This week, entries from readers (I’m woefully behind).
Science Is Blind
Blind on purpose. Elizabeth Murphy recalls a lecture “delivered at Memorial University in St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador recently sponsored by the Dept. of Sociology.” The “Henrietta Harvey Lecture: How Climate Change Became Controversial: Examining the Denial Counter-Movement” which took place Thursday, Oct. 01, 2015, but a fellow named Dr. Riley E. Dunlap. Here’s a PDF of the announcement (see p. 8).
Fascinating thing about this is that Dunlap is purposely ignorant about why people join the global-warming-of-doom anti-counter-movement. I mean, as far as I can tell, he has made no effort whatsoever to study fully the subject on which he is a purported expert. For instance, he edited the review article Dunlap, Riley E. (ed.). 2013. “Climate Change Skepticism and Denial.” American Behavioral Scientist 57: 691-837. And he is co-author of McCright, Aaron M. and Riley E. Dunlap. 2011. “Cool Dudes: The Denial of Climate Change among Conservative White Males.” Global Environmental Change 21:1163-1172. And so forth.
This Dunlap isn’t alone. Many, many scientists these days start out with a belief and then charge after anything which might support that belief, and these folks are constitutionally unable to search for evidence which might deny their belief. Their beliefs are just true, and the only question they can conjure is “Why isn’t everybody like me?”
Incidentally, I say people join the doom movements because they believe in the solution to global warming. About the physics, they are usually ignorant.
Shaming People Into Abusing English
The desperate-to-remain-relevant John McWhorter wants to shame people into dropping standard English pronouns and instead embrace insanity. “Goodbye to ‘he’ and ‘she’ and hello to ‘ze’?”
We are opening up to the idea that binary conceptions of gender are unnecessarily rigid and don’t correspond to the self-image of a great many people, and even that people’s sense of their gender may not correspond to their biological sex. In this new world, a bland opposition between “he” and “she” seems increasingly antique, and even insulting, to many.
This guy calls himself a linguist. I’m guessing from the Ministry of Education.
Death Becomes Us
Nina Rhea points us to the latest thrust in education: death awareness.
Here is a quote from an essay written in 2011, which favors Death Education.
“This article uses Pinar’s (1992) theory that the ‘concept and realities of death need to be integrated in everyday conversation and in everyday curriculum, and not treated as exotic topics of extreme anxiety. As life leads to death he asks us not to tempt death but invites us to perhaps make friends with it.” From Death and Dying in the Curriculum of Public Schools: Is there a place? (pdf)
The document is 11 pages and has a bibliography of death ed books going back to the 1970’s.
This may be the first time you have heard about Death Education. It is so awful and disturbing. Humanists have invaded our public schools with their damaging ideas about life.
The push is on for the “right” to die with “dignity.” Just like with same-sex attraction, they start the propaganda with the young. Soon will come the day when junior comes home and says, “Mom? Why are we keeping grandma alive? She can barely walk. Teacher said it would be better if she were made into Soylent Green.”
Longtime reader Ken says, “Speaking of climate change, here’s an interesting study on pornography I just ran across. Doubt if it means much, and I question it somewhat, but there it is”. The study title claims “Porn watchers think more highly of women“.
I’ve run out of creative ways to say BS. Thing that caught my eye was this admission by the researcher: “Research estimates have suggested that between 25-95% of men and 2-85% of women use pornography.” Notice it’s use porn, not watch or view. Use. This is accurate, which is why it’s so startling.
The push here is obvious: porn is healthy and promotes diversity, etc., etc. That it, like death education, is deadly to families is ignored.
Thanks to longtime reader Al Perrella we learn the New York Times thinks college lectures are “unfair”. Why?
Yet a growing body of evidence suggests that the lecture is not generic or neutral, but a specific cultural form that favors some people while discriminating against others, including women, minorities and low-income and first-generation college students. This is not a matter of instructor bias; it is the lecture format itself — when used on its own without other instructional supports — that offers unfair advantages to an already privileged population.
Growing body of research my festering…ah, skip it. The Left is one big unfairness factory. Equality of opportunity is impossible, so here we have another target that can never be reached, and so will provide and endless supply of material to rile the base.
From John Moore comes the find “We Are All Related! So Get Over It.” Yeah. We all descend from Adam and Eve, yet even Cain plastered Abel. And doesn’t the author know that family fights are the most internecine.
Contributor Jim Fedako discovers “Is YOUR baby racist? Scientists discover a way to reverse racial bias in young children.” Just is what is causing these horrors in the womb! Recognizing your own mother is now racist.
Categories: Culture, Statistics
Why would Dunlap do actual research? Climate scientists don’t. Those who study them don’t. Actual data is very hard to control. Made up or carefully chosen data is so much simpler.
“Research estimates have suggested that between 25-95% of men and 2-85% of women use pornography.” What should have struck you was the astronomical range of research results. It screams out “WE ARE GUESSING”. This is not science. Actually, throwing darts at a dart board would probably give a more realistic range and it doesn’t pretend to be science.
Unfairness: It is unfair that white males cannot be treated unfairly. No where are they ever listed as being one of those treated unfairly. That is unfair in and of itself.
Distant relations: Well said. DNA is a weapon of mass destruction, used to pummel people into behaving as demanded. Families are very violent–look at all those “domestic violence victim” crosses that get put up periodically.
On race: Unless the liberals stop talking about and constantly fomenting racism, we will never be anything but racist. When everything in your society is based on racial quotas, every news item tries to paint race as a factor (Native Americans–technically still an improper term. There was no America until Columbus or whomever named it such), you can show children all the photos you want. It matters not as long as minorities are privileged classes. You have to see race to have it be a privileged class. Had the study been done properly, it would also have shown babies whose fathers have beards gravitate to photos bearded men, babies whose mothers have lip and nose piercings gravitate toward the same type of woman in a photo. They should also redo the study with babies who have biracial parents and see what results they get. My guess is the baby gravitates to the race of the mother if the photos are women and mom is white, or blacks if mom is black. None of this is new whatsoever. It’s basic human behaviour.
“Native Americans–technically still an improper term”
It’s not an improper term, but it is used improperly. I and my two children are native Americans, We were born in the U.S. My wife, on the other hand is a naturalized Amerian.
Alan: Point taken. The term is improperly used to describe the humans living on the continent now known as North America at the time Columbus landed. It does indeed actually apply to those born on said continent after the continent and country were named. I guess the proper term is “indigenous persons”, though I am not sure if the humans living on this continent were here before the continents drifted and they remained here thereafter. Whoa—this PC stuff is time-consuming and can really give one a severe headache! 🙂
Holy smokes Briggs – the porn study was the one I read *last* week with my pals!
I won’t copy and paste a wall of text – but I will point out three things.
1) “Used porn” was operationally defined as “answered ‘yes’ to the question ‘I have viewed an X-rated film in the last year'”
2) The data used was from the General Social Survey (GSS) and ranged from 1975-2010.
3) In the results section, you’ll see that *more* porn users answered “no, I am not a feminist” than non-porn users. I wish I were making this up. Of course, this was “non significant” and other better measures of positive attitudes toward women such as “women can get an abortion at any time” *did* correlate with porn use.
Re Death Becomes Us. You are correct. It’s about normalizing the deaths of other people for the benefit of the collective. The left is about fixing the problems caused by other people even if it means killing them.
Wow. A This Week In Doom and no mention of a US House of Representatives incapable of finding a speaker. Ya’d think, right? And all those conservatives. All those Christian, conservative, reasonable, fair-minded folks, almost 250 of them, and not a Speaker to be found. Makes ya’ question the tangibility of today’s conservatism, huh Briggs?
Maybe the quote wasn’t characteristic of the entire pdf, but I agree that the “concept and realities of death need to be integrated in everyday conversation and in everyday curriculum, and not treated as exotic topics of extreme anxiety.”
Children need to learn about the four last things and familial generations should stay close that the elder members can teach the younger by example how to approach them (just the first three, with any luck) with faith and hope and love.
If the curricula recommended teach when and how to off granny and to expect to be offed by our own gran’kids, well then, yeah, I guess I’m agin.
acricketchirps: It used to be! 😉
I guess it is once more.