I Thought We Sort Of Knew That

But maybe not in the formal sense. Phys.org has news about a newly discovered … recognized … oh I dunno … law of nature:

A paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences describes “a missing law of nature,” recognizing for the first time an important norm within the natural world’s workings.

In essence, the new law states that complex natural systems evolve to states of greater patterning, diversity, and complexity. In other words,  is not limited to life on Earth, it also occurs in other massively complex systems, from planets and stars to atoms, minerals, and more.

So it’s a proposal that we recognize systems satisfying certain requirements will move forwards as a result of ‘selection for function’, of which there are three types: stability, energy, and novelty.

Fascinating stuff. It should be interesting to see how useful application of this law might be in guiding us to new discoveries.

And maybe this explains platypuses.

How I Feel About Gaza, Ctd

A reader writes an impassioned condemnation to my statement, to which I’ll reply in parts. First, a technicality:

It seems your friend Haviva, however, leans in that direction. Reading his words …

According to the author biography, the author is female. Here’s her Wikipedia page for more information.

… most significantly, it does not matter whether some Palestinians or some Gazans in the form of Hamas or any other organized group or as individuals have committed some sort of crime, say, terrorism. Between October 7 and this past week, Israel has destroyed 70% of every structure in the entirety of the Gaza strip — a home to over 2 million people. Most of the officially dead are women and children. The number of “missing” people vastly outnumbers the official dead count.

Which leads back to an old philosophical conundrum of mine: when your moral/philosophical system leads to unintentional suicide, i.e., when following your moral dictates, which should guide and even govern your self-defense activities, leads to the destruction of your society, then what is the worth of your moral system?

It’s not hard to see that the actions of Hamas are intentionally genocidal, from their chants, echoed by American students, to their rocket attacks, the despicable October 7th incident, and the use of the civilian population of Gaza as a shield.

That last, used efficiently, is part of what leads to my conundrum. Terrorists who survive their terrorism are, in general, recidivists; enough recidivism and one has, in reality, a victorious army that has pushed the Israelis into the sea. If Israel’s moral dictates, either internally derived or imposed externally, endanger Israel’s population, then why should they be retained?

Do you for one second believe that 70% of those 2 million people deserve to die? Do you for one second believe that most of the “officially” dead of 33,000+ who were women and children deserved to die? Does the 75 years of non-stop harassment and killing of Palestinians by Zionists, starting with exiling over 700,000 of them and confiscating their property have no bearing on the situation? Do the egregious statements by some of those members of the Netanyahu cabal and members of the IDF wherein they literally state their intention to wipe out all Palestinians and/or all of Gaza have no meaning?

I am not omniscient, but I will note Hamas, Hezbollah, the PLO, and undoubtedly many other organizations have issued similar statements concerning Israel, and I have no doubts that, much like Israel hard-liners, they are working on activities designed to expel the Israelis and destroy Israel.

Insofar as the movement of Jewish Israelis to Israel since the end of World War II goes, I’m once again puzzled as to what was to be done. Irrationally hated by many Europeans and Soviets, they were returned by the substantial assistance, as I understand it, of the Western powers. And I’ve seen claims, 30+ years ago, that they displaced nobody, that it was all empty, which seems unlikely in retrospect. Surely it was occupied, and surely that was unjust? Except then we get into historical claims, but as you say below, all the history matters not.

No, the truth is, the power structure in Israel — not all Israelis, not all Jews — but those in control and directing the continued attacks — are literally engaged in crimes against humanity, engaged in attempted genocide of Gazans.

And for that, there can be no excuse. There is no excuse. They are in the wrong. There need be no further discussion on who did what to whom in history to do the right thing right now.

And, for me, resolution of conflict always requires understanding, if not validation or acceptance, of the motivations of the participants. For example, using the reasoning in the previous section, the actions of Hamas in using the civilian population as a shield leaves Israel with two options: Ignore such gross crimes against humanity as the October 7th kidnapping, or ignore the human shield.

And, yes, the actions of Prime Minister Netanyahu are so questionable that he’s been indicted – but terrorist actions took place back when Likud’s political adversary, the Labor Party, was strong enough to be in control of the government. This serves to suggest that Hamas, its progenitors, and its context are not primarily reactions to Israeli actions, but to Israel’s existence.

And that leads back to the above conundrum. The Western moral tenet concerning genocide, as important and admirable a recognition as it may be, can be seen leading to Israel ceasing to exist; or, worse, to the elimination of all non-Israelis in Gaza, as adherence to moral tenets that lead to self-destruction rarely survives with those threatened by that destruction. And if Gaza is threatened with complete destruction, will we see Jordan or Iran or Saudi Arabia step in?

Haviva Ner-David’s “both sides are culpable” is unhelpful in this context.

I could not disagree more.

The friend who pointed me at Ner-David’s article writes:

SJP [Students for Justice in Palestine] explicitly supports Hamas. So eff them. And it seems to me that the right thing to do is to release the hostages and agree to a cease fire. YMMV.

History did not start in 1948. Israel isn’t going anywhere. The idea that the international border can be erased and the Jews expelled is both ludicrous and criminal.

The Palestinians aren’t going anywhere either. They cannot be expelled, wished away, or all killed.

Given that, there needs to be a legal and political solution. Which there could be. But Hamas et al need to get over the idea they can disappear Israel, Iran needs to stop funding them, Qatar needs to stop protecting them, and Netanyahu AND THE DAMN AMERICAN CHRISTIANS WHO PROP HIM UP need to get back inside the borders and stop making things worse. And of course, a lot of people need to stop using words they don’t understand. Like genocide.

I don’t know if a political solution would work or not, there are too many folks running around thinking their actions are blessed by a bloodthirsty Divine.

But I’ve thought for decades that Americans are a bunch of bloody drama queens, from Manifest Destiny ideologies to the End Times cults that have flourished throughout our history, despite their manifest failure. Only recently, though, have I thought to attach the adjective arrogant to them. Our overwhelming need to be certain and right in an uncertain world echos throughout our culture, most certainly in our poor communications skills. My Hah hah is painfully ironic, I assure my reader. While there is value in the debate in which two sides put forth clashing ideas with great certitude, I fear most of us, now given the platform of the Web, do not understand that we should separate our self-worth and emotional well-being from the acceptance of those ideas.

And that leads off to anthropological landscapes of social prestige and power structures unrelated to the subject of this post, and so I shall omit them.

Incidentally, while researching my responses, I ran across this NBC News report from last month:

Support for Hamas as a political party has fallen to 34% among Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, a 12-point drop from December 2023, according to a poll released Wednesday by a leading Palestinian research institute.

While the war is eroding Palestinians’ view of Hamas as the governing body in Gaza, relative support remains high for the militant group’s role in the war. Seventy percent of Palestinians said they were “satisfied” with Hamas’ war performance, as compared to that of other Palestinian entities, like its political rival Fatah, whose deeply unpopular leader, Mahmoud Abbas, governs the West Bank. Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack triggered the war with Israel, which has so far killed more than 31,000 people in Gaza, according to the enclave’s health ministry. …

Support for “armed struggle” dropped by 17 points, from 63% to 46%, driven largely by Palestinians in Gaza, and Gazan support for a diplomatic two-state solution has jumped by 27 points — to 62%.

It’s interesting, but I’m not certain how to approach it, given the volatility of the numbers.

Word Of The Day

Endosymbiont:

An endosymbiont or endobiont is an organism that lives within the body or cells of another organism. Typically the two organisms are in a mutualistic relationship. Examples are nitrogen-fixing bacteria (called rhizobia), which live in the root nodules of legumes, single-cell algae inside reef-building corals and bacterial endosymbionts that provide essential nutrients to insects. [Wikipedia]

Noted in “A bacterium has evolved into a new cellular structure inside algae,” Michael Le Page, NewScientist (20 April 2024, paywall):

It is quite common for one species to live inside the cells of another in a mutually beneficial relationship called endosymbiosis. For instance, cells in the roots of legumes such as peas host nitrogen-fixing bacteria. The success of cockroaches is partly due to endosymbiotic bacteria that produce essential nutrients. Some cells even host multiple endosymbionts.

How I Feel About Gaza

My thanks to the friend that pointed me at this: Haviva Ner-David, a Jewish Israeli obviously more knowledgeable than I as I am not Jewish, nor have I studied the subject, expresses some thoughts and feelings congruent with mine on the muddled subject of the conflict between Israel and Gaza, and the accompanying protests on the American college campuses, in this article for the Jewish Telegraphic Agency:

When you say, “I am Hamas!” you are not identifying with innocent civilians, including children, women and seniors who were massacred and kidnapped or the women raped in captivity (according to eyewitness accounts from hostages who were freed). Even my Palestinian Israeli activist friends strongly condemned Hamas’ attack on Oct. 7 and say Hamas is terrible for the Palestinian people.

And when you call out, “Say it loud and say it clear, we don’t want no Zionists here!” you are fomenting violence against and silencing other Columbia students. You may disagree with them, but does that mean they have no right to inhabit your shared campus — or even live? Do you think I, an activist in the struggle for peace and equality for all in Israel-Palestine, have a right to live? …

The situation here is so much more complex than you care to understand. There is a bloody conflict going on, with people suffering and dying on both sides in brutal ways, not just in the past months but for the past century. One who studies the history and present will know that both sides are culpable and responsible for the conflict and its resolution.

And I suspect what might be termed moral norms are entirely different in the Middle East from the West. In this regard, the American students could profitably be studied on the subject of moral colonialism, the import of one group’s moral system into another society. This import is a dubious enterprise, as it’s being motivated by those who are not facing an existential crisis.

Sadly, given the overwhelming religious nature of the conflict’s participants, I do not foresee a happy ending to this conflict. Both sides see the divine approving of their stories and reasons for their actions, and when God is on your side, hey, why compromise? We see such attitudes here in the United States, at least those studying the intersection of society, religion, and politics.

When it comes to the students’ activities, I am inclined to remind them that, as Ner-David observes, the situation is far more complex than just about any of them know; that’s their moral system they wish to impose, unequally; and that we hire Presidents to deal with difficult international situations.

And, to be sure, the American people are the ultimate boss, but to promulgate dissatisfaction without having something to resolve the situation at hand, something that hasn’t been rejected by Hamas or the Palestinians, is really simply arrogant bullshit and not being an adult.

So how do I feel? Bewildered, aware that the Middle East operates on differ morality systems, frustrated – and painfully aware I have no real solution, acceptable to the morals of our system, to propose. And I fear that Ner-David is being painfully naive as well.

And I hope I’m wrong.

Disappointment Of The Week

Professor Richardson gives the issue:

“I am in shock that a lawyer stood in the U.S. Supreme Court and said that a president could assassinate his political opponent and it would be immune as ‘an official act,’” lawyer Marc Elias, whose firm defends democratic election laws, wrote today on social media. He added: “I am in despair that several Justices seemed to think this answer made perfect sense.”

Elias was referring to the argument of Trump’s lawyer before the Supreme Court today that it could indeed be an “official act” for which a president should be immune from criminal prosecution if “the president decides that his rival is a corrupt person and he orders the military or orders someone to assassinate him.”

The Supreme Court today heard close to three hours of oral argument over Trump v. United States, which concerns former president Trump’s claim of absolute immunity from criminal charges for “official acts”: in this case, his attempt to overturn the lawful results of the 2020 presidential election and to stay in office against the will of the voters.

And the disappointing part? There are two answers, either will be correct:

  1. The case of Trump vs. United States should have been silently rejected by SCOTUS, leaving Trump with yet another legal failing.
  2. SCOTUS should have let Trump’s lawyers present their cases, and then chuckled, roared with laughter, and then told Trump’s lawyers, and Trump himself, to get lost.

And I’m not kidding. Pompous, self-important, self-aggrandizing, arrogant asses are best treated with laughter, as bad stand up comedians undeserving of serious consideration. Societal rejection, as lead by SCOTUS, is effective in discrediting fools like Trump, his allies, and his supporters. Supporters will continue to leak away as, well, the scales fall from their eyes; a lower percentage of allies will also leave him.

Some positions are simply not worthy of even minimal respect.

The Conundrum Of Democracy

Inveterate columnist George Will speculates on comparisons of today with world history:

Today’s Moscow-Beijing-Tehran axis is, as the 1930s Axis was, watching. Johns Hopkins foreign policy analyst Hal Brands, writing for Bloomberg, reminds us: “Italy’s invasion of Abyssinia in 1935 encouraged Hitler to send his military back into the Rhineland in 1936, just as Germany’s blitzkrieg through Western Europe in 1940 emboldened Japan to press into Southeast Asia.”

We can now see that the great unraveling that was World War II perhaps began with Japan’s 1931 invasion of Manchuria. Without the benefit of retrospection, we cannot be certain that World War III has not begun. [WaPo]

The problem with democracy isn’t its deliberate movements when at its best; this is a positive. No, it’s the fact that the members of Congress are inevitably provincials, as I believe President Truman once complained. They, like everyone does, tries to fall back on experience to guide momentous decisions – but have nothing that’s really applicable, and do not realize it.

And when a Party is guided, in part, by philosophies emphasizing greed, arrogance, and narcissism, then the problem is compounded. Not that I advocate for some other system, as theocracies, monarchies, autocracies, and all the rest are prone to the same problem. The drive to achieve, or preserve, high position is often incompatible with the ability to govern well.

But I shall take this chance to bemoan it while I meditate on something that is probably irremediable via design. Rather, it requires a citizenry that takes its responsibilities, and the requirements of justice, seriously.

If That’s How The Lesson Is Delivered

Monica Hesse at WaPo asks what seems an important question:

For the past few months there has been a stealth political campaign going on, the subject of which feels so unseemly that nearly every person publicly participating in the debate insists they would rather not be participating in it, and would, in fact, prefer the debate not be happening at all.

The question: Should Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor voluntarily retire before the next presidential election?

And, if your answer is yes, are you sexist?

And, if your answer is no, and you support liberal jurisprudence, are you a fool?

No, not really. The short answer is that if the American electorate is taken in by the Big Con that Trump and his allies are selling and return him to office, they deserve everything they get.

Whether they like it or not.

At some point, the liberals have to accept that. Not that they’re likely to walk down the McConnell path of dishonor and, frankly, disaster, although some might urge that. Easily debunked lies and frantic power grabs is more a Republican thing.

And the American electorate has to bear responsibility for their bad selections, should they make them, and not depend on liberals to ride white chargers to their rescue – or depend on the right-wing extremists and their arrogant philosophies to lead the conservatives to self-defeat.

But asking Sotomayor to leave just because there’s a few more wrinkles in the face is really unacceptable. Not after the absolute parade of wrinkly old men leaving SCOTUS feet first. Stay in your chair until you’re tired of the job, Justice. We appreciate your efforts.

Speaking Truth To Half-Baked Dweebs

A Republican recognizes the tumor of the Party:

“It’s my absolute honor to be in Congress, but I serve with some real scumbags,” Gonzales said. “Matt Gaetz, he paid minors to have sex with him at drug parties. Rep. Bob Good (R-VA) endorsed my opponent, a known neo-Nazi. These people used to walk around in white hoods at night. Now they’re walking around with white hoods in the daytime.” [The Daily Beast]

Another rip in the Party? It’s especially interesting:

The evisceration came out of seemingly nowhere, as Gonzales, a Navy veteran who represents a portion of San Antonio and Uvalde, has in the past refrained from bashing his party, despite withstanding heavy criticism from his colleagues for supporting federal gun-safety legislation. He’s otherwise been a steadfast repeater of Republican talking points since he joined Congress in 2021.

I suspect he saw his behavior as a key to success, but recently just couldn’t stand the tumor that is Gaetz, et al, any longer.

History At Your Feet

This is rather cool. From paleoanthropologist Professor John Hawks:

This naturally raises a broader question: How many other people have installed travertine with hominin fossils inside? …

Travertine also commonly includes fossils. Many are fossil inclusions of algae, plants, and small animals—especially molluscs and crustaceans—that live within the spring water. Much larger animals may be found and humans are no exceptions: Several well-known hominin fossil discoveries are from travertine deposits. Most of these discoveries have happened because of quarrying of the travertine deposits for use in construction.

Pictures at the link. I do not have any travertine floors, otherwise I’d not be writing this, but crouched on the floor looking for fossils.

It’s All In The Title

And it’s a doozy:

NASA’s Voyager 1 Resumes Sending Engineering Updates to Earth

Launched in 1977, it’s damn near 50 years old, traveling through space, and recently was threatened with the dust bin of history when NASA lost its connection; a bit of recovery engineering saved a mission that was exceeded long, long ago.

The next time I buy a *phone, I want it to say

MADE BY NASA

Google, Samsung, and all the rest have nothing on NASA.

Quote Of The Day

Given the bad guys’ inclination to project, I can’t help but speculate if former Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev has a reason to be nervous after this statement:

“But considering the rusophobic decision that took place [i.e., American foreign aid to Ukraine] I can’t help but wish the USA with all sincerity to dive into a new civil war themselves as quickly as possible. Which, I hope, will be very different from the war between North and South in the 19th century and will be waged using aircraft, tanks, artillery, MLRS, all types of missiles and other weapons. And which will finally lead to the inglorious collapse of the vile evil empire of the 21st century – the United States of America.”

Poor guy. The Russians are learning that war has become a technological endeavour, and we do it better.

Aid For Ukraine And Its Implications

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has exceeded my expectations – kudos! – when, with Ukraine teetering on the edge of collapse, he finally passed foreign aid packages for Ukraine, as well as Israel and Taiwan, over and through the objections of the anti-Ukraine brigade of the GOP House caucus – a group that some call the Putin Wing. This is all at the risk of his position as Speaker of the House, as it’s commonly said his advantage in the House is one seat, so if more than one Republican files a motion to vacate the seat, as Rep Greene (R-GA) and a couple of others have done so, and the motion is activated (not the proper terminology, I’m sure – apologies), then he’s subject to a vote. The implicit expectation is that the expected assent of all of the Democrats, currently in the minority, plus a few of the Republicans, would result in Johnson’s losing the position.

However, the Democrats are not an inflexible group. They’ve backed Johnson, in very limited circumstances, in other areas, and certainly aid to Ukraine is a top, top priority of the Democrats. I expect a horse trade of voting for Johnson as Speaker in exchange for getting the desired foreign aid packages to the floor for a vote – which then passed – did occur, even if such is denied by the principals. If the Putin Wing follows through on the motion to vacate, we’ll find out if that horse trade did occur. I think there’s little doubt that Rep and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) can deliver  the necessary votes to save Johnson.

But, beyond this apparent snub of the concerns of the execrable Putin Wing, there are other concerns for the masters of the Republican Party.

First, Speaker Johnson has defied the wishes of well-known anti-Ukraine partisan and Putin admirer Mr. Trump. Mr Trump, presumptive but not guaranteed Republican nominee for President in the 2024 national elections, has a host of troubles, consisting not only his current New York state criminal trial, but his health (age 77, with known heart disease) and even his reputation. To the latter most point, Mr Trump depends, to a very large degree, on his purported accomplishments as a businessman, lover, actor, and even as an avatar of the Biblical character of Cyrus. If he’s convicted in his current criminal trial, more voters will begin to disregard him as worthy of their vote; revelations in this trial, which is a collection of accusations that he falsified business records, could do more damage to him. Even his inclination to fall asleep while at the defendant’s table may damage him further.

In essence, this is another rip in the tattered fabric of the Republican Party. Many of the fourth-rate party officials, owing to Trump their newfound positions and prestige, will stick with him; but Johnson has shown that ignoring Trump’s wishes is possible, even when Vladimir Putin, President of Russia and invader of Ukraine, is involved. This, in turn, damages the mystique, unearned as it was and is, of Mr. Trump. Naturally, this is a complex relationship between Mr Trump and his base, and many will remain loyal even in the face of the most dire revelations in court. But many others will have reached their limit in the number of major indiscretions and doubts, and not vote for Mr. Trump. His performance in the primaries, while victories in all but Vermont, have not been as convincing as President Biden’s, or of the sort of a truly dominating politician. They reflect the results of a Party suffering internal conflict. And that’s fine, out of context. American politics is about debate, because debate and doubt result in positive progress. But in a Republican Party where uniform voting in general elections – Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line – is a virtual law, the untold strain on the voter is worse. One might think, reasonably, that the primaries are a release valve, but if one’s preferred candidate loses, how easy is it, intellectually and emotionally, to transfer their vote to the winning candidate, who the voter detests?

At some point, the Republican Party member blows a gasket and refuses to vote, to participate, to even be a member. This Gingrichian dictate is, like so many such dictates, like borrowing money to pay dividends in the corporate world: madness.

Second, the purported power of the Freedom Caucus, the primary troublemakers in the House, to decide issues and control the House, is now on the line. If the Democrats choose to vote to support Johnson for Speaker, the power of the Freedom Caucus is shown to be blunted. It’s another step to understanding the true image of such Representatives as Gaetz, Gosar, former Freedom Caucus member Greene, and a number of others, as simply a pack of power-hungry and immature clowns, with little idea of how to govern.

Third, this violates another Gingrichian dictate: never give the Democrats a substantial victory. This is about as big as they come, and, much to the blindly loyal Republicans’ dismay, they’ll discover the world doesn’t catch fire and burn. Thus are the Republican Party’s tenets slowly and painfully destroyed. Again, the Party will suffer damage as some members walk away.

So there are many consequences to Johnson’s decision to bring desperately needed foreign aid to the House floor, and for doctrinaire Republicans, clinging to Mr Trump’s pants legs, none of them are good.

Cool Astro Pics

It is events of this sort that serve to put the picayune machinations and beliefs of humans in perspective:

In October of 2022, a wave of radiation washed through the solar system, more intense than anything observed before. Astronomers dubbed it the BOAT, the brightest of all time. Its source was an unusually close brush with a gamma-ray burst, a 1-in-10,000-year event, according to a 2023 study published in Astrophysical Research Letters

Fortunately for life on Earth, the confined nature of the beams means that a direct collision would be very unlikely. Nonetheless, the elusive nature of gamma-ray bursts ensures that they will continually inspire awe — and perhaps a bit of fear — of our cosmic backyard. [“Gamma-Ray Bursts Could Wipe Out All Life, But Are Unlikely to Hit Earth,” Max Bennett, Discover]

For an article on gamma-ray bursts (GRBs), it’s almost unforgivable that the magazine didn’t supply the name assigned this GRB, so I looked it up. This is it:

GRB 221009A also known as Swift J1913.1+1946 was an extraordinarily bright and long-lasting gamma-ray burst (GRB) jointly discovered by the Neil Gehrels Swift Observatory and the Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope on October 9, 2022. The gamma-ray burst was around seven minutes long, but was detectable for more than ten hours following initial detection. Despite being around two billion light-years away, it was powerful enough to affect Earth‘s atmosphere, having the strongest effect ever recorded by a gamma-ray burst on the planet. The peak luminosity of GRB 221009A was measured by Konus-Wind to be ~ 2.1 × 1047 J/s and by Fermi Gamma-ray Burst Monitor to be ~ 1.0 × 10 A burst as energetic and as close to Earth as 221009A is thought to be a once-in-10,000-year event. It was the brightest and most energetic gamma-ray burst ever recorded, with some dubbing it the “BOAT“, or Brightest Of All Time. [Wikipedia]

It’s fascinating that we live in a Universe where such extraordinary power can be naturally focused and released, endangering the integrity of anything in its path.

And the pic?

Pendulums? Swinging?

WaPo has a report on an old technology:

Music fans may love the immediacy of streaming music, but that hasn’t stopped them from bringing vinyl records mainstream. Revenue from vinyl jumped 10 percent to $1.4 billion in 2023, and outsold CDs for the second time since 1987, according to the Recording Industry Association of America.

Back, back to the farm!

I always found vinyl to be annoying, from scratching to warpage to maintenance, and, after my fairly good record player was stolen, I was happy enough to be rid of my paltry vinyls and go to only CDs.

Is the quality advantage of vinyl over CDs really that discernible? I don’t doubt that it’s better than streaming and radio, or, if I may shudder in public, 8-track, but is the digitization inherent in CDs really that recognizable? I know my Dad claimed to know people who could discern virgin vinyl from vinyl played once or twice, but not me, so it’s no surprise that I can’t discern it.

Or is it the greater tangible footprint of vinyl? Streaming means, as most of us know, no tangible artifacts, as well as paying for each repetition. Having a CD is one sunken cost and a medium sized artifact, the jewel case if memory serves. A vinyl record sits between – a sunken cost that degrades with each play. And a bigger artifact with room enough for art and sheets of protective paper hanging out, to boot.

A romantic return to an earlier age where the environment is not in such perilous condition, where the dangerous impact of environment-deniers, of election-deniers, of people who isolate themselves from the real world through their horrendous hooting?

Probably contributions from these and a dozen other factors.

Word Of The Day

Gender incongruence:

Gender incongruence is a marked and persistent experience of incompatibility between a person’s gender identity and the gender expected based on sex at birth. [MSD Manual]

Noted in “Will Big Trans Be Held To Account?” Andrew Sullivan, The Weekly Dish:

[The release of the The Cass Report (Hillary Cass) is] a decisive moment in this debate. After weighing all the credible evidence and data, the report concludes that puberty blockers are not reversible and not used to “take time” to consider sex reassignment, but rather irreversible precursors for a lifetime of medication. It says that gender incongruence among kids is perfectly normal and that kids should be left alone to explore their own identities; that early social transitioning is not neutral in affecting long-term outcomes; and that there is no evidence that sex reassignment for children increases or reduces suicides.

Inflation & The Real World

Inflation is neither some random thing that affects your finances nor exclusively the result of printing money; it also can reflect real-world phenomenon. Consider this UPI report on Fed Chair Jerome Powell’s statement on inflation:

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell highlighted a significant yet often overlooked contributor to the persistently high inflation rates: soaring insurance costs. Powell emphasized in congressional testimony that various types of insurance, including home and car insurance, have experienced substantial surges in recent years, impeding the Fed’s efforts to achieve its 2% inflation target. He noted, “Insurance of various different kinds — housing insurance, but also automobile insurance, and things like that — that’s been a significant source of inflation over the last few years.”

Climate change is overwhelmingly attributed to our fossil fuel economy, in case you were wondering, and climate scientists have been warning about it for two or three decades now. Think about who consistently defends the fossil fuel industry, while denigrating cleaner technologies, when listening to some politician harp on and on about inflation.

The Exotic In Your Backyard

This WaPo article never mentions the possibility, but I have to wonder if the time of the cows in America may be ending, to be replaced by camels.

The camels had thump-thumped for seven days across northern Kenya, ushered by police reservists, winding at last toward their destination: less a village than a dusty clearing in the scrub, a place where something big was happening. People had walked for miles to be there. Soon the governor pulled up in his SUV. Women danced, and an emcee raised his hands to the sky. When the crowd gathered around an enclosure holding the camels, one man said he was looking at “the future.”

The camels had arrived to replace the cows.

Cows, here and across much of Africa, have been the most important animal for eons — the foundation of economies, diets, traditions.

But now grazable land is shrinking. Water sources are drying up. A three-year drought in the Horn of Africa that ended last year killed 80 percent of the cows in this part of Kenya and shattered the livelihoods of so many people.

If, faced with the same climate conditions, would Americans stubbornly hold on to cows, or would we switch to camels? It brings in dizzying visions of the Strategic American Reserve of Camels.

Earl Landgrebe Award Nominee

Rep Byron Donalds (R-FL) steps forward with a claim:

Ahead of the start of the Republican presidential pick’s first criminal trial on Monday, Representative Byron Donalds pleaded with the people of Manhattan to give his party leader a break.

“My plea is to the people of Manhattan that may sit on this trial: Please do the right thing for this country,” the Florida congressman told Newsmax. “Everybody’s allowed to have their political viewpoints, but the law is supposed to be blind and no respecter of persons. This is a trash case, there is no crime here, and if there is any potential for a verdict, they should vote not guilty.” [The New Republic]

Besides its incoherency inherent in … and if there is any potential for a verdict, they should vote not guilty, his appeal to safeguard Mr Trump from punishments for misdeeds is the sort of thing that destroys the integrity of a judicial system and destroys confidence in societal stability.

He should be roundly reprimanded by GOP Congressional leaders Senator McConnell (R-KY) and Speaker Johnson (R-LA). Will it happen? I doubt it.

It speaks to a GOP positively awash in folks with little pride in themselves and their accomplishments, of which there is little to go around, and utterly dependent on their Mob boss Party leader.

Word Of The Day

Phreatomagmatic eruption:

Phreatomagmatic eruptions are volcanic eruptions resulting from interaction between magma and water. They differ from exclusively magmatic eruptions and phreatic eruptions. Unlike phreatic eruptions, the products of phreatomagmatic eruptions contain juvenile (magmatic) clasts. It is common for a large explosive eruption to have magmatic and phreatomagmatic components. [Wikipedia]

Noted in “Icelandic volcano erupts, turning sky orange and forcing evacuations,” Annabelle Timsit and Kasha Patel, WaPo:

As The Washington Post reported, that explosive eruption vividly demonstrated what happens when hot lava meets freezing cold water. Known as a phreatomagmatic eruption, the molten rock — magma — made contact with ice and meltwater and flashed to steam. But the volcanic system on the Reykjanes Peninsula is far from the glaciers of Iceland.

Greater Accomplishments & Crimes

Senator Vance (R-OH) would have us believe that Ukraine is doomed:

President Biden wants the world to believe that the biggest obstacle facing Ukraine is Republicans and our lack of commitment to the global community. This is wrong. Ukraine’s challenge is not the G.O.P.; it’s math. Ukraine needs more soldiers than it can field, even with draconian conscription policies. And it needs more matériel than the United States can provide. This reality must inform any future Ukraine policy, from further congressional aid to the diplomatic course set by the president. [The New York Times[1]]

To which there is an answer that doesn’t involve dry statistics and other dreary things.

Senator Vance, you’ve forgotten one factor in your mathematical analysis.

We are the UNITED STATES. Together, we can do anything. We’ve gone to the Moon, we’ve sent probes to the planets and probes are on their way to other solar systems. We’ve rescued countries, and we have doomed other countries.

That’s right, we are capable of the greatest feats, and the greatest crimes. We can abandon Ukraine as we snivel about the penny-pinching cost of it all, or we can provide our aid, in support of another democracy, in support of international law, and in support of our national interest.

We can send more than enough arms to Ukraine to defeat those who threaten to oppress them, to rape them, to bully them, to eradicate them from their very homeland, many of them obsolete in our estimation – but not there’s. We can do this without sending troops.

Or we can turn our backs on them, our fellow humans who wish to control their own destiny, rather than capitulate to the Russian dictator.

Do you want to commit a great crime? Or do you want to accomplish the ‘impossible’ great thing, and set Ukraine free?


1 Via Maddowblog, because I am too cheap to pay for subscriptions to both WaPo and the Times. And I don’t have the time to read both.

Opening The Pipeline, Ctd

For those wondering how Mr Trump’s latest venture, Trump Media & Technology Group Corp, is working out after a couple of weeks, well, ummmm, the stock market isn’t always the most accurate indicator. Hey? Yeah, well, it stinks:

That high point just before April? When it was announced that the merger between DWAC and DJT had been okayed by the SEC. It’s been downhill ever since.

If you bought stock, I wish you well. Good wishes are rarely good for rescuing you from unfortunate financial situations. Unfortunately.

My Bad Sense Of Humor

Daily Kos‘ Joan McCarter remarks on the Arizona Supreme Court’s ruling that a law dating from before Arizona became a State is still a law:

Rep. David Schweikert is one of the most vulnerable, up for reelection in a district that narrowly voted for President Joe Biden in 2020. Schweikert is a six-time co-sponsor of the radical Life at Conception Act. That’s the legislation that would ban all abortions and does not exclude IVF treatments in defining a “person” as “each and every member of the species homo sapiens at all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization.”  …

“I do not support today’s ruling from the AZ Supreme Court,” he tweeted. “This issue should be decided by Arizonans, not legislated from the bench. I encourage the state legislature to address this issue immediately.”

And all I can think is that, obviously, they are not legislating from the bench, which is an old Republican trigger phrase that he evidently thinks applies whenever he becomes uncomfortable, but rather affirming a law from … pre-Arizona days … concerning pre-humans.

If it wasn’t so sad, it’d be funny as hell. For Mr. Twisted Sense of Humor over here. Bad Hue! Go lay down by your dish!