G’day. I’m back in the saddle (bike). Woooo!

1. Well, I’ve been listening to a WWII history on audible. It’s a shame our President is so clueless when it comes to history. So … are we asking the Poles if we can move troops to assist their preparations? Or not? If not, why not?
2. Lent and the endurance athlete.
3. This is a common American conceit. Mr Sandefur also noted the uniquenes of America as founded on ideas/ideals with the Constitution. This book offers another example of such a nation, if I read it rightly. This one might counter the linked post.
4. The mouse that roared (at the snake).
5. If true, yet more academic malpractice.
6. Families love.
7. Nerd power.
8. Armored up.
9. A lawyer asks “Can I show everyone how stupid I am, or should I just sit in the corner quietly, … alas”
10. Hmm. I think of these things more symmetrically, especially in the beltway. How about “D” for duplicitous and “R” for rascally? Any more suggestions can go in the combox.
11. I wonder how Mr Schraub and other liberals defend the indefensible?
12. Proof positive that God exists. Heh.

You’ve no doubt heard them yourself. I’ve heard them quite a bit; on social media, on blogs, and even in TV commercials. I’m talking about people with their own personal stories about how the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka ObamaCare, has helped them personally.

It’s great to hear that people are able to get coverage for things that they either couldn’t get covered for before, or for less money. Who wouldn’t be in favor of that, and be glad for these people? It feels good hearing how people have benefited from this government program.

And that’s what those, especially on social media, are trying to say with their success story; this is a good thing, because it worked for me. Then I have to ask, what do we make of this story?

William Rivers Pitt, is the senior editor and lead columnist at the leftwing web site TruthOut. He has his own story which he posted at the Democratic Underground website, a forum for the far Left. (Have we figured out where this guy’s politics lie on the spectrum?) He first extolled the wonders of Obamacare, writing about his experience in getting signed up. System goes down in the middle of the session. No problem. Call the 800 number and finish the process there. “No. Big. Deal. Thanks, Obama.” That’s how he signs off that post.

And then reality set in. In another post later on, he relates his experience, not with signing up for Obamacare, but actually trying to use it.

What I’ve learned after a three-month war with these fiends: the ACA says the insurance companies cannot deny coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, which is true as far as it goes. But they can deny coverage for the life-saving medications necessary to treat those conditions. The insurance company I signed up with through the ACA exchange just denied coverage of my wife’s multiple sclerosis medication. We’re "covered," to the tune of $700 a month…just not for what she really needs.

He signs off that post quite a bit differently. Later he said he feels like a dupe, and wishes he had a time machine to undo what he’d done. His criticisms get to the point that the DU folks stopped allowing him to comment on his own post.

So then let’s consider this. Does this prove that Obamacare is an abject failure? No. Additionally, good experiences with it don’t prove that it is a success, either. If you contend that one is true, then you have to accept the other, and they come to opposite conclusions. Well then, what does any of this prove, other than that some people are doing better and others doing worse?

The answer is, it proves nothing.

Read the rest of this entry

No, but he does seem to be watching their Supreme Court case.

Pope Francis and Vatican officials on Thursday told U.S. President Barack Obama they were concerned about "religious freedom" in the United States, an apparent reference to the contraception mandate in Obama’s health care plan.

The talks included "discussion on questions of particular relevance for the Church" in the United States, including "the exercise of the rights to religious freedom, life and conscientious objection," a Vatican statement said.

Obama’s 2010 healthcare law, widely opposed by Republicans, includes a provision that requires employers to cover the cost of contraception in their health insurance plans.

Catholic and other religious groups say the mandate forces them to support contraception and sterilization in violation of their religious beliefs or face steep fines.

Just wondering if all those Democrats who have been falling all over themselves over the Pope when he seems to be saying something they like (whether or not he’s actually saying what they think he’s saying) will take note of this rather obvious political stance.

Well, the on-site work last night went past midnight, hence my cunning plan for a post from the hotel didn’t quite work out.

1. Some four months ago or so, I read that book on recommendation by an acquaintance. I’d recommend this one too. I was joking that my reading that was the unintentional cause of the Putin/Crimean adventure, and that I’d better be careful about reading World War history in the near future.
2. So, “how you hold your drink” apparently is making the rounds. A rebuttal (without mentioning beer helmets … wine helmets anyone?)
3. Saint Gregory Palamas on the Zen Koan “Does a dog have Buddha Nature?”
4. A man remembered.
5. Whew!
6. What happens when you misread “Hetpa” as “Herpa” … and go into a post thinking it’s about snakes.
7. A whole winter’s worth for a continent is not “weather”, it’s getting close to being “climate”, eh.
8. Or to put it more succinctly, you should be going to, not running from.
9. Why check? Who has standing to sue?
10. Aristophanes revenge.
11. Mr Obama misses Tom & Jerry.
12. This will make news.

I don’t know how much the Vatican’s Chief Justice holds sway in terms of official church policy, or how much his opinion reflects the position of the Catholic church, but I thought I’d pass this along.

In an interview with Polonia Christiana magazine –and transcribed by Life Site News — Cardinal Raymond Burke said that Obama “promotes anti-life and anti-family policies.”

“It is true that the policies of the president of the United States have become progressively more hostile toward Christian civilization. He appears to be a totally secularized man who aggressively promotes anti-life and anti-family policies,” Burke told the magazine.

The former archbishop of St. Louis stated that Obama is trying to “restrict” religion.

“Now he wants to restrict the exercise of the freedom of religion to freedom of worship, that is, he holds that one is free to act according to his conscience within the confines of his place of worship but that, once the person leaves the place of worship, the government can constrain him to act against his rightly-formed conscience, even in the most serious of moral questions,” Burke said.

Burke took a swipe against Obama’s Affordable Care Act over the law’s birth control mandate, saying “such policies would have been unimaginable in the United States even 40 years ago.”

“In a democracy, such a lack of awareness is deadly,” Burke told the magazine. “It leads to the loss of the freedom which a democratic government exists to protect. It is my hope that more and more of my fellow citizens, as they realize what is happening, will insist on electing leaders who respect the truth of the moral law as it is respected in the founding principles of our nation.”

Since this was transcribed by Life Site News, you know there’s an abortion angle, and there’s just a bit more at the link.

The freedom of religion vs. freedom of worship is a distinction that I’ve heard elsewhere, and it’s good to hear it given voice by someone at the Vatican. These days, it’s almost like you lose that First Amendment right upon leaving the church building. You don’t, even if you own a business (i.e. Hobby Lobby). This is a serious concern.

G’day

1. So, how does a liberal conscious of the Black slavery history think gun control a good idea?
2. Alas, it is indeed pretty much a guarantee of diversity.
3. Bracket madness of a ‘nother sort.
4. Actually, neither of those resemble science. Actually science more resembles hunting for problems or experiments that are interesting and feasible, doing/solving them. Rinse and repeat.
5. The modern mirror.
6. What we want vs what the our beltway masters think we want.
7. What throwing away information gets you.
8. Not 19th century, alas. Those ignorant of history, doomed to, well, look ignorant at best.
9. The term “Oriental” is Not Racist. The loony left notwithstanding racist terms are not “accidentally” insulting or racist.
10. So, a study finds drug to be ineffective. Which wins, the study or the drug?
11. That invincible scientific consensus. Policy momentum (like the above) will ignore that for quite some time to come.
12. So, the liberal echo chamber has been pushing that one reason to ignore the Koch brothers (on energy matters) is their investments in oil sands. Hmm. I guess this means one reason to ignore Mr Gore and the like are their investments in alternative energy and carbon offset providers. Consistency is one of those rare things.
13. Noah and some good signs.
14. High drone.
15. Hobby Lobby. Read the brief, note the lack of counter argument from the left of the aisle that actually address the points made.
16. Or as the demotivational poster puts it, “None of us is as dumb as all of us”.
17. It’s called, “education” for a reason ya knucklehead.
18. Word migration.

• Russia taking over Crimea.
• Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia worried about the same thing happening to them.
• Russian forces massing on the border of Ukraine.

No, this is not the opening scene of some pre-World-War-2 movie; it’s history from the past couple of weeks. But during the Cold War, Russia had control of all of these under the umbrella of the Soviet Union.

In the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan set out to defeat – not just contain, as his predecessors has done, but defeat – the Soviet Union. He succeeded. His detractors said, and continue to say, that he got lucky; that the Soviet Union was going to collapse under its own weight anyway, and it just coincidentally happened on his watch. But Reagan was the first President to actively try to bring it down. That it happened right after this attempt is a cause & effect that is extremely rare in geopolitical affairs. And those he liberated – from places already mentioned as well as Poland and other former eastern Bloc nations – certainly give him that credit. And he did it without causing a nuclear World War 3, which those detractors predicted.

A huge foreign policy success in the 1980s liberated millions and kept them free. Understanding the world as it was – not being afraid of the Soviets, but projecting strength to keep them at bay – set the stage for their downfall. And understanding today’s world as it is, is absolutely required in order to deal with the foreign policy challenges of today. But our current President doesn’t recognize what’s going on right in front of him. Here’s an excerpt from one of the debates he had with challenger Mitt Romney

Read the rest of this entry

Your blood.

Scientists at A*STAR’s Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology (IMCB) have developed a method to generate human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) from a single drop of finger-pricked blood ("Human Finger-Prick Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells Facilitate the Development of Stem Cell Banking"). The method also enables donors to collect their own blood samples, which they can then send to a laboratory for further processing. The easy access to blood samples using the new technique could potentially boost the recruitment of greater numbers and diversities of donors, and could lead to the establishment of large-scale hiPSC banks.

Imagine a stem-cell bank much like a blood bank. There is truly no need at all to destroy embryos for stem cells. Using blood and skin, the supply is endless.

Well, 6 day work-week. Woo! Five down, one to go.

1. Feminists seeking a clue. And a counter opinion from other women here (see esp. #9).
2. More liberal feminist cluelessness here.
3. This, on the other hand is what real feminism looks like.
4. A one liner to live (and vote) by.
5. Mr Obama’s FDA, screwing things up one day at a time.
6. Parental obvious observation.
7. Liberal icon dies. Nobody living or dead has done more to raise the opinion and consciousness of gay social issues than he has. Odd that.
8. Climate, extreme weather and cost.
9. Here’s what liberals will ignore or dismiss, and it will cost us all a lot of money.
10. 8 questions and the Ukraine.
11. Some Noah cinema thoughts. For my 2 cents, if Noah is seen struggling with the tiller to keep the boat safe against wind and wave … that’s not Noah, that’s Gilgamesh. The Noah and Epic of G. narratives both had a arc-like boat as key elements in the story. The essential difference highlighted by the latter story (Noah) was that Noah’s arc had no tiller, God not man saves is the lesson. So, a litmus test for this film is this the story of Gilgamesh or Noah, is Man or God your source of salvation? You can tell by asking if the boat has a tiller.
12. Lesson regarding Mr Obama and political speeches. Look at the statement in 2008. Look at the subsequent cuts. The statement in 2008 is a bald faced lie.
13. Well, if you want proof that the NSA has cracked https. Here it is.
14. “Humans can …”, hah! Not me! I’m only good for about 6 to 8, well realistically maybe 100.
15. Horrible headline. What? The Earth gave a hip fake to the Sun and did what? Slipped past the blockers on the left? Riiiiight.
16. And to end this list for today, something to help you smile.

Woops, sorry. Missed yesterday.

1. Government stupidity, example number (big number)+1. Don’t they have, you know, useful things to do with our money?
2. Explaining one of the recent Obamacare court challenges.
3. Liberals seem to not a fans of “pass it so we can find out what’s in it” either.
4. Fun with art.
5. This headline made me wonder if there is a hockey player with a name almost but not exactly Fermion.
6. A lesson for you parents who try to tell your kids Santa isn’t real (hint: he is real).
7. That squares with my intuitions on that.
8. Pre-information age org-chart.
9. Bureaucrats should be shot more often for malpractice.
10. I’ll be we all know colleagues like that.
11. Liberal icon rips women and minorities for not cracking books open and studying hard, … oh wait.
12. And come to think of it …. examine some of those assumptions.
13. Yikes.
14. That “historic” drought in Southern California. Odd that same years they had their previous drought years the Midwest had record cold and snow. Hmmm.
15. Interesting.

Ok. ‘Nother week, ‘nother dollar

1. Mr Obama’s sanctions invoke replies, such as this and this. Few typically note that we are using Russia for supply lines to Afghanistan operations when they remark on the weakness of said sanctions.
2. Purple-ness brings to mind the Bulwer-Lytton contest, which if I was more clever I’d know when the 2014 results were to be out … and if I was even more clever I’d enter.
3. Gosh, lots of uses for this, few of the licit or moral.
4. Chicago and St. Patrick’s Day.
5. Yah, if you believe that, we’ve got submarine pens in Arizona to sell you.
6. This book looks interesting.
7. That “more open” Presidency, yet another promise not kept, eh?
8. Insanely cool … and he’s right.
9. A modern analogy for Lent.
10. Solzhenitsyn and the Crimea. Last night I had a chat with a Romanian friend. He put a large part of the onus on Yeltsin, for drunkenly allowing the “split up” to follow Stalin’s division of state boundaries and not suggesting regions work it out for themselves or to use more rational historical/ethnic boundaries. The Crimea just an outworking of Stalin’s assigning the Crimea (vast majority Russian, some Tartar, and finally Ukrainians) to Ukraine. Errors along the southwest boarder with Moldavia, Ukraine and Romania were mentioned as well.
11. Our liberal teaching establishment, getting the hind end foremost.
12. The other side of being part of GM, i.e., Government Motors. But the government won’t be to blame just as they skipped out on the BP disaster. It’s always the other guy’s fault, except when you are in a extremely regulated industry it’s the ultimately the watcher’s fault.

Links?

1. Regarding Mr Obama’s latest cunning jobs plan.
2. Something to keep in mind regarding “putting pressure on Russia”.
3. Oh. I see. Never mind.
4. Not. A. Science.
5. Someone not following the football/concussion discussion.
6. If they don’t know, how exactly is the IRS going to assign penalties?
7. There’s a cute instrument.
8. So, apparently, a New York paper released a map of gun owners. Texas follows suit.
9. They know they are precursors because they found their fossilized plane tickets.
10. Your RNA on/off switch discovered.
11. This is the part of Jules Verne’s Voyage to the Center of the Earth that was overlooked in the cinematic renditions, all the participants had gills. Mr Verne forgot that that water, unlike air, is in-compressible.
12. Yikes.

G’day

1. Don’t end it, fold spindle and mutilate.
2. Some grist for when feminists praise prostitution, ’cause they do.
3. Politics would be more appropriately garbed.
4. Journalism and some thoughts on cuddling with monsters.
5. Efficient? At what?!
6. The starlet and responsibility.
7. Immoral use of highway law.
8. So, the question arises, is that the pro-abortion fringe … or is it mainstream.
9. Dads.
10. Yet another person who needs to read the Gulag Archipelago.
11. Bubbles are complicated.
12. Bars in thar woods.

Woo. Two days in a row. Cooking with, err, steam?

1. Some grist to counter Che chic. And what looks like a good book for the inbox to boot.
2. Speaking of the inbox, here’s another.
3. Two posts on freedom of speech, here in the US it is apparently falling out of favor and in Russia where one thinks the press has little freedom, this might be a counter-example of that notion.
4. A project.
5. I wonder at the use of the adjective “hopeful”. Not what comes to mind for me at least.
6. Zap, snarf snarf.
7. This post brings to mind the remark I noted by Mr Schraub a few weeks ago that government was uniquely situated to act fairly. Yah, right.
8. They should eliminate Asian quotas for schools, five years after the elite schools become 60+ percent asian … the majority whole slacker student attitudes would do some disappearing. Do us all some good.
9. Yah, that makes sense. Historically speaking that means, they would be seeking damages from West African nations, Spain, and the Dutch.  Good luck on that.
10. Apropos of the above.
11. Cheap but cool.
12. Fracking did not drive Texas economic boom.
13. No reason I can think of.
14. Which means it probably isn’t true.
15. The administrations remains stuck on stupid.

Professor James M. Tour is a highly-credentialed chemist, and a Christian. Check this link for the list, and for his contention that there is no scientist alive today who understands macro-evolution. Tour, of course, comes at this from a chemical point of view, and has no idea how something like that can happen at the molecular level. He’s asked over and over for someone to explain it to him, but so far no takers.

In an article about an insider’s view of the National Academy, he explains the situation behind the curtain.

Let me tell you what goes on in the back rooms of science – with National Academy members, with Nobel Prize winners. I have sat with them, and when I get them alone, not in public – because it’s a scary thing, if you say what I just said – I say, “Do you understand all of this, where all of this came from, and how this happens?” Every time that I have sat with people who are synthetic chemists, who understand this, they go “Uh-uh. Nope.” These people are just so far off, on how to believe this stuff came together. I’ve sat with National Academy members, with Nobel Prize winners. Sometimes I will say, “Do you understand this?”And if they’re afraid to say “Yes,” they say nothing. They just stare at me, because they can’t sincerely do it.

I was once brought in by the Dean of the Department, many years ago, and he was a chemist. He was kind of concerned about some things. I said, “Let me ask you something. You’re a chemist. Do you understand this? How do you get DNA without a cell membrane? And how do you get a cell membrane without a DNA? And how does all this come together from this piece of jelly?” We have no idea, we have no idea. I said, “Isn’t it interesting that you, the Dean of science, and I, the chemistry professor, can talk about this quietly in your office, but we can’t go out there and talk about this?”

If you understand evolution, I am fine with that. I’m not going to try to change you – not at all. In fact, I wish I had the understanding that you have.

But about seven or eight years ago I posted on my Web site that I don’t understand. And I said, “I will buy lunch for anyone that will sit with me and explain to me evolution, and I won’t argue with you until I don’t understand something – I will ask you to clarify. But you can’t wave by and say, “This enzyme does that.” You’ve got to get down in the details of where molecules are built, for me. Nobody has come forward.

The Atheist Society contacted me. They said that they will buy the lunch, and they challenged the Atheist Society, “Go down to Houston and have lunch with this guy, and talk to him.” Nobody has come! Now remember, because I’m just going to ask, when I stop understanding what you’re talking about, I will ask. So I sincerely want to know. I would like to believe it. But I just can’t.

Now, I understand microevolution, I really do. We do this all the time in the lab. I understand this. But when you have speciation changes, when you have organs changing, when you have to have concerted lines of evolution, all happening in the same place and time – not just one line –concerted lines, all at the same place, all in the same environment … this is very hard to fathom.

He does not claim the Intelligent Design label because:

I do not know how to use science to prove intelligent design although some others might. I am sympathetic to the arguments on the matter and I find some of them intriguing, but the scientific proof is not there, in my opinion.

He is searching for the scientific proofs, but for macro-evolution, they just aren’t there, and no one in academia can provide them.