1. The power of negative thinking.
2. Women in Pakistan.
3. The beltway and Hoover.
4. West on West.
5. That would be it (the end) … what other conclusion could you draw?
6. Patriarch Pavle and a poem.
7. Software and science.
8. La chocolate and sin.
9. Oops.
10. If true, this should be a damning indictment of government roles in healthcare.
11. Logic and evangelism.
12. Verse.

1. Contra the “emails at CRU change nothing” argument.
2. A conversation on climate. More on the same here.
3. International politics, economics, and climate.
4. Higher education and Mr Obama.
5. Standing against a casino.
6. An explosive situation in Russia, so to speak.
7. Putin may want a balanced view of Stalin … Ukraine not so much.
8. Russian intellectuals.
9. Speaking of which … bombs and the Evangelicals.
10. Heresy.
11. Noting history and Jesus.
12. A book.
13. That price tag seems high.
14. Risk assessment.

A few thoughts, in the form of the dread bullet list, on AGW and climate in general.

• If one uses a variable ? to represent the time-scale in which one is considering making predictions (about the weather), then we can identify a number of regimes for?. If ? is in minutes or even seconds, often we have difficulty predicting weather as gusts of wind move from our local point of view very unpredictably. If ? is in the day/week regime again weather forecasters have difficulty predicting more than 24 hours out in great accuracy temperature, wind, and precipitation. Apparently, as the recent almost decades long downturn which was … unpredicted is anyindication as well, if ? is in the time-scale of a year or a dozen years again climate scientists fail to predict accurately into the future. Yet, they would have it that if? is in the quarter century to century regime … there, and apparently only there the science is easy and they have that figured out. And they’ve both made their prediction and want us to stake the farm on their result. Now in the above conversation if one moved from weather to the market and discussed the various regimes of market, which is similarly unpredictable at any number of time scales, and suggested that based on my computer model of past events I’ve got it nailed down. I have a good model for quarter century market movement. Furthermore I am now trying to convince you to bet your entire life savings on your model. You’d rightfully point out that only several million other yokels have used past markets to predict future market behaviour and have all failed … and that such models are worth not a whole lot more than a bucket of spit. So the question is, is why you think one chaotic dynamical system is so far different from another. If you’re going to really make the claim that when ? is a half-century then that needs to be tested. And that claim that your methods and models work well for that time period will be proven … in about 200-300 years … if you can correctly predict trends now and watch the climate track your predictions. 30 years ago climate science was warning of impending ice ages. Today, it’s warming. Tomorrow?
• One of the claims of those who would call those sceptical of AGW, “climate deniers” are quick to attempt to label the objectors as anti-science Luddites. Yet that claim doesn’t really fly. There are indeed some anti-science people on the right, and others can argue about the numbers or percentages and compare cricket race results. But there is a problem, which is people like myself. There is another problem. There are strong social idealogical reasons why those on the left are receptive to AGW where they should be perhaps (see the prior remarks) more sceptical.The left is conditioned to find fault with America and the corporate culture and behold, AGW fits right into that idea. Given then that there are secondary (and perhaps in many cases dominant) non-scientific reasons why many would be receptive to AGW … that strikes me as problematic.
• Computer modeling has also been described as computer aided story telling. Computer modelling has been used as a shortcut in design and engineering successfully these days in automotive and aerospace design. Yet, consider for a few moments that these applications are backed up by many decades engineering, wind tunnel testing, materials/structural testing and so on. That level of testing and detail, frankly, has no way of having been matched by climate scientists. Furthermore AGW proponents desire the results of their work to have a large and costly public impact. So, are their data sets, algorithms and methods clearly and publicly accessible? Consider the deletion of files and emails in an illegal response to an FOI request? See this post for remarks on how open the AGW people have been.
• Finally, I’m embarrassed to admit another reason that I’m sceptical about AGW … is that I was trained as a Physicist. In Physics the best and brightest move, especially in theory, to the “hot” topics. In programming, (see Mythical Man Month) there exist orders of magnitude in productivity between the very best programmers and the average (and the poor). Likewise this is true in Physics as well … at least in theoretical Physics. And here’s were the bias (or perhaps bigotry) of which I will admit to holding. I don’t think climate or meteorology is a hot topic and as a result I’m of the mindset that climate scientists are, well, second rate.This perhaps not a good reason, but for me I suspect it remains a factor.

1. Recession and taxation.
2. War and the left.
3. UAVs in Afghanistan.
4. A film noted.
5. The kicking and swimming things.
6. AIG, conflicts of interest, and the Fed.
7. Homosexuality, as lightning rod, and a interesting response.
8. Evangelism of the first kind.
9. A Holy man.
10. A Lutheran considers incense.
11. Grandmothers = footballers?
12. WWP(utin)D?
13. How will the left defend this without “losing their credibility?”

The CRU mini-scandal has gotten an lot of press, at least in the slice of the blogs regularly read by myself, two examples here and here are not unrepresentative. There are two facets of this little kerfuffle that might be noted. Read the rest of this entry

Actually, some links will be more than a day old as I missed getting this out yesterday.

1. On belief and free will (or at least the freedom to believe).
2. Hmm.
3. On Mary, Theotokos … two opposing views.
4. A Saint noted (and celebrated in my family as she is my eldest daughter’s name-saint as well and a fine choice for a budding intellectual).
5. On the recently departed Patriarch.
6. Two thoughts on Dubai, here and here.
7. On the religious landscape of Battlestar Galactica.
8. Law and morals.
9. Watching Rifqa?
10. Ouch ouch ouch … (warning just slightly nsfw … no graphics just text).
11. An extraordinary journey by an apostle called the first-called … and a homily on the same.
12. Economic data.
13. Of progressives and their different treatment of Islam and Christian … and a related post.
14. Church, state, and witness.

The occasion of the Manhattan declaration has been one in which a number of evangelicals, the very active Frank Turk at Evangel, has decided that the primary reason he will not sign is that it was done in concert with Roman Catholics, and apparently even worse than that, with the Eastern Orthodox. His point of view, and in fact his very reason for not signing has a number of prominent bloggers and those who self-label as Evangelicals who share his point of view. He writes:

I’ve said it elsewhere, so it should be no surprise when I say it here that I am sure there are Catholics who are saved, and likewise for the occasional Eastern Orthodox you may run into who exercises an Evangelical (large “E” intended) understanding of Jesus and the consequences of Him; but to throw out the wide blanket and just call all of these groups “Christian” in an overly-broad sociological sense, and to call all of them “believers” in the sense required to make the rest of the reasoning in this document is much.

This, to my ears, sounds very Pharisaic. Here we have Mr Turk standing in judgement of the whole of Catholicism and Orthodoxy and finding them wanting … except those few who secretly are “Evangelical.” Well, fortunately (apparently) for me, Mr Turk is not my judge, for I have a Judge already. It seems to me the Gospel has a few things to say about those trying to put themselves in the place of that Judge. Read the rest of this entry

1. When a philosopher says, “your meaning is not clear” … his meaning apparently is also somewhat guarded.
2. An academic philosopher offering unintelligent remarks.
3. We can hope.
4. Memory, has a year passed already?
5. Theology and a question of continuum or distinct category.
6. This was settled once a thousand years ago … but I guess not for good, the return of the iconoclast.
7. Controlling costs of healthcare.
8. Yet another reason to distrust what passes for wisdom in the White House.
9. Culture of death noted.
10. Of worship and song.
11. A poem.
12. Heh.
13. Odd robot news.
14. The fate of America’s poor.
15. For the AGW faithful.

This summer I had a class in theology which I sometimes discussed. This class was part of the “late vocations” program offered by in our area by the OCA. Currently, I’m taking the second of these classes, and true to form the reading/work load has been somewhat larger than expected. We’re taking a “great books” approach to the Old Testament, and in our 8 week class … reading and discussing the entire Old Testament …. and for the technically minded, using the Codex Alexandrinus for our canon … which means that the books we read are somewhat extended from the standard Protestant even Catholic set of books. In the below, I’m going to explore a question/point raised in class which I would like to explore in more detail.

Throughout the Old Testament, but certainly notable in Judges through Kings IV (the Orthodox church uses the Septuagint as its basis for the Old Testament, Samuel I and II and Kings I & II become Kings I-IV) there is constant influence from external polytheistic religions. There is not just military conquest and battle back and forth between nations being portrayed, but we find priests contending and confronting those following other gods and abandoning those of other religions. There is a marked contrast between how, for example, Elijah deals with the priests of Baal (Kings III 18) and how today we confront those who believe differently in this modern age. Read the rest of this entry

1. Austrian economics.
2. The importance of one Mr Brentano.
3. Is that martyrdom of or and the intellectual?
4. Looking at the left and the politics of healthcare.
5. From where I sit, the description includes “handsome” the picture … not so much.
6. Big “O” Orthodoxy, Not just an intellectual exercise.
7. Well, I linked this yesterday and was told it was deceptive. Try try again.
8. What’s “wrong” with capitalism.
9. Considering church and state.
10. Where the wild things really are … and what it’s like over there.
11. Logical fallacy and the budget.
12. In Mr Obama’s military.
13. Singing … Skopjans?
14. Cost and Afghanistan.

1. China, currency and all that stuff … a response here.
2. Exports and … Bangladesh.
3. Menace, phantom or no … another view on that here.
4. For the Afghan McChyrstal plan.
5. Freedom of choice, spin and Mr Kennedy.
6. Liberal anger, Mr Obama and the Asian “tour.”
7. A question.
8. Fiction unfolding.
9. Mr Mohler and the Manhattan Declaration.
10. Neo-Malthusians?
11. The party of “if a Black man votes against healthcare he isn’t Black” looks askance at a RNC “purity” test.
12. One effect of the climate-hackergate.
13. Icons a secular aesthetic.

1. An artistic aesthetic for the family photo that I don’t quite get.
2. Contra move-on and a self-contradictory PAC.
3. Questions regarding the upcoming (show?) trial.
4. That Manhattan document.
5. Man and Woman … Mars and Venus.
6. Unimpressed by pork … or outright bribery.
7. The other healthcare bill.
8. Uranium ore and international politics.
9. Stalin and a war memorial.
10. West/East and Mary, Theotokos.
11. A favorite novel.
12. Dr Who and ethics.
13. Myths.
14. The Muslim Palestinian left and Mr Obama’s policy.
15. Lessons and climategate.

1. Mere Christianity considered.
2. On this, I concur.
3. Ouch.
4. Considering the Oreo and fat calories.
5. Praising Rowan Williams for a public speech no less.
6. Hmm, you wanna bet that the rich in California won’t obey that law?
7. A question asked.
8. On Ms Palin.
9. How not to pray for the President correctly.
10. Where’s the beef.
11. The prosecutor picks the venue? Is that normal?
12. Remarks on Mr Beck.
13. Eight days of night.
14. Mr Gore, photoshops for science.

Apparently we are heading to a New York show trial of a infamous Guantanamo Bay resident. Some years earlier, a famous essay by Hannah Arendt to whit, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil, which highlighted another show trial. In that former trial, to the discerning observer if not to the general audience, political ethics and the public/personal normative framing were highlighted. The prospects seem low, especially given the pre-trial protestations of an assurance of a guilty verdict by Mr Holder, of any such public debate and discussions about political ethics on the public stage. Earlier I queried an interlocutor in conversation over up-coming civil show trial what was his evaluation of the considerations involved in the detainment, processing, and treatment of illegal combatants. Read the rest of this entry