I’m several hundred emails behind. This weekend, always the slowest of the year, allowed me to catch up some. I appreciate very much all the missives and apologize if everybody doesn’t get a timely reply. My backlog of story ideas—which I am thrilled you all send in—goes back to 2011. All great, meaty ideas. Keep ’em comin’!
To help catch up, I’m going all British style for a few running Mondays, with brief quips and links.
Note: unless you tell me not to, I assume it’s okay to say who sent what.
Krauss comes out for brotherly & sisterly love
“Nothing” specialist Larry Krauss (@LKrauss1), über-skeptic, recently said “It is not clear for me that incest is wrong.” It’s also not clear to him that something is not nothing. He stubbornly will not acknowledge that the “laws” of physics, quantum mechanical fields, and the “multi-verse” is not nothing. My bet is he knows of his critics but is too vain to admit to error.
Incest, says he, is an “empirical taboo”, meaning “most cultures” shun it because incestual matings result in politicians and other genetic defectives. Yet that only pushes the problem back a level. Why is having defectives wrong? And why is whatever reason you have for that right or wrong? No: you always end up flapping in the breeze; unless, that is, you can build morality on a solid foundation. “Nothing” holds nothing up. Being Itself can support everything.
Watch the video. He’s okay with a brother and sister going at it, as long as they use contraception and as long as they “love” each other and that their behavior “doesn’t affect anything else.”
Incest clip sent in by Anonymous.
Iowa Democrats Thank Not God
Iowa Democrats thanked “God” for abortions.
We give thanks, oh Lord, for the doctors, both current and future, who provide quality abortion care…
Today we pray for the families who have chosen. May they know the blessing of choice…
We pray for women who have been made afraid by their paternalistic religion.
I think these ladies are on their way to Switzerland.
Found this myself.
Bill Watterson Abides
Cass Sunstein, yet another of Obama’s retired “czars” and now “Harvard” professor, thinks people don’t “fear” global warming enough.
Sunstein thinks that even though global warming has not yet struck, it will. With a vengeance! It will be Sharknado City all over the place. If only we could get people to believe! We must overcome common sense and the plain evidence of a steady thermometer and assure them that if only we increase the size, scope, and power of government, all will be well.
It’s not clear, but it looks like Sunstein wants to create a government agency which will hide agents behind bushes dressed like global warming. Whenever citizens pass by, they’d jump out and frighten the begeebers out of them. And thus, in their induced nervousness, vote for the Establishment in greater numbers.
All above me, but then, as I said, Sunstein is at “Harvard”, which makes what he says gospel.
Sent in by Willie Soon.
Guns reduce crime?
Take the headline “Harvard gun study concludes gun bans don’t reduce the murder rate.” I haven’t looked at his, and probably won’t, except to note that everywhere this appeared it had a headline which mentioned the place of origin of the authors.
Is it a case of “It’s Harvard, gosh” or “I thought all the profs at Harvard were unthinking, reflexive lefties, all of whom despise guns and freedom, so this new gun stuff must be true”? Or it is the standard appeal to authority fallacy? You tell me.
Sent by Al Perrella.
SSM is too political
Not as in exceedingly, but as in “It is, too!” Proof? The organization to be least affected and indeed likely to suffer a lack of clients, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, felt it had to issue an “official endorsement.”
A substantial and growing proportion of the professoriate ready to chuck out science and embrace lunacy in the goal of not hurting feelings. Take Dr Russell Luyt, a specialist in gender and identity at Anglia Ruskin University, who said
Gender is another social category, like race or social class. It remains something we consider important in differentiating between people.
My feeling is that gender is a social construct, something that we have imagined into being. Itâ€™s not real but it has a real importance in terms of how we act and feel and behave.
One interesting question is why even ask it in the first place and what makes it an important category for birth certificates?
I accept remuneration in any currency. Or donate (in lieu of advertising!).