to me like mere assertion. Here is a thorough discussion of why peace is not at hand in Ukraine: https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/the-long-term-risks-of-a-premature-ceasefire-in-ukraine#
Excerpt:
Those freedom loving Conservatives need a lesson in surveillance of all citizens at all times, shutting down the economy and keeping it shut down over all protests, keeping the public on a need to know only basis with regards to pandemic information to stop fearmongering and disinformation and, finally, in methods of keeping civilians in lockdown including welding doors shut.
It would appear that Chinese Communist party and apparatchiks would be best selected for this indoctrination. Let us get at it.
If peace negotiations were successful there would be no more long posts on war strategies and developments. How much fun would that be?
Ken,
â If peace negotiations were successfulâ
I am not interested in peace negotiations. A russian defeat and ouster from Ukraine, including Crimea, must come first. Then peace negotiations can begin.
Ken Fritsch,
“If peace negotiations were successful..”
.
Negotiations will ultimately be successful. It is only a question of when, not if. I have very close to zero interest in the endless ‘analyses’ of the war which trumpet Ukraine’s endless triumphs, and especially not by ‘authorities’ like the ISW, who seem to do little more than parrot propaganda releases from the Ukraine and NATO.
.
The war will end at the negotiation table. Russia is not going to give Ukraine the Crimea; it has been Russian territory for hundreds of years. Russia is not going to allow the Crimean to be deprived of water from the Dnipro river. Russia is not going to allow the Ukraine to become part of NATO. Russia is not going stop influencing/controlling the Donbas regions they have effectively controlled since 2014. Everything else is probably negotiable. The Ukrainian leadership, Western Europe, and the USA show no interest in negotiations. I am sure this will ultimately change. I hope it is before the Ukraine (and maybe a lot of other places) becomes a radioactively contaminated mountain of rubble.
Yesterday one side was talking peace plan:
âUkrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told Congress on Wednesday that he proposed a âpeace formulaâ in his meeting with President Biden which he hoped would result in joint security guarantees for decades to come.
Speaking to a joint meeting of Congress, he said he discussed a 10-point peace formula with Mr. Biden and expressed his willingness to take part in a peace summit.â
Free link, https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/ukraine-zelensky-biden-congress-washington-trip-russia/card/zelensky-says-biden-supports-his-peace-plan-niPc0HGjRkabUKS9mL5A
And one side wasnât:
MOSCOW, Dec 21 (Reuters) – The Kremlin said that nothing good would come from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s trip to Washington on Wednesday and that Russia saw no chance of peace talks with Kyiv.
https://www.reuters.com/world/kremlin-says-no-chance-ukraine-talks-zelenskiy-travels-washington-2022-12-21/
To me, the russian war machine is stuck in reverse; I see no reason to negotiate.
And the world moves closer to WWIII.
.
I am hearing reports of Poland mobilization of an additional 300k troops.
.
Russia has authorized an army increase of 1m to 1,6m, and expansion of their professional contract troops from 200k to 700k.
.
The only question is if Poland moves across the border by itself or if the US follows Poland.
.
Both Hungry and Turkey would appose NATO as a group attacking Russia, but the US and Poland going in alone is a real possibility when Ukraine finds itself on the ropes.
.
The only way this war ends is with a total surrender ( destruction) of one, or both, of the different sides.
Ed Forbes,
I hope those reports are wrong. Poland can’t as a NATO member act alone unless they want to abrogate their treaty obligations. If Poland (or the USA) sends troops into the Ukraine, a nuclear holocaust becomes likely. I hope the clowns running the Biden administration recognize this as the likely outcome, but I am beginning to have my doubts. This is becoming ever more like the start of WWI, where multiple clowns on all sides make a series of foolish choices which ultimately bring a catastrophe.
Poland is arming themselves to defend against an invasion by russia. I wish them Godspeed.
The area of russia is 53 times the area of Poland. Russia has a brutal history of invading and subjugating itâs smaller neighbors:
September 17, 1939, stalinâs declared that the Polish government has ceased to exist. Next came the invasion and occupation of eastern Poland. The number of Poles who died due to Stalinâs repressions in the period 1939-1941 is estimated as at least 150,000. In one notorious atrocity ordered by Stalin, the secret police systematically shot and killed 22,000 Poles in a remote area during the Katyn massacre. Some 14,471 victims were top Polish Army officers, including political leaders, government officials, and intellectuals.
Poland shares a 130 mile long border with russia [Kaliningrad Oblast] and a 248 mile long border with Belarus, from where putin launched his invasion of Ukraine.
Poland must stand ready.
Ed Forbes (Comment #217402): “And the world moves closer to WWIII.”
.
There is no evidence for that. Poland is not going to attack Russia.
.
Ed Forbes: “The only way this war ends is with a total surrender ( destruction) of one, or both, of the different sides.”
.
Once again, no reason to believe that. It amounts to claiming that the only way the war can end is with the destruction of Ukraine, since Ukraine has no intention of trying to destroy Russia.
———–
There are people who think our involvement in Ukraine is a bad idea. They have legitimate concerns. It really annoys me when such people are accused of being “pro-Putin” or “Pro-Russia”. No, they are merely pro-America and don’t see our interest in Ukraine.
.
But Ed Forbes seems to be genuinely pro-Russia. He often sounds like he will be disappointed if the war ends with Ukraine still in existence with something like its pre-war borders.
Murder of Ukrainian civilians in the town Bucha…. NYT documents one of the russian units responsible, and their commander:
âan eight-month visual investigation by The New York Times concluded that the perpetrators of the massacre along Yablunska Street were Russian paratroopers from the 234th Air Assault Regiment led by Lt. Col. Artyom Gorodilov.â
âSoldiers interrogated and executed unarmed men of fighting age, and killed people who unwittingly crossed their paths â whether it was children fleeing with their families, locals hoping to find groceries or people simply trying to get back home on their bicycles.â
Some of it reads like a prosecuting attorney presenting evidenceâŚincluding videos.
Free link: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/video/russia-ukraine-bucha-massacre-takeaways.html?unlocked_article_code=8K4mMH7WDFI8KgGOCaEf0nvyAm3_GdAdGuRXwDLYEkdQuc2XT1IhknGj75jPKhi3Vm6QwVhFrrMrpYWKJed8mjs7y0JQzs_v_bDzQ7cZ9A50XD1poxNe-QyWkuwcnKWFqgIH7mm4K0Aq-Pn-IRSzOdR3-znj5J4_XwfvVB8QTL-mqbgz0ilENfB63todFP7PMt3My5XOO59j5JO05vmXDMXutfM6P501L5jtcP83Quax2EmZTGWcOY3PElbvPgoa8AjOo0JFBGmir_cJ9yV5fiCy__EsU_cdujYqf6YGSk_WuMhEfw0gE7us1NLjh08OmRyuuh28TmRiWxIE70yH6xvXjzO_GUYzZVQyqk-XiNQ
Mike M,
I definitely have serious concerns about our involvement in the Ukraine. There is no clearly stated objective; what exactly is success? There is no apparent limit to how much we will spend (“whatever it takes” is not an answer). There seems zero acceptance that Russia is not going to be driven out of the Crimea (it is about a s likely as the USA being driven out of Texas)….. which precludes the possibility of a negotiated settlement.
.
When the war is over, whether the Ukraine exists with close to its pre-war borders (which I think is the most likely outcome barring escalation to a nuclear conflict) or within somewhat different borders, the Ukraine will be, at best, a middle income country with a lot of damaged infrastructure, but with the same rampant corruption as before the war, and will be neither in the EC nor part of NATO. For the Ukrainian people there will not be much difference, save for that the longer the war goes on, the greater the human an economic toll they will pay. If nuclear weapons come into play, the country will likely be uninhabitable.
.
The frustrating part of all this is not just the terrible loss of life and enormous cost, but also that our political leaders seem unwilling to address reality, and so are sleep-walking into putting the USA (and all of Westerner civilization) at risk for what seems to be minuscule political gain. Yes, Putin is evil, and it would be good if a bolt from on high found him. But he is not likely going to fall out of a 5th story window, and whoever replaced him, if that happened, is a likely to be worse (and more likely to trigger a holocaust) than Putin. I just don’t see that any of our positions make any sense.
.
Finally, there is the utter lack of moral consistency. The CCP enslaves Muslims. The CCP routinely “disappears” people they don’t like. The CCP took over Hong Kong politically in direct violation of the treaty they had signed with the UK. The CCP is aggressive in taking regional territory for itself (creating “Chinese” islands that never existed in disputed resource rich ocean waters), and constantly threatens Taiwan with military action. The CCP (along with dozens of smaller countries) is subverting every economic measure taken against Russia. Yet the Biden administration treats the CCP with kid gloves. The Biden administration is run by a bunch of clowns.
SteveF,
I have many similar concerns. My biggest is the lack of a clear objective. Biden says we want Ukraine to win, but has slow walked military assistance. Maybe they are providing all they think Ukraine can productively use; but evidence seems to say otherwise. Their public excuse seems to be that they don’t want to irritate Putin, as if that ship has not sailed. My big concern is that Team Biden is using Ukraine as a cat’s paw against Russia.
.
I am not much worried about a nuclear conflict. Crimea will be resolved when the time comes. But if the war drags on and on, Ukraine may never recover.
Mike M,
“My big concern is that Team Biden is using Ukraine as a catâs paw against Russia.”
.
I honestly can’t see it any other way. Spend a lot of taxpayer’s money to punish Russia for not doing what the “international community” wants, without the political inconvenience of body bags arriving at Andrews AFB. The Biden administration’s blind spot is that they could never imagine the Russians honestly think they have legitimate security concerns with NATO expanding to Russian borders. It is a bit like the way the Biden administration has acted on domestic policies since the moment it took power in Jan 2021: absolutely no compromise and no quarter given to Republicans because ‘rubes and deplorables’ have no legitimate policy concerns, so should be completely ignored. Just like clearly stated Russian security concerns should be ignored.
.
So long as Zelensky continues to get vast quantities of military support, no strings attached, along with an equally vast money stream to support his government, there wii be no negotiations.
There will be no negotiation that leaves NATO with a viable proxy of Ukraine.
.
NATO and the EU leaders have publicly acknowledged they had no intention of honoring the Minsk agreements they signed to settle the Ukraine conflict. This duplicity totally poisons the well for any diplomatic settlement of the current conflict in Ukraine. Without trust, any agreement would not be worth the paper it was written on.
.
The west sees the conflict as a way to weaken Russia and has no real interest in Ukraine future. Throwing Ukraine under the bus when convenient for them is a given.
.
Russia, on the other hand, sees the conflict as an existential threat to the viability of Russia itself. As such, Russia will do anything necessary to win a full and complete victory over Ukraine.
It is completely rational to be on the border of Russia and be paranoid of your future. Poland is behaving as one would expect them to.
As is NATO. They are not the Super Friends in the Hall of Justice. They are optimizing the outcome to the benefit of NATO which is shockingly the job they are asked to do. This is weakening Russia and deterring future wars without expanding the current war. This involves a lot of guesswork and brinkmanship. Why they donât state this as the objective or why the media is not curious to press this issue is a mystery.
If one wants global justice go whine to the UN and see how far that gets things towards a preferred solution. Until then self interests explain behavior pretty well. NATO isnât pressing hard to stop the war ⌠because they donât want it to stop. This makes sense militarily but not perhaps from a humane perspective. Politicians have to bridge that void. Until then expect the generals to keep the war going.
Declaring something an existential threat doesnât make it so. Russia was under no threat of invasion and has zero rights to effective sovereignty over its neighbors. They are paying the price for their arrogance and will pay everything necessary in the future if they continue this foolhardy behavior. Russia is not better off for this, they have gained almost nothing. We shall see where it goes. Every country tires of war eventually. So far it has been a strategic mistake by almost every measure.
I see a third option between WWIII and Putin agreed settlement to pre-war status quo: an effective Russian anti-war protest with strikes and massive desertions that gives Putin no choice.
.
SteveF: “As always with the left, the ends justify most any means. As always with the left, there is no respect for honesty, the rule of law, nor the Constitutionâs limitations on government. âProgressâ is all that matters; it is pure evil.”
.
Radicals hate honesty, compromise and principles like reciprocity, i.e., the golden rule. And if they do they need to invent evil narratives about adversaries to delude themselves that they are.
.
The only answer is honest and open dialogue and slow trust building.
For me the end point is clear:
We stop supplying weapons when either of the following happens:
-1.The Ukrainians decide they have lost too many of their soldierâs lives and want to quit, or
-2.Ukraine stops being effective at using our weapons to degrade the russian war machine.
The ideal endpoint is a russian military so depleted that it will not be able to threaten NATO on the ground for a decade or more. [We may have already achieved that goal]
Then we can turn our attention to preparation for the air and sea battle with the chinese.
Ron Graf,
“The only answer is honest and open dialogue and slow trust building.”
.
Nice thought. Never seen that happen with the left any time in my adult life. When I was in college, my campus (a pretty quite science and engineering school) was ‘invaded’ on the second Earth Day by leftist students from many surrounding colleges and universities. Listening to them scream at the crowd (through bull horns) that day was not a significantly different experience from listening to leftists scream today: They want to destroy the country because they think it is evil. But the clearest message they gave was they will never accept compromise.
.
No, I think the only plausible path forward, if meaningful personal liberty is to exist at all in the future, is for a majority of sensible people to keep the left from exercising political power. With so many near-lunatic lefties already exercising political power (look at the clown car that is the Biden administration), it is not clear to me that will be possible. What is clear is that those on the left do not compromise on substance…… ever.
Ed Forbes
Russia “sees” it that way? Sure. But that’s because they are demented. Being demented, they very well may do that.
.
The west “sees” it that way? Not so sure. I think the west knows just giving Russian free reign to invade whoever and whatever reason they like merely because they “see” things their way is an existantial threat to others.
.
The west may very well end up by throwing Ukraine under the bus. It’s not entirely given– but the west does do that.
Tom Scharf (Comment #217411): “They are optimizing the outcome to the benefit of NATO which is shockingly the job they are asked to do. This is weakening Russia and deterring future wars without expanding the current war.”
.
NATO is *supposed* to be a defensive alliance. I see no real difference between “weakening Russia” and attacking Russia. NATO expanding to the east did not serve NATO’s stated purpose; just the opposite because that was (and is) destabilizing.
————-
Tom Scharf (Comment #217412): “Declaring something an existential threat doesnât make it so. Russia was under no threat of invasion and has zero rights to effective sovereignty over its neighbors.”
.
And declaring something not a threat does not make it so. NATO has gone on the offensive in the Balkans and Afghanistan, effectively claiming sovereignty over other countries and undermining the claim that NATO is purely defensive. NATO’s eastward expansion does not serve its declared purpose. It is completely understandable that Russia feels threatened.
.
That does not make it OK for Russia to invade Ukraine. But it does deny NATO (and the US) the moral high ground. Both sides are in the wrong and Ukraine is paying the price.
.
Everything Biden has done is consistent with wanting the war to start and to drag on as long as possible. I hope that is not his intent, but if it is then Biden and Putin deserve to be roommates is hell.
In some ways I see the Ukraine war evolving in similar ways to that of the Viet Nam war. Like most wars initial public opinion very much favors the action or at least does not in large numbers protest it and that is what we see in the Ukraine conflict and saw in Viet Nam. The initial emotional appeal in both wars is that, if one is against it, one must favor the enemy and again something common to most wars. The side the US supported in Viet Nam and in the Ukraine had a history of political corruption that could in the instance of war be overlooked and in fact looked at as if those nations supported most all of the US ideals of government. In both wars the US limited it efforts in the hopes of avoiding WWIII.
In this proxy war there are not daily transport of body bags and a draft, as was the case for Viet Nam, there are only large sums of money going into the effort and the view of death and destruction of the invaded nation. That situation probably for tends the Ukraine war to be agonizingly extended.
I do not see any grand strategies from any of the indirectly and directly involved nations in the Ukraine war. Like most wars the political leaders become nothing more than cheerleaders in hopes of keeping the populace in favor of the war effort. War proponentsâ efforts become one of rationalizing whatever actions these leaders take as efforts well taken and not mistakes which in many cases is the case. The single most obvious strategy of the larger NATO nations is to wait for the US to put up the major share of the money required for their proxy war. Of course, the US wanting to maintain the position as the worldâs policeman is more than willing to comply. Smaller NATO nations closer to the Russian border are more than doing there share and this is the way the cost should be expected to be shared. The larger NATO nations appear to be more in it as a matter of virtue signaling, unless someone can explain why their share should not be larger GDP-wise than the US -Emmanuel Macronâs pronouncements on an independent EU military and defense aside.
How the Ukraine war ends is not readily foretold at this moment in time because the populations on both sides are still on a war high. An alternative to the war ending due to war weariness by the people is for one of the sides militarily defeating the other side. For Ukraine to prevail in my view the US would have to spend in the trillions range for the military and support of the Ukraine regime and probably a promised nation building effort like we saw in Iraq. For Russia to prevail would require in my view an even more devastating bombing of civilians and civilian infrastructure than has already occurred and more on the scale of what the US and Great Britain did in WWII.
The biggest unknowns are what happens to Ukraine and Russia in the aftermath of the war. I am sure that the directly and indirectly involved politicians on both sides are currently thinking they will deal with that matter when it happens and then determine what the involved populace will stand still for.
Conclusions: Grand strategies? No. Future plan timing? Weeks at best.
Lucia,
“The west may very well end up by throwing Ukraine under the bus.”
.
I am pretty sure they will. When, not if, is the only real question in my mind. Of course, there is always an outside chance of a miracle (Putin has a heart attack that makes him accidentally fall from a 6th story window, then Russia withdraws), but the most realistic outcome is that the Ukraine will end up negotiating a settlement under unfavorable terms after a terrible cost in lives, money, and infrastructure damage.
.
Mike M,
Biden deserves a room in Hell for lots and lots of reasons, with or without Putin as a roommate.
.
You are correct, of course, that NATO has multiple times taken an offensive position in conflicts that had zero to do with it being a mutual defensive pact. I think NATO should have been wound down over a decade to become little more than a signed treaty after the Soviet Union collapsed; NATO had served it’s purpose. Rapid expansion of NATO against a non-existent Russian threat? Absolutely nutty.
.
I agree the Biden administration appears to be doing everything possible to make sure the war does not end any time soon. This will cost many thousands of lives and many billions of dollars under the best of scenarios….. and a hundred million+ lives and a hundred trillion+ dollars in damage under the worst of scenarios. The war in the Ukraine needs to stop.
Ken Fritsch,
You might find this worth a read: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/no-one-would-win-long-war-ukraine
.
The fellow being interviewed is from the University of Chicago, and might be worth a listen: https://youtu.be/HBiV1h7Dm5E
.
University of Chicago: Sensible free speech policies, sensible economics, and sensible foreign policy. What’s not to like?
SteveF,
I think the settlement will be more favorable than if they had not fought or if we had not helped with weapons. If we had not helped and they had not fought, Russia would have gone on to absorb the entire Ukraine. Ukrainians consider that very, very unfavorable.
.
I think Poland and the Baltic states would also not have been happy with that outcome.
Lucia,
“I think the settlement will be more favorable than if they had not fought or if we had not helped with weapons.”
.
Agreed. But worth the cost in lives and treasure? Not so clear to me.
.
“If we had not helped and they had not fought, Russia would have gone on to absorb the entire Ukraine.”
.
Donno. I think Putin clearly wanted a politically compliant Ukraine, one not in NATO, and not part of the EU. But to absorb the Ukraine into Russia? I am not convinced of that. Heck, even during the Soviet era, the Ukraine wasn’t absorbed into Russia, even though they could have done that at any time.
SteveF
Sure. But on terms more favorable to Ukraine than Russian. That’s where the tension lies.
SteveF
I think the opinion of the Ukrainians on the cost/benefit balance is more important than yours. Vlad’s father returned to Ukraine to support the war effort. They really, really, really don’t want to live under Russian rule. I wouldn’t either.
I absolutely believe Russia would absorb Ukraine, doing so incrementally.
Different time. Different structure. Different benefit to Russia.
Lucia,
“I think the opinion of the Ukrainians on the cost/benefit balance is more important than yours.”
.
Well, they have a lot more at stake than I do.
.
But that said, the Ukrainians need to understand that funding their fight against the Russians is something they most certainly do not control…. voters in the USA and Europe do. Absent USA and European support, the Ukraine would likely now be taking orders from Moscow. I believe that at some point there is a very good chance US voters will say “no” to continued funding, and the longer the war continues, the greater the chance that will happen. That would be a catastrophe for the Ukraine, and is something the Ukrainians should keep in mind as they consider their negotiation conditions.
.
Zelensky’s 10-point “peace plan”, while righteous, just, and pure, is completely unrealistic, and will only mean continued war. IMHO, he is putting a great deal at risk by effectively refusing to consider negotiations. In fairness to Zelensky, the USA and Europe could be pressuring him to make sure there are no negotiations, so his options may be limited.
.
I was surprised the Russians did not target energy infrastructure for a very long time, but now they are. I remain surprised the Russians have not yet targeted Ukrainian leaders. I am guessing they still want to maintain a credible Ukrainian counter party. If the Russians start targeting Ukrainian leaders, then I think that will mean the Russians have completely given up on a negotiated end to the war.
“If the Russians start targeting Ukrainian leaders, then I think that will mean the Russians have completely given up on a negotiated end to the war.”
Very astute observation. Putin is not completely insane, just mostly. He needs the current government to lose support by war weariness or revealed corruption. Targeting a popular government just leads to a more determined and likely radical one.
SteveF
I’m sure they are very aware of that. They were aware of that before they were invaded. They were aware of that when the were first invaded and decided to fight back.
.
Sure. But they may weil choose the ongoing catastrophe of war to the catastrophe of the conditions Russia may insist on to end the war.
.
https://www.businessinsider.com/zelenskyy-proposes-10-point-peace-plan-ukraine-g20-bali-summit-2022-11
.
Which of the 10 points do you think Zelensky should compromise on? Letting the Russians threaten to escalate to nuclear war? (That’s two points.) Letting Russiance block food? Or Energy? Withdrawal of troops?
I honestly don’t think how you can have an end of war without those 10 points. Threatening to escalate and use nukes is certainly not “peace”. Standing Russian troops in the Ukraine is not “peace”– or at least it’s just a Russian take over.
.
Yes, Russian isn’t accepting those. But that’s because Russia wants to take over Ukraine either as a vassal state or absorb it..
Ron/Steve
My quibble with that is that it suggests the Russians were ever interested in negotiating an end to the war (on any basis other than complete surrender and subjugation of Ukraine.)
I have been saying the russian military degradation at the hands of Ukraine is a major, long-term problem for them. It turns out, I have a lot of company:
“The crack units that led the charge have to be rebuilt from scratch.âWiped outâ: War in Ukraine has decimated a once feared Russian brigadeâ
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/16/russia-200th-brigade-decimated-ukraine/
And the kremlin:
âThe proposals, announced earlier this week by Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, would expand the size of Russia’s armed forces by around 30 percent to 1.5 million troops and amount to a reversal of reforms undertaken more than a decade ago that sought to modernize its Soviet-era force structure.â
âAmong other things, Serdyukov’s changes dismantled the Soviet-era structure of the armed forces, moving away from large divisions toward more mobile and largely self-sufficient brigades, and trying to increase interoperability of different branches.â
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-military-reorganization-expansion/32190811.html
A guy from Brookings:
While a tragedy for Ukraine, Putinâs decision to go to war has also proven a disaster for Russia. The Russian military has suffered significant personnel and military losses. In November, Milley put the number of dead and wounded Russian soldiers at 100,000, and that could fall on the low side. U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin commented that the Russian military had lost âstaggeringâ numbers of tanks and other armored vehicles, adding that Western trade restrictions on microchips would inhibit production of replacements. The Oryx website reports 8,000 pieces of equipment destroyed, damaged, abandoned, or captured. Oryx advises that its numbers significantly understate the true nature of Russian losses, as it counts only equipment for which it has unique photo or videographic evidence of its fate. â
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-russia-ukraine-war-and-its-ramifications-for-russia/
Iâve been saying this, but this guy has credibility:
âAfter almost nine months of aggression against Ukraine, Russia has burned through, and seen destroyed, enormous stocks of arms and munitions. It cannot fully replace them. Faced with an acute loss of advanced components and industrial equipment as a result of Western sanctions, the Russian defense industry will simply be unable to compensate for its losses in the foreseeable future.â
https://cepa.org/article/doomed-to-failure-russias-efforts-to-restore-its-military-muscle/
Just like I said, from a military Guru at Brookings: âBut the sequence of Ukrainian victories could also reverberate in the Caucasus, which experienced a chain reaction of violent conflicts in the early 1990s, but was subsequently âpacifiedâ by Russian power projections in various forms, including the August 2008 war with Georgia. The severe depletion of Russiaâs military might and the recognition by various conflict entrepreneurs of this weakness could unleash a new wave of instability in the region, where suppressed rather than addressed sources of tensions tend to burst free. The sudden attack by Azerbaijanâs forces on several Armenian border posts and bases in mid-September is just one manifestation of this trend, and Armeniaâs appeal for help to Russia and the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) was predictably in vain. Azerbaijan is perfectly positioned to capitalize on its victory in the autumn 2020 war and establish full control over Nagorno Karabakh, and Russia would have to wrap up its small peacekeeping operation.â
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/time-for-the-west-to-think-about-how-to-engage-with-defeate
New open thread here
http://rankexploits.com/musings/2022/open-thread-dec-23-2022/