Welcome to December 23, 2023, and it’s but two days until the beginning of Coynezaa. It’s also National Pfeffernüsse Day, a day for culturally appropriating a great sweetmeat, an iced gingerbread cookie from Germany, translation: “pepper nuts”. I could use some over the holidays. But be careful, for Wikipedia notes this:
In 1820, the Brothers Grimm warned their sister Charlotte (de) against excessive consumption: “Don’t eat too much of the pepper nuts, they are said to cause a lot of heat!” At that time, nutmeg was considered an aphrodisiac, and cardamom as invigorating as caffeine
- It’s also National Bake Day, Festivus, “a secular holiday made popular by the sitcom Seinfeld,” Night of the Radishes (Oaxaca City, Mexico), Tibb’s Eve in Newfoundland and Labrador, denoting a day that will never arrive (!), and, finally, Tom Bawcock’s Eve in Mousehole, Cornwall, celebrating a legendary resident (the town is pronounced “muzzle”), who saved the place from starvation. As Wikipedia notes, “During this festival Stargazy pie (a mixed fish, egg and potato pie with protruding fish heads) is eaten. . “. That is the world’s WORST pie.
Here’s a scene from “Night of the Radishes” with the Wikipedia caption:
And would you love a slice of Stargazy pie? I would eschew it! (Photo from Wikipedia.)
Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this by consulting the December 23 Wikipedia page.
Da Nooz:
*The UN Security Council has finally passed a resolution that is binding on Hamas and on Israel (though countries have ignored resolutions like this before). The substance is described below (I can’t find the original text): the issue is how long the “humanitarian pauses” will last. Israel will surely not tolerate a permanent cease-fire, but that’s what many countries, including our EU allies want. The best news is that all the hostages will be released. And, with some strictures, the war can go on. The text of the resolution is here.
The United Nations Security Council on Friday adopted a resolution calling for a surge in aid to desperate civilians in the Gaza Strip, ending nearly a week of intense diplomatic wrangling intended to ensure that the United States would not block the measure.
The vote was 13-0 in favor of the resolution, with the United States and Russia abstaining. At the insistence of the United States, the final version of the measure did not demand an immediate truce, omitting earlier language that would have insisted on the “urgent suspension of hostilities.”
But it called for “urgent and extended humanitarian pauses and corridors,” of unspecified timing and location, “to enable full, rapid, safe, and unhindered humanitarian access.”
It remained unclear how the resolution would affect the current fighting in Gaza, where about 20,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli airstrikes and ground operations.
The resolution was adopted after Council diplomats repeatedly delayed the vote this week and reworked the measure in intense negotiations aimed at winning support from the White House and its allies in the Israeli government.
. . . Friday’s resolution, put forward by the U.A.E., the only Arab country currently on the 15-member council, called on the warring parties in Gaza to allow the use of “all available routes” into Gaza for aid deliveries, according to a draft that was circulated before the vote. It also demands the immediate release of all hostages abducted during the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7.
. . . Even though she did not vote in favor of the resolution, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., said it “speaks to the severity of the crisis and it calls on all of us to do more.” Ms. Thomas-Greenfield did not explain why the U.S. had abstained but said she was deeply disappointed that the resolution did not condemn Hamas’s terrorist attack on Israel.
This is pretty good, so long as it holds Hamas to the same suspension of hostilities as it does Israel. That is, no more rockets during the “pauses.” The hostages will be released (I predict that many will have been killed), and Hamas will no longer hold assets to use as bargaining chips. But I’m convinced that Israel and its citizens want Hamas gone, and I doubt that anything the UN does will ultimately prevent that from happening, As for what could happen after Hamas loses, you can find a good series of speculations by an Israeli at this site (h/t Norm)
*However, there’s considerable criticism that the regulation is too weak, and of course Doctors Without Borders:
Humanitarian groups immediately responded by sharply criticizing the United States for not supporting calls to end the war, which Gazan authorities say has killed more than 20,000 Palestinians, most of them civilians. The United Nations says the war has displaced nearly 1.9 million people — more than 85 percent of the population — who are at risk of both famine and the rampant spread of infectious diseases.
Doctors Without Borders, which has physicians and other staff working in Gaza’s crumbling health care system, said the resolution “falls painfully short” of what is needed.
“This resolution has been watered down to the point that its impact on the lives of civilians in Gaza will be nearly meaningless,” the group’s executive director in the United States, Avril Benoît, said in a statement.
People must realize that “calls for ending the war” are the same as “calls to leave Hamas in power”, and a permanent ceasefire is a guarantee that Israel will be subject to continued terrorism, and may be in danger as a country. I don’t support calls to end the war until Hamas is destroyed or rendered powerless. The solution is for them to put down their weapons, disband, surrender, and, of course, release all the hostages.
*Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman, once regarded as a “progressive” Democrat, is now abjuring the label because, as a legislator who favored Israel, he was demonized by his fellow progressives.”
In April 2022, during his Senate primary campaign in Pennsylvania, John Fetterman spoke enthusiastically about his unqualified support for Israel and said he did not consider himself a “progressive” when it came to his views on the Jewish state.
“Whenever I’m in a situation to be called on to take up the cause of strengthening and enhancing the security of Israel or deepening our relationship between the United States and Israel, I’m going to lean in,” Mr. Fetterman, then the lieutenant governor, told Jewish Insider at the time. When it came to far-left Democrats who harshly criticized Israel, he added, “I would also respectfully say that I’m not really a progressive in that sense.”
So as the left has turned against Mr. Fetterman in recent weeks, branding him #GenocideJohn for his unequivocal support of Israel’s fierce retaliation against Hamas in response to the group’s Oct. 7 terrorist attacks, the senator has dug in.
Once a darling of progressives who positioned himself as a champion of the underdog and highlighted his association with Senator Bernie Sanders, the self-described democratic socialist from Vermont, Mr. Fetterman now has a less rosy view of the left and says the label of “progressive” does not fit him anymore.
“What I have found out over the last couple years is that the right, and now the left, are hoping that I die,” Mr. Fetterman, who suffered a near-fatal stroke during his campaign, said in an interview on Wednesday. “There are ones that are rooting for another blood clot. They have both now been wishing that I die.”
*As always, I’m stealing three items from Nellie Bowles’s snarky but accurate weekly news summary; this week it’s “TGIF: Down with democracy!” The first one refers to lots of immigrants to Texas being flown to Chicago.
→ Mayor of Chicago says immigration is war: Speaking of progressives and immigration, the mayor of Chicago is having a breakdown over migrants arriving. You see, immigrants are beloved, welcome new members of Texas, they must stay in Texas. Here’s what Chicago’s mayor said this week: “[T]hey come to the city of Chicago, where we have homelessness, mental health clinics that have been shut down and closed, you have people who are seeking employment. The governor of Texas needs to look in the mirror of the chaos he is causing for this country. This is not just a Chicago dynamic. He is attacking our country.” First of all, the way blue city mayors are talking about immigrants is pretty nasty. I know and love many Californians who come from Mexico. Second: Is there no homelessness in Texas? Are there no mental health clinics that have been shut down in Texas? Why should Southern states alone carry the very real social service burden of helping new folks settle when blue states are the ones who want that open border in the first place?
It’s a very clever trick to blame Southern states, which are really in a Catch-22. They’re racist for wanting border control. They’re racist for sending new arrivals to other American cities. They’re racist for even saying they need help and that social services are expensive. And yet it’s decidedly not racist for the mayor of Chicago to say that the arrival of immigrant families is an “attack” on the city. Meanwhile, 14,000 people were recorded crossing the border in a single day this week, a new record.
→ What if race is a skill: Colleges, banned from technically doing affirmative action, are going nuts trying to figure out ways around this rule. Obviously, dropping standardized testing is a good first step, done. But the next: they are going to redefine merit to include race, or at least that’s what an influential education consulting group is suggesting. If you think for one second that these schools are going to let in more Asian students, you have not met a determined McKinsey consultant with a pocketful of Adderall and a determination to get those percentages a little more correct at Princeton.
Here’s an excerpt from that National Review article:
At a November event for College Board, Art Coleman, EducationCounsel’s co-founder and managing partner, explained that if the mission of a college or university is to advance diversity and equity, then applicants whose identities align with this mission should be given preference. Under Coleman’s understanding of merit, presumably, a black student who writes his application essay about overcoming “systemic racism” might be considered more intelligent and prepared for higher education than, say, a Korean-American student who gets a perfect score on the SAT.Even organizations outside of higher education have subscribed to EducationCounsel’s redefinition of merit. In its response to the Court’s decision, the New York State Bar Association referenced the firm’s July guidance letter six times and advised law schools in the Empire State to “consider reevaluating the criteria for assessing merit, including standardized test scores.” It warned law firms that “overreliance on a student’s GPA might not be appropriate or determinative of a student’s career outcome and is often at the expense of evaluating a prospect’s qualities and abilities more holistically.”EducationCounsel has been trying to redefine the concept of merit for some time. In 2019, College Board published a playbook for “advancing higher education diversity goals” that was co-authored by Coleman. It explains that “adhering to principles of holistic review that consider multiple measures of preparedness and merit (i.e., a student’s academic, nonacademic, and contextual backgrounds) is critical to making the kinds of nuanced and individualized judgements called for to achieve robust student diversity.” It instructs colleges and universities to create “admissions materials that allow students to represent academic preparedness in multiple ways, in addition to or in lieu of test scores.”At a November event for College Board, Art Coleman, EducationCounsel’s co-founder and managing partner,
→ Israel worse than North Korea, Iran, Syria, and Hamas: According to the United Nations, which has issued a totally reasonable number of resolutions against the one Jewish state. (H/t Hillel Neuer.)
*Shadi Bartsch-Zimmer, the spouse of our late and beloved President Bob Zimmer, and a famous professor (of classics) in her own right, just wrote an op-ed in the Chicago Tribune (archived here) about what she thinks her husband would have done about the roiling of campus due to the Hamas/Israel war. Would would Bob had done about the calls for genocide of the Jews.
I agree with her speculation about what Bob would have done, though we will never know, but not entirely with what he should have done:
Since the troubling testimony before Congress on Dec. 5 by university Presidents Claudine Gay, Liz Magill and Sally Kornbluth, I have been asked several times what I thought my late husband, University of Chicago’s 13th President Robert Zimmer, might have said in response to similar questions.
Bob, who died of brain cancer in May, was a staunch advocate of the Chicago Principles and the 1967 Kalven Report and well known for his unremitting support of free speech as a necessary part of the fabric of a rigorous education. Bob’s rejection of rhetorical safe spaces and his refusal to yield to cancel culture allowed unpopular views to find expression, and reasoned rebuttal, on our campus. In this, he followed a long University of Chicago tradition. As inaugural President William Rainey Harper declared in 1902, “The principle of complete freedom of speech on all subjects has from the beginning been regarded as fundamental in the University of Chicago” and “this principle can neither now nor at any future time be called in question.”
I’d like to suggest that Bob would not have equivocated as Magill, the now-former University of Pennsylvania president, did by saying, “I’ve heard chants, which can be antisemitic, depending on the context, when calling for the elimination of the Jewish people.” He would not have tolerated people taking over campus buildings or hounding students trying to attend class. He would not have balked at U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik’s question, “Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn’s rules or code of conduct, yes or no?” because calling for the genocide of any ethnic group on campus, he would have said, is not acceptable.This claim might seem startling. If Bob was a bastion for free speech in academia, why claim he wouldn’t tolerate chants for the elimination of Jews, or of any people? The 2014 Chicago Principles were composed under Bob’s leadership, and they are clear that the core mission of the university is commitment “to free and open inquiry in all matters” that guarantees “all members of the University community the broadest possible latitude to speak, write, listen, challenge, and learn.” These principles repeat the view of the Kalven Report [our principle of institutional neutrality on political, ideological, and moral issues] , which specifies that “by design and by effect, it is the institution which creates discontent with the existing social arrangements and proposes new ones. In brief, a good university, like Socrates, will be upsetting.”
All of this is true. Without differences in points of view, a university is not worthy of the name. And yet the analogy to Socrates is telling. Socrates was a pain in the ass who asked you, politely, in conversation to rethink your current convictions, often by showing you that they were internally incoherent. He often upset his interlocutors and offered opinions they found morally reprehensible. But he didn’t upset them by calls to eliminate them. (And in any case, the Athenians got rid of him first.) Socrates thought that we needed, all of us, to examine our fundamental beliefs and make sure they weren’t based on unthinking assumptions. In short, free speech of the Socratic sort is here to lead to learning.
. . . Consider another statement from the Kalven Report that is significant on this score. “To perform its mission in the society, a university must sustain an extraordinary environment of freedom of inquiry and maintain an independence from political fashions, passions, and pressures.” This suggests that the report would not endorse having a group of students chant, on campus, for the eradication of another group of students. That’s not the function of an education. It’s not a debate. It doesn’t lead to learning. And yes, it creates an atmosphere in which it’s impossible to concentrate because it causes Jews to wonder if the world is ticking up to another Holocaust. The 1,200 victims of the dehumanizing horror that Hamas unleashed are the harbinger of a future that suddenly seems open to unspeakable possibilities.
. . . The University of Chicago is not a public institution, nor are Penn, Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. And yet we might wish to recall — besides the First Amendment — Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which mandates that all students have equal access to the educational opportunities of their university. It is at least arguable that walking past protesters shouting for your destruction is as obstructive to education as it would be if the chants were in favor of the Ku Klux Klan. We could argue over the precise meaning of “intifada” or “From the river to the sea,” or contest where exactly we should draw the line. That’s fine. But there is a line.
In other words, Bob would have said that any call for genocide would create an atmosphere inimical to learning, and thus, while comporting with the First Amendment, violates title VI. I would disagree. There are things that do create such an atmosphere, like constant demonstrations that are “in your face” about genocide, and statements directed at individual students, or small groups of students in a very hostile way, but there are also acts that don’t do that. Holding up a sign that says “Kill the Jews” doesn’t, to me, rise to “depriving students of their right to an educational opportunity. If you disagree, what about the “From the River to the Sea” chant? Doesn’t that constitute, at least for many, a call to kill off the Jews and eliminate Israel? What about cries of “No affirmative action for blacks?” which many black students would see odious enough to say that it creates the inimical atmosphere. In other words, I don’t think there IS a line that hasn’t already been drawn by the courts. And a further line, banning hate speech of the “gas the Jews” sort, creates a slippery slope. (Remember, I’m a Jew and I find that call about as offensive as I can imagine.)
Here’s part of what the Chicago Principles say:
Of course, the ideas of different members of the University community will often and quite naturally conflict. But it is not the proper role of the University to attempt to shield individuals from ideas and opinions they find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive. Although the University greatly values civility, and although all members of the University community share in the responsibility for maintaining a climate ofmutualrespect, concerns about civility andmutualrespect can never be used as a justification for closing off discussion ofideas, however offensive or disagreeable those ideas may be to some members of our community.
The freedom to debate and discuss the merits of competing ideas does not, of course, meanthatindividualsmay saywhatevertheywish,wherevertheywish.TheUniversity may restrict expression that violates the law, that falsely defames a specific individual, that constitutes a genuine threat or harassment, that unjustifiably invades substantial privacy or confidentiality interests, orthat is otherwise directly incompatiblewith the functioning ofthe University.In addition, the Universitymay reasonably regulate the time, place, and manner of expression to ensure that it does not disrupt the ordinary activities of the University. But these are narrow exceptions to the general principle of freedom of expression, and it is vitally important that these exceptions never be used in a manner that is inconsistent with the University’s commitment to a completely free and open discussion of ideas
The call to kill the Jews is a debatable idea, and also outs the caller as someone who’s odious (that’s another reason to allow odious speech. But you can engage the callers in a dialogue: why do you think we should kill the Jews? So long as the protestors don’t violate university policies (no megaphones, no sit-ins), and don’t constantly harass individual students, I think they should be able to say what they want, Otherwise, you’re starting to draw new lines, and those lines will have to be adjudicated by the courts. Readers may of course disagree, as Shadi did, but I have my own solution to the atmosphere of anti-Semitism here, and will write more about that later.
Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili and Szaron plan a catarian initiative:
Hili: We have to change the world.Szaron: How?Hili: For a better one.
Hili: Musimy zmienić świat.Szaron: Jak?Hili: Najlepiej na jakiś lepszy.
*******************
Here’s a nice Coynezaa picture, used with permission. The Bag of Nails is Bristol pub famous for harboring a bunch of resident cats. Paul’s words:
Merry Coynezaa from me, Paul Triffitt (shown) and Solarise in the Bag of Nails, Bristol.
From the FB page America’s Cultural Decline Into Idiocy: Would you like your child medium rare or well done?
From Kristin:
From Masih; No hijab and singing: this woman is in trouble, but immensely brave. Sound up. Clearly the crowd is on her side, too!
In an Islamic regime, singing as a woman is forbidden. Showing your hair is forbidden. Being a woman is a crime. Yet, here we see the bravery of Iranian women. This one removes her hijab, sings openly, and challenges the gender apartheid, supported by many. #WomanLifeFreedom pic.twitter.com/uAaSQRNRWG
— Masih Alinejad 🏳️ (@AlinejadMasih) December 22, 2023
This kind of bias is so common that you hardly notice it any more:
No, @NPR, there is no "hostage swap." Palestinians held in Israeli jails are not hostages; they are there because of their involvement in terror-related offenses. There is no moral equivalence.
Please change your headline like @AP has already done.https://t.co/4nkFBvo0TS pic.twitter.com/4yXo3dtac3
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) December 21, 2023
From Luana. The Atlantic has joined the chorus calling for the resignation of Harvard President Claudine Gay. When you lose the Atlantic, you’ve lost! (The article is archived here.)
“It is clear to me that this is plagiarism.”
“It is disqualifying for a position of leadership at any university. Her failure to accept responsibility in stark and unqualified terms makes matters worse.”@EliotACohen on Claudine Gay:https://t.co/oNUgoaIxmp pic.twitter.com/0fr9vydWI2
— Steve McGuire (@sfmcguire79) December 22, 2023
From Malcolm: Cats ‘n’ kids:
Cats and kids..🐈🐾👶🥰 pic.twitter.com/zala2yUJMB
— 𝕐o̴g̴ (@Yoda4ever) December 17, 2023
From Barry, a great rocker by the early Beatles. I think this is “That’s all right”, made famous by the Beatles but written and recorded by Arthur Crudup in 1946.
The Beatles playing rock & roll music with absolute authority. pic.twitter.com/duwjwUsRva
— Ted Gioia (@tedgioia) December 11, 2023
From the Auschwitz Memorial. a mother and daughter gassed upon arrival at the camp:
22 December 1933 | A Dutch Jewish girl, Betty Scheffer, was born in Amsterdam.
In October 1942 she was deported to #Auschwitz with her mother Sara. They were murdered in a gas chamber after the selection. pic.twitter.com/KRVUR7IaWM
— Auschwitz Memorial (@AuschwitzMuseum) December 22, 2023
Tweets from the polymathic Dr. Cobb (“call me anything, but don’t call me Matt”). First, a woman and her goose:
The way they walk away together.. 😊 pic.twitter.com/26avQze8Oq
— Buitengebieden (@buitengebieden) December 21, 2023
Matthew tells us where he is. But where the hell is Buxton?
Buxton. pic.twitter.com/NcrR78bdtN
— Matthew Cobb (@matthewcobb) December 21, 2023
Jerry writes:
Regarding whether Israel’s existence is being endangered (a claim Jerry has made several times recently), political scientist John Mearsheimer (Univ of Chicago; he specializes in the study of war) said this in a recent interview [emphasis added by me]:
“What country is going to invade Israel and threaten its survival? Jordan? I don’t think so. Egypt? I don’t think so. Syria? I don’t think so. Iraq? I don’t think so. Lebanon? No.”
Well, let’s see … Jordan has already invaded Israel four times with hopes to destroy it. Egypt has done it five times. Syria four times. Iraq three times. Lebanon once and Hezbollah twice have waged war on Israel. Saudi Arabia twice. Plus a few other players, including Russia, and often together.
That you don’t think any of this will repeat is not exactly a relief. These hostile entities still have the same philosophy, the same hatred of Jews, and the same opportunistic tendencies. Not to mention the millions of Arabs who live in Israel (and by that I mean within its 1948 borders which include “Palestine”) who fervently believe that Israel belongs to them and are happy to employ terroristic murder to further that end.
How easy it is to counsel skepticism from the safety of Ivory Towers.
And then there’s Iran…
How does the fact that the Arab neighbors lost multiple wars against Israel lead you to a rejection of the statement that they do not possess the ability to conquer Israel at the moment?
If anything, Israel has become more powerful in relation to its neighbors. Mearsheimer is correct from his perspective limited to nation states and conflicts between them. Yet decades of sustained terror are an existential threat to Israel in its current form. It would drain its prosperity, most likely radicalize its population and/or send its citizens into exodus.
“he specialises in the study of war” probably never been closer to conflict than on a television screen?
Of course Hamas is an existential threat to Israel, maybe go and sit under the missiles fired regularly at Israel. Political Scientist, humbug!
Slight confusion about the the Coynezaa Bag of Nails photo. The “me” is me, the person who took the photo. Paul Triffitt is a friend of mine with whom I spent yesterday afternoon in the Bag of Nails.
The Bag of Nails currently has 13 cats (down from a max of 22 – found new homes rather than off this mortal coil, I think). They also serve a variety of real ales that changes from week to week. Music is provided by the landlord’s record collection and turntable. You used to be able to put the records on yourself, but working a turntable is a dying art and there were a couple of unfortunate incidents, so only the staff are allowed to put records on anymore.
There’s only one down side: the pub definitely belongs to the cats. Even humans with our poor sense of smell can tell.
“Working a turntable is a dying art…”. Wow. Reminds me of when a ten year old nephew came to our house in the 80’s to call his parents to pick him up after a nearby baseball practice and just stared, frozen, at our rotary dial phone. He had only seen digital push button telephones and our vintage…we did not convert until late 90’s…rotary dial was totally foreign to him. Thanks for the image.
When our grandkids first got into our no-frills pickup, they stared at the cranks for the windows and asked “What are those?”
I’ve seen a delightful video of two teenage boys who were challenged by their father to use a rotary phone to call home. They flat out could not do it. Nice kids, though. But Otoh I don’t think I could quickly figure out a slide rule.
In the 80’s I introduced our girls to computer punch cards and a keypunch as these items were being replaced by file operating systems, desktop terminals, and personal computers. While cards and keypunches were history by the aughts, I did introduce our grandchildren to the slide rule, which the youngest took a shine to and she can still use it!
When I did my A level in Computing we saved our programs on punched tape and had to get the data put onto punched cards by technicians employed solely for that purpose. It’s a different world.
Buxton: a lovely spa town tucked away in the hills of west Derbyshire: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buxton
Stargazy pie: the sardines are butterflied and the backbone, tail and fins removed before being placed in the pie. It’s actually quite tasty. (You don’t eat the heads!)
But … but … but .. the song tells me to eat them up, yum!
All right then…I don’t eat the heads!
So according to the Wikipedia, Bawcock fed the whole town with a single pie.
Since herring have to be caught with nets and small coastal fishing boats of the time could hold a minimum of 12,000 fish (or one “last”) I think it is safe to say Bawcock had help and the limiting factor here is how many fish can fit and be cooked in a single pie.
Anyone know or have alternate thoughts?
Asking as I am curious how many people were potentially saved from starvation (and it became a little bit of a rabbit hole for me today).
On this day:
1688 – As part of the Glorious Revolution, King James II of England flees from England to Paris, France after being deposed in favour of his son-in-law and nephew, William of Orange and his daughter Mary.
1783 – George Washington resigns as commander-in-chief of the Continental Army at the Maryland State House in Annapolis, Maryland.
1815 – The novel Emma by Jane Austen is first published.
1905 – The Tampere conference, where Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin meet for the first time, is held in Tampere, Finland.
1913 – The Federal Reserve Act is signed into law by President Woodrow Wilson, creating the Federal Reserve System.
1914 – World War I: During the Battle of Sarikamish, Ottoman forces mistook one another for Russian troops. The following friendly fire incident leaves 2,000 Ottomans dead and many more wounded.
1919 – Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act 1919 becomes law in the United Kingdom. [The act enabled women to join the professions and professional bodies, to sit on juries and be awarded degrees. It was a government compromise, a replacement for a more radical private members’ bill, the Women’s Emancipation Bill.]
1947 – The transistor is first demonstrated at Bell Laboratories.
1948 – Seven Japanese military and political leaders convicted of war crimes by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East are executed by Allied occupation authorities at Sugamo Prison in Tokyo, Japan.
1954 – First successful kidney transplant is performed by J. Hartwell Harrison and Joseph Murray.
1960 – Hilkka Saarinen née Pylkkänen is murdered in the so-called “oven homicide” case in Krootila, Kokemäki, Finland.I
1968 – The 82 sailors from the USS Pueblo are released after eleven months of internment in North Korea.
1970 – The North Tower of the World Trade Center in Manhattan, New York, New York is topped out at 417 metres (1,368 ft), making it the tallest building in the world.
1972 – The 16 survivors of the Andes flight disaster are rescued after 73 days, surviving by cannibalism.
1979 – Soviet–Afghan War: Soviet Union forces occupy Kabul, the Afghan capital.
1986 – Voyager, piloted by Dick Rutan and Jeana Yeager, lands at Edwards Air Force Base in California becoming the first aircraft to fly non-stop around the world without aerial or ground refuelling.
2002 – A U.S. MQ-1 Predator is shot down by an Iraqi MiG-25 in the first combat engagement between a drone and conventional aircraft.
Births:
1582 – Severo Bonini, Italian organist and composer (d. 1663).
1732 – Richard Arkwright, English businessman and inventor, invented the Water frame and Spinning frame (d. 1792).
1805 – Joseph Smith, American religious leader, founder of the Latter Day Saint movement (d. 1844).
1812 – Samuel Smiles, Scottish-English author (d. 1904). [His primary work, Self-Help (1859), promoted thrift and claimed that poverty was caused largely by irresponsible habits, while also attacking materialism and laissez-faire government. It has been called “the bible of mid-Victorian liberalism” and had lasting effects on British political thought.]
1907 – Avraham Stern, Polish Zionist leader (d. 1942).
1908 – Gertrude Bancroft, American economist (d. 1985).
1912 – Anna J. Harrison, American organic chemist and academic (d. 1998).
1918 – Helmut Schmidt, German soldier, economist, and politician, 5th Chancellor of Germany (d. 2015).
1929 – Chet Baker, American jazz trumpet player, flugelhorn player, and singer (d. 1988).
1935 – Johnny Kidd, English singer-songwriter (d. 1966).
1935 – Esther Phillips, American R&B singer (d. 1984).
1938 – Bob Kahn, American computer scientist and engineer, co-developed the Transmission Control Protocol.
1939 – Nancy Graves, American sculptor and painter (d. 1995).
1941 – Tim Hardin, American folk singer-songwriter and musician (d. 1980).
1946 – John Sullivan, English screenwriter, producer, and composer (d. 2011).
1955 – Carol Ann Duffy, Scottish poet and playwright.
1963 – Donna Tartt, American author.
1964 – Eddie Vedder, American singer-songwriter and guitarist.
1967 – Carla Bruni, Italian-French singer-songwriter and model.
Death is such a strange thing. One minute you’re here and then just gone. You’d think there would be an anteroom, a place where you could be visited before you go.
1638 – Barbara Longhi, Italian painter (b. 1552).
1834 – Thomas Robert Malthus, English economist and demographer (b. 1766).
1889 – Constance Naden, English poet and philosopher (b. 1858).
1939 – Anthony Fokker, Indonesia-born Dutch pilot and engineer, designed the Fokker Dr.I and Fokker D.VII (b. 1890).
1953 – Lavrentiy Beria, Soviet general and politician, head of the People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs (b. 1899).
1972 – Andrei Tupolev, Russian engineer, designed the Tupolev Tu-95 and Tupolev Tu-104 (b. 1888).
1994 – Sebastian Shaw, English actor, director, and playwright (b. 1905).
2000 – Victor Borge, Danish-American comedian, pianist, and conductor (b. 1909).
2005 – Yao Wenyuan, Chinese writer and politician, member of the Gang of Four (b. 1931).
2006 – Charlie Drake, English actor (b. 1925).
2007 – Oscar Peterson, Canadian pianist and composer (b. 1925).
2013 – Mikhail Kalashnikov, Russian general and weapons designer, designed the AK-47 rifle (b. 1919).
2013 – Yusef Lateef, American saxophonist, composer, and educator (b. 1920).
2020 – Leslie West, American singer and guitarist (b. 1945).
2021 – Joan Didion, American writer (b. 1934).
A U.S. MQ-1 Predator shot down…. I recall one of our research pilots, after a pretty realistic differential maneuvering simulator engagement with a computer-directed drone saying that the fight was really unfair because the pilot can only know where the opponent drone is when it is visible from his cockpit, but the drone always knows where the piloted aircraft is. This was 1980’s sensor technology. The research pilot was a former carrier qualified, Viet Nam veteran fighter pilot….no slouch!
IRT the Federal Reserve, I recommend this book, a fascinating read.
Secrets of the Temple: How the Federal Reserve Runs the Country by William Greider https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/326358.Secrets_of_the_Temple
Per the Beatles clip, that’s a cover of “Long Tall Sally.”
Not “Good Golly, Miss Molly”?
Yep, definitely Little Richard. A cover of Arthur Crudup’s “That’s All Right (Mama)” was Elvis Presley’s first single.
It is definitely “Long Tall Sally.” Paul did sing lead vocals on “That’s Alright (Mama)” on BBC radio.
“Night of the Radishes” sounds like a bad horror film, like “Attack of the Killer Tomatoes” (bet you all forgot about that one).
“Attack of the Killer Tomatoes” is a classic! My wife was horrified when her old boss agreed with me.
“I know I’m going to miss her
A tomato ate my sister”.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=b3uIKzgcDxo
Testing
Hmm. I attempted to post a comment later in the evening yesterday to send Ceiling Cat some links about how Obama purportedly secretly lobbied Harvard to keep Gay. My comment didn’t make it through moderation. Not sure why. So, my first two comments today were just “tests.”
I found them today, Roz. I think if you include more than one link in a comment it goes to moderation, getting through once the moderator (PCC(E) working by himself) realizes they are not malware links.
Indeed. Also, this sometimes happens if a post is too long.
Cute “mother goose” video!
Nice to see that the RSVP above contains something to please Jonathan Swift’s palate.
Reminds when asked “ do you like children?” my reply, “ yes I quite like children, but I couldn’t eat a whole one”
Q: “Do you like children?”
W. C. Fields: “Yes … medium rare.”
According to Wikipedia, the British Food Trust describes stargazy pie as being “fun and amusing for children.” I think somebody at the trust has a sick sense of humour.
On the other hand, I love the name “stargazy.” It’s a shame that it isn’t attached to a more appealing dish.
Agreed, it is on par with “ four and twenty blackbirds baked in a pie” as a vegetarian I find it somewhat disrespectful to the animal consumed, not an amusing spectacle for children.
I don’t believe the blackbirds were actually baked in the pie, or they wouldn’t have been able to sing when the pie was opened. Instead, I suspect that an elaborate pie shell was baked, and the blackbirds (live) put in the shell, which was then opened at the table for the assembled crowd to hear the blackbirds. Medieval dinners, at least among the very rich/powerful, seemed to be elaborate.
As for me, I have never found blackbird “singing” attractive; and the idea of baking a pie shell from which to release them to sing at the dinner table eccentric, to say the least.
Yes, bringing live songbirds in a pie case to the table was a thing at the banquets of the royals and noble families in the Tudor period. I have also read of larger ‘pies’ containing live hares to be released at the table to amuse the diners.
The first time I came across stargazy pie was in a book my kids had called “The Lighthouse Keeper’s Cat”. It was a long time before I realised that it was a real thing.
I agree with you that universities should uphold the same speech policies that are guaranteed by the First Amendment. (At least I think that is your position.)
But could President Zimmer have said the following?
“As the President of the University of Chicago I must uphold the principles of free speech as outlined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. However, the University’s policies also allow me to speak as a citizen and *not* as an administrator on behalf of the University. As a person, as a human being, as an individual, I abhor the speech of those who are calling for the end of Israel and the Jewish People.”
Of course, I don’t know if Congresswoman Stefanik would have allowed him that many words.
I despise what I’m hearing on our campuses—and the constant drumbeat does risk expanding into something worse—but I also think that our best remedy and our duty is to fight hate speech with better speech. Banning bad speech just sends it underground to fester and, like Hamas itself, explode into the light as something much worse.
+1
Ceiling Cat, forgive me, but there is an error in your recent tweet on Gay’s data:
https://x.com/Evolutionistrue/status/1738613531464151073?s=20
It’s not the DIRECTION of the effect that’s different. It’s the MAGNITUDE. It’s hard to see in the image of her Table 3 from her dissertation, but the effect estimate is -0.004. Then, in her 2001 paper (also a Table 3), it is -0.168. The direction is negative in both, implying a reduction. It’s the magnitude that’s different. This absolutely might be explained by the introduction of covariate variables. If there was no adjustment in her model for her dissertation, but then she added covariates to the model for the paper, the discrepancy in the results highly suggest the univariate model is confounded.
It is normal to compare the univariate and multivariable models. It’s not unusual AT ALL for there to be differences. What is weird is that she wouldn’t share her data and didn’t appear to explain the difference between the univariate and multivariable models.
Look back carefully at what was written in Brunet’s piece. The claim isn’t about the direction reversing. Calls to have her sacked for this, are, IMHO, over the top. Yes, she should be willing to share her data. But the sort of difference she found when adding a covariate is NORMAL. Many data scientists would be able to defend Gay on this charge, which now looks like an utter witch hunt.
Social scientists don’t have the luxury of running experiments, like those in wet labs. Covariates are used to account for possible confounders that would be dealt with were a randomized-controlled trial possible.
This isn’t a scandal except for her refusal to release her data.
Please look back carefully at your tweet.
Unless she claimed to have run the exact same statistical models in her dissertation as her 2001 paper, there is no evidence of scientific fraud here. In fact, it’s normal for people to build on their own work, publishing repeatedly with the same data sets, though an explanation of the differences in findings would be standard for one to report.
This doesn’t mean she didn’t do something dubious, but this attempt to hang her honestly does look trivial. And I will think so unless it is proven that she fabricated something. Her not explaining the differences isn’t fraud. It’s stupid.
Sorry so many comments from me here, Jerry. I’ll stop after this. If you end up writing about Gay’s data in another post, I’ll share my thoughts there. I have similar training to the scientist (Jonatan Pallesen) who went through her paper in the tweet you made, only I’m also trained in causal inference models. I think we should all be more judicious and be careful not to give in to confirmation bias. I think Gay should resign. I just don’t think that this particular attempt to prove she’s a fraud or promoted unfairly is sound.
Again, sorry for dominating this feed.
Roz, I lack content expertise here but I’m trying to be an informed consumer of statistical analysis. I hope you’ll bear with me as I try to work out if the discrepancy between her dissertation and the later paper is a cause for concern.
I read Brunet’s article, https://www.dossier.today/p/these-scholars-asked-claudine-gay and the embedded pdf Herronshotts Polmeth2002 (by Herron and Shotts) which describes the logical inconsistencies in the two-stage ecological inference -> regression (EI-R) technique, which Gay used in her 2001 paper. Footnote 2 in the pdf refers to this shortcoming in her paper that showed the 16.8% reduction in white voter turnout attributed to a black candidate, compared to the Missouri state average (and which was a negligible 0.1% reduction in the analysis of the same election in her earlier dissertation.) (Of note, the paper included analysis of several more contests with black candidates than she analyzed in her dissertation, most also drew lower white turnouts.)
As I understand it, researchers use this EI-R approach because it is not possible to measure voter turnout by race if the voter registration database doesn’t capture the race of each registrant. All they have to go on is is the race-blind voter turnout by precinct and the racial composition of each precinct from the census. They have to use an ecological inference model to estimate from those two data in each precinct what the voter turnout for each racial grouping was. This inference relies on certain assumptions about the absence of aggregation bias which may then have to be contradicted in the subsequent regression of imputed white turnout against imputed black turnout, rendering the results invalid. (The pdf explains this in detail and describes an alternative one-stage method of statistical analysis that avoids this logical fallacy, but which Gay did not use in her 2001 paper.)
We see this “ecological fallacy” as it’s called in medical sociology, e.g., in studies showing that Covid death rates were higher in Trump states than in Biden states. The unsupported inference invited is that those excess deaths occurred disproportionately in Trump voters. A moment’s reflection shows that you can’t know how a person who died of Covid voted. You make the ecological assumption that the proportion of deaths who were Trump voters (unknown) was the same as the proportion of voters who were Trump voters (known.) But there are empiric reasons to doubt that this is so. Black people (who voted heavily for Biden) figured disproportionately in the death toll and did so even in Trump states.
In any event, Herron and Shotts argue that Gay’s 2001 results claiming that black candidates caused significantly lower white turnout in Missouri are not valid, never mind what she found in her original dissertation.
So as not to make this post too long, I’m going to split it, to ask what that finding means re academic misconduct.
Part 2
The 1994 Bill Clay contest in Missouri attracted an estimated 0.4% reduction in white turnout as analyzed in Gay’s dissertation. From the standard error of 1.0 we infer that this result was not significantly different from zero. This became a statistically significant 16.8% reduction when analyzed for her 2001 paper, and several other contests studied in the paper showed a similar effect (although some didn’t.) We know Gay used the EI-R method in 2001 but not what she used for her dissertation.
Here’s where I get confused. My understanding of multivariate analysis in non-experimental research is that you progressively introduce potentially explanatory variables into the equation to see if statistically significant associations remain significant after controlling for these now-included confounding variables. E.g., women have higher risk of dying after heart attack than men in univariate analysis where sex is the independent variable. But if you include age in a multivariate analysis — women are (or used to be) much older than men when they start getting heart attacks — the association of death with sex is found to be spurious when thus controlled for age.
It’s not my experience in my field that significant associations emerge when new explanatory variables are added into a multivariate analysis of a relationship that , on univariate analysis, found no associations. So for -0.004 to become -0.168 is a surprise. Nonetheless, it might well be that she simply used what she hoped was a more powerful method of analysis when she analyzed, de novo, the election results for her 2001 paper and got different results from whatever she used in her dissertation. (That this analytic approach may be invalid, as per Herron and Shotts, is a separate issue. They do point out that PoliSci researchers often use the EI-R method because it tends to generate more “positive” results which are publishable and newsworthy even if spurious. )
So I agree with you that the discrepant results are not on their face evidence of misconduct. I’d go further and say that even if the signs of the two results were opposite, that would be OK. The dissertation result of -0.004 is consistent (95% confidence interval) with a true result as large as +0.016. But I also agree that she should make her original data available. It would be interesting to analyze the election results using a method free of internal logical inconsistencies.
I’ve got a yummy bag of Pfeffernüsse cookies for Xmas along with two Stollen. I love German Xmas treats and German treats in general. I’m sure it isn’t cultural appropriation because white people don’t count in it as we were born with the sin of racism that will never wash off just like the babies with those little black dots of original sin on their souls.
WOW first time I’ve gotten a notification of a reply to my comment in years, though the notification is phrased a bit ungrammatically: “ Hey Merilee,
We happy to let you know someone replied to your comment on post – Saturday: Hili dialogue
You can view your comment reply by clicking on the link below:
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/?p=498178#comment-2073455”
So glad they happy😹
“Once a darling of progressives who positioned himself as a champion of the underdog and highlighted his association with Senator Bernie Sanders, the self-described democratic socialist from Vermont, Mr. Fetterman now has a less rosy view of the left and says the label of “progressive” does not fit him anymore.”
I think this description is unfair (even though Fetterman himself rejects the “progressive” label now). Fetterman is still a champion of the underdog-he just isn’t a champion of whiny college students who’ve been reading too much Judith Butler. His combination of old-fashioned liberalism, economic populism, and a rejection of wokeness is a good model for the Democratic Party as a whole. He might even make a good President (if Trump doesn’t destroy democracy.)