Category Archives: Uncategorized

Just for fun.

I was quite disappointed, if perhaps not surprised, to run across this:

I see George Will is trying a bit of sleight of hand when it comes to spending on political races:

On [June 18th], peak absurdity reaches the Supreme Court. It must decide whether a compelling government interest is served by limiting “coordination” between parties and their candidates. Lest the parties corrupt their own nominees?

Notice the subtle bullying of the intellectual process by suggesting that this is obviously ridiculous. But let’s think about it this way: Are candidates and their parties inseparable entities?

No. Many candidates, especially in the past, held certain positions at variance with their national party’s interest. In fact, it was quite a common phenomenon; today, it’s a bit less common.

Candidates are also mutable. There’s an old trope about the well-intentioned innocent entering politics, and exiting umpteen years later covered in shame. It’s not a myth. Is it that hard to see a Party transforming the earnest politician into a self-serving wretch? No. The reverse is more difficult, but I think that historians will point to Mr Trump as a prime example of a candidate effectively corrupting a Party through the mechanisms of persecution of the earnest and the induction of the corrupt.

Actual quid pro quo corruption involving donors is rare. Abundant research confirms what common sense suggests: Political contributions move to politicians’ issue positions, not the other way around. Teachers unions generally support Democrats for the same reason opponents of gun restrictions generally support Republicans: the parties’ preexisting beliefs.

Abundant research doesn’t mean it was insightful research. After all, dishonest candidates, outside of Mr Trump, do not want to be caught being corrupt as the electorate puts a great deal of value on the honesty of candidates. Worse yet, Mr Will hits the big red button: Common sense. This is another bullying phrase that should never be used when it comes to politics, usually because scaling solutions to 300 million people is a delicate proposition. I still apply it in this distantly related area, as ethics are, as Mr. Heinlein once noted, the most important aspect of a political candidate, and coercing ethics from an unethical candidate is a tricky thing to do.

But citing abundant research that corruption is rare without acknowledging the difficulties inherent in such research is the sort of thing that makes my skin crawl.

The takeaway? When someone tries to intellectually bully you, look around for the curtain. Pull it back. See what’s cowering in the corner.

In case you’re wondering how the fringe is dealing with the tragic results of the flooding in Texas, here’s a sample from fringe figure and candidate for the House of Representatives from Georgia Kandiss Taylor:

They want us to believe it’s all just natural. The hurricanes. The floods. The droughts. The tornadoes. The fires. …

[Some liberal quasi-quotes]

These people are so brainwashed they sound like programmed zombies. They twist and pervert every word, not because they’re right, but because they can’t handle the truth.

Let’s talk geoengineering. Let’s talk cloud seeding. Let’s talk HAARP, stratospheric aerosol injection, solar radiation management, and weather weaponization.

Yes…those are real terms. Real programs. And they’ve been around for decades. You don’t need a degree in rocket science. You just need eyes to see and ears to hear.

So let’s take this apart, shall we?

1. Invocation of conspiracy theory culture. BTW, notice the word natural. It really has no role in her assertion, because the word really means without the interference of human activity, and that’s impossible; the word is used because often the interference is negligible. In the case of climate change, the argument from the conservatives is that human activity influence is negligible, while liberals and scientists assert otherwise, i.e., what is called anthropogenic climate change.
2. Prioritization of personal experience over collection & study of data. This justifies the reader’s experience being used to make a judgment, rather than dealing with the massive data collection and interpretation.
3. Reminder of conspiracy theories: for readers of Skeptical Inquirer, all of the terms mentioned, besides being legitimate science-related terms, are familiar as being subjects of conspiracy theories. Some are old, such as HAARP, an atmospheric study program from the 1990s, or cloud-seeding, involving silver nitrate seeding of clouds in order to induce rainfall. Some are relatively new, such as geoengineering, the goal of which is to reduce the amount of solar radiation trapped by the Earth’s atmosphere.
4. Reiteration of #2.

Then it gets kinda … funny.

What’s happening is not normal.

What’s happening is not natural.

What’s happening is FAKE!

What does fake mean? Those citizens of Texas weren’t killed?

No. She seeks to use fake as a linkage word from her religious tenet that anthropogenic climate change does not exist to the disaster in Texas. It’s clumsy, ungrammatical, and induces uncertainty in her meanings – probably not what she wants.

But she wants power, recognition, and prestige, and better a clumsily written calumny of the liberals than silence.

Because this tragedy is just the sort of thing that happens when climate change hits. Lives are lost, property destroyed, and the fringe-right loses the interest of independents who, until now, feared losing social position and, well, change in general. I can sympathize with the latter.

They were told repeatedly that climate change is a lie.

Then that it’s happening, a little, but it’s from a natural source.

But each bit of evidence that is injurious to those independent citizens also reduces the fringe-right’s influence and power. Every independent that walks away from the position of denying anthropogenic climate change reduces the fringe-right’s power.

And so we get confusing, twisted messages such as Taylor’s.

Engram:

An engram refers to the hypothetical physical or biochemical changes in the brain that are thought to be the basis of memory. It is a neurological trace that represents the storage of information or experiences in the brain. [Psychology.tips]

For usage, I shan’t cite The Ultimate Computer from the original Star Trek series, but rather “Your forgotten memories continue to influence the choices you make,” Chris Simms, NewScientist (28 June 2025, paywall):

Our memories can be defined in different ways. One is based on what people report, such as recalling what they ate for dinner last night or what happened on their seventh birthday. Another way is in terms of an enduring pattern or circuit of cells and connections in the brain, known as an engram, that constitutes the biological representation of a remembered experience.

It has been thought by many researchers that when you forget something, the engram related to that memory vanishes. However, research in mice suggests that forgotten memories can persist, they just can’t be consciously recalled.

Fascinating.

When considering privately funded satellites, Elon Musk comes to mind as the funder of the development of the Starlink network. This report, from NewScientist (28 June 2025, paywall), must be concerning to him:

The asteroid 2024 YR4, which was once thought to be on a collision course with Earth, may still pose a threat to the planet. There is still a chance the space rock could smash into the moon, and the resulting explosion could shower Earth with a cloud of satellite-destroying shrapnel. …

The chance of a collision with the moon, however, has slowly been increasing, and now stands at 4.3 per cent based on the last observations taken before the asteroid flew out of view of our telescopes until 2028. And according to Paul Wiegert at the University of Western Ontario in Canada and his colleagues, such a collision could still cause significant damage to Earth’s satellites. …

Wiegert and his team calculated that 2024 YR4 could create a kilometre-wide crater on the moon – the largest lunar impact for at least the past 5000 years, though relatively small compared with a typical crater. An impact of this size would eject a cloud of debris into space, and by simulating its potential behaviour 10,000 times, the team found that this could cause Earth’s satellites to experience a level of collisions equivalent to what we would expect to see in years or even decades, but occurring in just a few days.

They do state that, depending on conditions, satellites may be damaged rather than destroyed, but since satellites are difficult to repair, this, too, is serious. Replacement may be the only option.

Or maybe the asteroid will miss the Earth and Moon.

It occurred to me yesterday that Wisdom is the Prey of Age.

Or, more accurately, Wisdom is the anti-prey of Age. For those of a literal bent.

Although those with a literal bent would, by nature, not use such a phrase.

To be clear, prey is the definitional subject of the mechanism by which something extends its existence via consumption; yet, Wisdom consumption appears to be a paradox, as consumption, or reduction of something into its constituents for appropriation by another entity, reduces the probability of age-extension.

And this is why inappropriate metaphor employment is in violation of the World Constitution.

Chimeritope technology:

The team identified the piece of OspC, known as an epitope, that triggers the immune response and found that was the part that varies so widely worldwide. Based on [an] earlier epiphany in [Dr. Richard T. Marconi’s] lab, the team then invented a next-generation process they call chimeritope technology. Using this approach, they designed a DNA molecule comprising the epitope encoding sequences from several different variants of OspC. The word chimeritope is formed from the words chimeric — joining together parts of different organisms — and epitope. [VCU Health]

Epitope:

An epitope, also known as antigenic determinant, is the part of an antigen that is recognized by the immune system, specifically by antibodies, B cells, or T cells. The part of an antibody that binds to the epitope is called a paratope. Although epitopes are usually non-self proteins, sequences derived from the host that can be recognized (as in the case of autoimmune diseases) are also epitopes. [Wikipedia]

Noted in “Why Lyme disease and other tick-borne conditions are on the rise,” Carrie Arnold, NewScientist (21 June 2025, paywall):

Using a new technique that he and his lab dubbed “chimeritope technology”, they stitched together small snippets of different OspC protein antigens that provoked an immune response. This super protein proved effective enough for a vaccine for dogs that was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2016. A human vaccine is on its way – Marconi’s lab is currently working with the National Institutes of Health to get it into human trials and then on to market in the next several years.

The same Marconi as above. OspC is used by the responsible bacteria to evade the human immune system, and there’s twenty one known variants; thus the need for chimeritope technology to construct a vaccine that applies to all those variants.

“Waddya mean, paintball?!”

Tollbooth (2021; US title: The Toll) is a tidy example of modern film noir. Multiple gangs wish control of a tollbooth in the Welsh hinterlands. In it lives the leader, if he does indeed lead anyone, of one of the gangs, a bookish man who still manages to indulge in a certain amount of violence.

Into this comes a policewoman who is damaged by the mysterious death of her brother a year earlier; upholding the public weal somehow seems hollow in his absence. The antics of triplets, dancing in the shadow of Death, clownish gangs looking to acquire the booth, even the arrival of a gang boss from the old days, boastful and annoying, fails to improve her mood.

And then everyone meets for the final standoff. Welsh inscrutability vs the modern age.

Like the Welsh personality, this story doesn’t invite you in; you may have to break a window and stick your head in. But if you like a certain melancholic uncertainty in your life, Tollbooth will deliver for you.

It seemed like a good composition.

I do feel sorry for Erick Erickson, I really do. He so wants to be part of the political system of the United States, but both Parties are really going downhill, as I noted here.

And now he notes it here.

We are expected to cheer on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act because it is the Republican bill.

This Republican bill adds to the deficit, adds to the debt, picks winners and losers, raises the debt ceiling beyond the $37 trillion in existing debt, and just rearranges deck chairs as the nation sinks into insolvency. It is fiscally irresponsible.

Without its passage, taxes will go up. That is the only real justification for this legislation. But taxes are going to go up on everyone significantly eventually because this legislation does not seriously tackle the issues of our fiscal solvency and uses sleights of hand to suggest any real benefit.

The Senate version of the plan will raise the debt ceiling $5 trillion. The House wanted to raise it $4 trillion. We will be crossing $40 trillion in debt soon.

I cannot help but notice how he clings to the spectre of higher taxes as if it’s the worst thing in the world, even worse than those baby-killers he imagines exists. But this paragraph is better yet:

This piece of legislation will not win or lose an election in November of next year. But it will also not have the stimulative effect so many of its cheerleaders want to claim. It may offset some of the costs of tariffs, but will saddle us with more debt and ultimately drive up interest rates to burden Americans, disincentivize the creation of families, and put more young workers on the path towards socialism as they blame market forces instead of Washington for their economic stagnation.

Erickson recognizes the Republican tenet of lower taxes – never mind cutting health-enhancement measures that improve worker productivity – do have a limit.

But will he recognize the corruption endemic to the Republicans? I’m sure he knows the Democrats’ ideology is the anchor around their necks, and not the pro-choice position; but the moral character of his fellow conservatives is doing worse than the Democrats, so far as I can see.

Go read his piece. It’s a painful bit of agony, and I do mean it when I say I feel sorry for him. But it’s his problem, not mine.

Remember the questions of confidence on the Iran attack damage assessment?

Mth be frail.

For many American viewers, this may seem like it’s in a foreign language where they don’t yell a lot. Americans, in movies, deliver each line with so much emotion that we’ve burned out several Greek gods. Their rotting husks litter the heavens, occasionally dropping bits of arrogance, sarcasm, and schadenfreude on the highways.

The Station Agent (2003) is an entry in the slice-of-life genre. A man with a physical challenge inherits a train stop, a simple little building, from his employer. From there he meets several other people, each battling their demons, as he battles his, and become friends with some of them, learning as they go.

In some ways this reminds me of Paterson (2017), probably my favorite movie of that year. It’s not a dance with your favorite action star from one adrenaline high to the next; it’s a chronicle of some problems, some tragedies, and some accomplishments that a few folks in New Jersey experience. Some of them are at Point A at the start and Point B at the end; some never get off Point A, clinging too strongly to their likes, dislikes, tragedies, even philosophies, and thus never progressing down their trail.

I won’t say this is as good as Paterson, but by no means let that caveat stop you from seeing this if you’re so inclined. Your taste in quiet, thoughtful drama will, most likely, differ from mine. Sampling Paterson and The Station Agent will not leave you with a sense of regret.

Most likely. I enjoyed this one a lot. Recommended.

A President who’s a publicity hound, and will kill to get it. What to do?

Accuse the left of lying. (Man, is this Roman Senate or what? Not a spec of shame to be seen.) Here’s Erick Erickson’s frantic accusation:

Mark Thompson, the CEO of CNN, has a serious problem that came into sharp view yesterday. His network is suffering from institutional arrogance. We need them, it seems, but they do not need us.

Yesterday, CNN anchors and fact checkers lied to the CNN audience.

A network that once ran “this is a banana” ads and laments disinformation and misinformation, engaged in what amounts to institutional arrogance — an unwillingness to hold itself accountable for getting a story wrong.

On Tuesday, at 2:51 pm, CNN ran an exclusive story that the Defense Intelligence Agency’s preliminary assessment showed the United States only set Iran back by perhaps two months.

The story never noted that the DIA report was rated as “low confidence.”

Elaborately stated. That’s a red flag. What are we distracting from?

That’s right. Whatever the confidence of the DIA report might be, it’s better than the President’s utterances, spewed as he runs in circles trying to claim a share of the glory. He has a long history of disdaining his own intelligence agencies; he relies on his own intuition, always a mug’s game.

I wonder how many people died in his attacks?

Meanwhile, it sounds like SCOTUS‘ conservative wing is diligently working to insulate the President from the legal world. If this is so, that’s another pack of fools.

I’ve been trying to find the complete speech by the President of Iran, but no luck. Here’s the CNN summary, which is the most concise, yet comprehensible, that I’ve encountered:

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian addressed the nation today and claimed the country achieved a “historic victory” following the conflict that was “imposed” by Israel, according to the state-run news agency IRIB.

“After the courageous resistance of your great and history-making nation, we are witnessing a ceasefire and cessation of the 12-day war that was imposed on the Iranian nation by the adventurism and incitement” of the Israeli government, Pezeshkian said, according to IRIB.

Which I suppose might be best interpreted as “We’re not dead, yet.” Sun Tzu, a Chinese philosopher from centuries ago, once remarked that, in order to claim victory in war, the defender must merely survive.

Perhaps that’s the idea here.

But Iran has, if I’m to believe news reports, certainly engaged in provocative behaviors, allying with Hamas, Hezbollah, and other regional militias of dubious nature, so Sun Tzu and his observations may be inapplicable.

While the status of their nuclear energy program remains unclear following the Israeli and American attacks, it does appear that Iran stands alone. None of the other autocratic powers, such as China, North Korea, Russia, or others, came leaping to defend Iran. I wonder if Supreme Leader Khamenei considers that important?

Step 1: Make up a title that has little to do with reality.

Look, this CNN paywalled article, which means I haven’t read it, not being a subscriber, is entitled

The myth of Iran’s invincibility has been broken, and the fallout could be far-reaching

Maybe some Iranian provincials, with little access to the world, harbored that belief – but they won’t be reading CNN. Everyone else knows Iran has strengths, weaknesses, and elements that function as both.

So why the bizarre title?

Because that’s how one garners clicks.

And I view it as offensive and misleading – even as I clicked on the damn article to see which delusion the author may suffer from. (It wasn’t marked as Subscriber-only material.)

Sorry, sorry. I’m feeling cranky this morning. Even NewScientist is making me cranky. I’ll have to write that up, but maybe for tomorrow. Today, I’m crabby about the importance of honesty in communications in an article I haven’t even read. That may fling poo over my purported earnest nature, maybe.

Rolling Stone reports:

According to ethics disclosure reports released by the White House, Miller owns between $100,000 and $250,000 worth of stock in Palantir, Peter Thiel’s data and intelligence software company that has a several lucrative contracts with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to track data and conduct surveillance on undocumented immigrants. It’s a pretty clear conflict of interest from the man behind much of Donald Trump’s immigration policy, in an administration that is already rife with corruption.

A lesson in how to take advantage of one’s position. Maybe Mr Miller can take up a senior teaching position after this Administration closes down.

Something about this video is underhandedly creepy. My Arts Editor just shrugs.

For those who believe in goat entrails special elections as a light on the future, here’s last week’s spotlight from Steve Benen:

Headed into last week’s state legislative special elections, Democrats were confident about a contest in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The state House race was in a district that Kamala Harris carried by 19 points, and the party’s candidate, Amanda Clinton, appeared well positioned to do at least as well.

The good news for Democrats was that their candidate prevailed. The better news for Democrats was the margin: Clinton won a 69-point landslide, easily surpassing expectations.

Republican voters are either dispirited or switching sides in that particular district. Keep in mind that gerrymandering no doubt packed the district with left leaning voters if it was easily carried by Harris just a few months ago – in ruby red Oklahoma.

I wouldn’t try to extend that to other parts of Oklahoma.

Sock puppet account:

A sock puppet, sock puppet account, or simply sock[,] is a false online identity used for deceptive purposes.^[1] The term originally referred to a hand puppet made from a sock. Sock puppets include online identities created to praise, defend, or support a person or organization,^[2] to manipulate public opinion,^[3] or to circumvent restrictions such as viewing a social media account that a user is blocked from. Sock puppets are unwelcome in many online communities and forums. [Wikipedia]

As political and financial objectives supersede simple honesty, it’s difficult to tell readers that they shouldn’t use social media for their news.

But you shouldn’t.

I’m contemplating a post concerning the corruption that is pervading society; while Fox News has a decades-old reputation for misleading their audience, more recently the failures to reveal the failing nature of President Biden’s cognition has left mainstream and left-wing media similarly disgraced.

So what to do? Use multiple sources; think carefully about who can manipulate a given source, such as social media account.

And read the below.

Socket puppet account noted in “Is Your Favorite Influencer’s Opinion Bought and Sold?“, Lee Fang:

There was a momentary push in 2017 for stricter social media disclosures in the political realm. The discovery of foreign influence campaigns aimed at the 2016 presidential election set off alarm bells. As a result, the major tech platforms began working to track and close so-called sock puppet accounts operated by the Russian and Chinese government. Yet few reforms were institutionalized, and as more and more Americans get their news from social media, the problem remains largely unchecked.

Time for another check on the price of DJT, the stock of Trump Media & Technology Group, which was priced at $23.60 on May 27. And now?

This monthly chart^[1] shows DJT is currently in decline. Since my last casual note, my calculator shows DJT’s dropped 24.4%. Is this disaster?

No, not in my experience. I have observed, and in a few instances, owned stocks that have dropped that much and more, and then recovered. All it takes is patience; the bold investor might even buy more.

But there are no guarantees, folks. DJT could drop 20% tomorrow. In a month, it might go under the waves, never to be seen again. Or it could jump 20%.

Thank goodness I’m not a financial advisor, and readers shouldn’t take this as anything more than an old investor’s observations of a certainly unusual company, a company with a social media product that reportedly doesn’t do well, an American President as its chief draw, and a cryptocurrency on offer.

Speaking of, how’s that doing?

CoinMarketCap

From Day Zero to today, it appears to have dropped quite a ways. Investors who’ve bought $TRUMP coins are experiencing an unexpected depletion of their core wealth, I’d say, which is rather in line with everything Donald J. Trump touches.

But I do recall Professor Richardson of Letters From An American commenting that $TRUMP experienced a big drop during the week of feud between President Trump and Elon Musk^[2]. Such feuds are not uncommon in politics, but inexperienced folks often assume that allies are forever and bonded at a deep level, when the reality is that it’s often an alliance of convenience, and breaks up as goals are accomplished, personalities clash over tactics – or someone decides their slice of the pie isn’t big enough. Consider the fate of former leading Communist revolutionary and Stalin ally Leon Trotsky, exiled and assassinated.

I have to wonder if investors are awakening to the facts of DJT.

And President Trump’s bombing of Iran? I don’t expect that to affect the price of DJT. But we shall see.

¹ It also appears to be exhibiting a bug in that the After Hours display replicates the daily trading information of a 3.98% decline, yet the price hasn’t changed.

² I regret not finding the link.

Remember when the United States invaded Iraq under the excuse that Iraq, under President and megalomaniac Saddam Hussein, had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs)? Oh, some readers might be a trifle young.

And President Bush ordered the invasion despite his intelligence services telling they didn’t think there were WMDs? No WMDs were ever found.

And now we’ve hit Iran because President and megalomaniac Donald J. Trump believes the Iranians were only weeks, or months, away from completing nuclear weapons development.

Not an assessment – or excuse – to which his intelligence professionals agree.

So this CNN headline

How Trump quietly made the historic decision to launch strikes in Iran

while technically accurate, ignores the pattern in Republican Presidents to ignore inconvenient advice, making a mockery of running the best Administrations possible in favor of fiscal advantage and emotional preconception.

I wonder how many innocent Iranian citizens will die in this needless conflict?

It starts with a pleasant surreality, and then goes off into … weirdness.

Beckett-King is not a recent, random find. We have, I think, two of his books for children; his whimsical short videos appeal to the nature of both myself and my Arts Editor.