Welcome to Friday, the last one in August: it’s August 28, 2026 and National Bow Tie Day. I’ve worn one only at a prom, and that was years ago.
Here’s a Doctor Who video featuring bow ties (two “crackers of ties”), but it’s even better because Dr. Who and his assistant (played by Karen Gillan) transport Vincent van Gogh to the future so he can see (at the Musée d’Orsay) that he became posthumously famous and beloved, even though during his lifetime he was obscure and neglected. This clip always makes me tear up—like Vincent.
Yes, I know I’ve posted this before, but it’s worth more than one look. On a second look you may notice, for example, how Vincent is taken aback by seeing a Monet: for van Gogh knew Monet’s Impressionist paintings well and admired them.
It’s also National Cherry Turnovers Day and Red Wine Day (you know what to do).
There’s again a subtly moving Google Doodle gif honoring the National Parks (this one is Yosemite). Click to see where it goes:
As I’ve intimated, traffic, or at least comments on this site, have slowed, and if you want it to continue at least let me know you’re reading. I know the difficulties of commenting on a phone, but you shouldn’t be reading this on a phone!
Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the August 28 Wikipedia page.
Da Nooz:
*A giant flood devastated parts of Nepal and Tibet on Wednesday and Thursday, likely killing over 2,000 people, including many visitors (the area is popular with tourists). The cause of the flood isn’t yet known but was probably triggered by a landslide (article archived here).
Emergency workers and helicopters scoured steep Himalayan valleys on Thursday in a desperate search for survivors after a torrent of water, mud and ice killed hundreds — and perhaps many more — as it swept through a river valley that runs through Tibet and Nepal. More than 1,400 people were still missing.
A New York Times reporter and photographer who traveled to the region with rescuers found miles of devastation and weeping residents unsure if their families and neighbors would ever be found. In one Nepalese village, a man described what sounded like a thunderclap before a wave of muddy water crashed into his home, carrying away his wife and two daughters. “They all died and I lived,” he said, adding that he still clung to a slim hope they had somehow survived.
The flood that tore through the remote river valley in northern Nepal and the Tibet region of China caught many of its victims without warning. Its speed and force destroyed roads and bridges, toppled buildings and severed communications — all of which were complicating rescue efforts.
Scientists said the flood was probably unleashed by a massive rock landslide that coincided with the collapse of a glacier high in the mountains near the border on Wednesday morning, unleashing a wall of water that surged down the Bhotekoshi and Trishuli rivers. Survivors described lightning fast floodwaters laden with debris that shattered houses and quickly swallowed up people trapped in buildings or as they fled on foot.
Warming temperatures caused by climate change may have destabilized the rock face and precipitated the disaster, scientists said, though they added it was too early to determine a precise cause.
Images captured the flood’s terrifying speed and force, and Times journalists traveling with the Nepali military on Thursday surveyed the devastating aftermath. One highway, near the Bhotekoshi River, had mostly disappeared. Scars on hillsides showed that in some places the river had risen as high as 650 feet during the flood.
Shisir Khanal, Nepal’s foreign minister, called the flood “one of the largest natural disasters we have experienced in recent memory.”
Here’s a photo shown by the NYT and credited as “Composite 3D image from Google Earth.” Although I’ve been to Nepal three times, trekking in the Himalayas, this is one area I never visited.
And here are 12 minutes of news videos, with some really scary video of the flooding. At the beginning, look at at those buses tossed about like rubber ducks by the massive wall of water! And all those people you seei n that segment are probably dead as well.
*It seems to me that Republicans are hell-bent on indicting Anthony Fauci for accusations that he lied about U.S.-funded research on viruses in the Wuhan institute, and that he tried to suppress any evidence that Covid came from a lab leak. When he testified before Congress about all this in early August, Fauci took the Fifth (refused to testify on the grounds that it might incriminate him) over 100 times, leading to the Republican-majority Senate Homeland Security Committee to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress. Now, as the WSJ reports, efforts to indict Fauci for pleading the Fifth appear to have stalled, despite Rand Paul’s desire to see Fauci behind bars.
A Republican push to prosecute Dr. Anthony Fauci for contempt of Congress has stalled as the Trump administration questions whether the legal approach supports an indictment by the Justice Department.
Three weeks after a GOP-led Senate committee voted to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress, some administration officials are skeptical that the current approach is procedurally sound enough to indict him for failing to answer questions before lawmakers, according to people familiar with the matter.
The Aug. 6 contempt vote was brought by Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.), a longtime Fauci critic. He sought to bypass the Senate’s customary full-floor vote by having Vice President JD Vance certify the resolution, allowing him to refer it directly to the Justice Department for possible prosecution.
Paul, who has said Fauci should go to prison, pushed a contempt vote against the 85-year-old former public-health official after he declined to answer questions before Paul’s committee over his handling of the Covid-19 pandemic. The contempt resolution, which passed on a party-line vote, would traditionally be considered by the full Senate. Given his resolution would almost certainly fail to meet a 60-vote threshold to pass, Paul’s measure called on Vance to certify it in his capacity as Senate president.
But as of early Tuesday, people familiar with the matter said that Vance’s office had yet to receive a document to certify. Paul’s office sent the report to the vice president late Tuesday, according to people familiar with the process, following repeated inquiries from The Wall Street Journal about its status. The Justice Department, which received a letter from Paul the day of the vote laying out the committee’s case against Fauci, has yet to receive a formal referral, a person familiar with the matter said. And President Trump hasn’t determined whether he wants the Justice Department to act on the referral, according to people familiar with the discussions, who say the issue hasn’t been a high priority for the president.
Paul’s move put the White House in a tough situation. While Trump has criticized Fauci, certifying the document could force the White House to defend it in court, where some administration officials say it might not survive a motion to dismiss without a full Senate vote.
This smacks of a vendetta. Yes, Fauci did lean on scientists to oppose the lab-leak hypothesis when they were writing a paper, and I consider that bad behavior. But I don’t see it as criminal behavior, and nothing I’ve read about him indicates that he should be indicted—unless he lied under oath. Even so, the guy is 85 years old and, as the article notes, a contempt resolution would be unlikely to pass a full Senate vote. The J.D. Vance maneuver circumvented normal procedure. Leave the old dude alone!
*A distressing (for me) report from the Free Press: “Are Americans losing faith in capitalism? We asked them.” The FP partnered with the think tank Populace to survey Americans of different ages and political stripes, and here are the main results:
A big question has dominated political debate in this year’s primary elections. With the rise of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), who have racked up victories from New York and Pennsylvania to Colorado and Florida, our elections have become a referendum on our economic system. So we decided to ask Americans what they’re thinking about capitalism versus socialism.
The results suggest that the public is feeling down about capitalism but is still wary of full-blown socialism. And many are deciding whether a few socialist candidates might help shake up the system. We found that:
—Just a third of Americans privately say they have a positive view of capitalism.
—Less than half of Republicans privately express a positive view of capitalism, though two-thirds support it in public.
—Almost half of women privately say they would consider voting for a socialist.
—Nearly a third of Gen Z publicly say that America would be better off as a socialist country, but only 14 percent say so in private.
—The majority of blacks publicly say capitalism is the cause of America’s social ills, but only 37 percent say so privately.
—Of people earning more than $150,000 a year, 58 percent privately say they are open to voting for a socialist, though only 42 percent say so publicly.
They add this, too:
We asked other questions too—about Israel and antisemitism, AI and data centers, income inequality, and more. Stay tuned for our next batch of results next week.
I’m not looking forward to the data on Israel! Anyway, you can read the methodology here and how they distinguished public from private opinions. It’s a relatively small survey. Here’s what they see as most telling:
While many Americans express a low view of capitalism, and a significant share say they’re open to socialist candidates, only a very small share would prefer to adopt socialism altogether. In public, merely 18 percent say America would be better off socialist. In private, support drops to a meager 11 percent.
The younger the respondent, the more willing they are to embrace socialism in public. Nearly a third of Gen Z say publicly that America should adopt socialism, along with more than a fifth of millennials. Yet support drops considerably in private, to 14 percent among Gen Z and 10 percent among millennials. Meanwhile, Boomers are equally opposed in public and private, standing pat at only 7 percent support.
The most notable result of all may be the public-private gap among the left. Thirty-eight percent of liberals and 28 percent of Democrats say publicly that a switch to socialism would be good for the country. But in private, the left’s faith in socialism wanes by double digits. Only 22 percent of liberals and 14 percent of Democrats want America to trade in its current economic system in favor of a fully socialist one.
I wonder if those who think American should “adopt socialism” know what that really entails. Surely the approbation for socialist candidates is not the same as a full-hearted embrace of socialism, and I’d like to know the different (and undoubtedly diverse) construals of “socialism”. Do the respondents know that, classically, it means that the state owns all the means of production and distribution? I think the poll largely reflects a widespread ignorance about “socialism”.
*Also depressing: a NYT op-ed by former Time magazine writer Charlotte Alter, “What are moderate Democrats for?” , which, tellingly changed its title yesterday afternoon to “What ever happened to the young, exciting, moderate Democrats?” (article archived here). Since I’m one, I want to know. Alter’s example of someone who should be exciting all of us is Seth Moulton, a Congressman from Massachusetts who’s running for a Senatorial seat this fall. Alter’s thesis is that moderate Democrats, in contrast to “progressives,” haven’t laid out what they stand for, or what changes they want to make.
Now a six-term congressman, [Moultin is] running for Senate in Massachusetts’s Sept. 1 primary against the incumbent, Ed Markey. It doesn’t seem to be going well.
You’d think this would be Mr. Moulton’s moment. Democratic voters are in an anti-incumbent, anti-establishment mood, and the disaster of Joe Biden in 2024 has made them increasingly nervous about aging candidates. Yet polls show Mr. Moulton losing by double digits to Mr. Markey, an 80-year-old who has been in Washington for half a century.
Mr. Moulton’s bid exposes the dilemma of the center-left in a year when progressives seem to be notching win after win. Moderate Democrats must distinguish themselves from the left without antagonizing the energized Democratic base. They’re struggling to articulate a message of change that isn’t necessarily progressive change. And the 2024 fiasco has made it harder to argue that moderation is the only way to win elections.
Democrats are not “screaming that we want socialists,” as Mr. Moulton pointed out to me in an interview. Instead, he said, “there’s a whole bunch of Democrats saying, ‘The party establishment is failing us.’” But progressive Democrats do have a clarity advantage: American voters know what they stand for, whether they like it or not. Center-left candidates tend to offer more pragmatic versions of progressive ideas or wonky political strategies to achieve incremental change. This forces voters to make exhausting calculations about how to actually get things done.
. . . It’s always been clear what Mr. Moulton is against: the geriatric Washington establishment, the inertia of incumbency, whichever oldster happens to be in charge. But he’s been so busy fighting the establishment, he hasn’t explained precisely what he was fighting for.
. . . So while I had Mr. Moulton on the phone, I asked him: What does his campaign stand for, besides a new generation of leadership?
“Well, I mean, it’s a new generation of ideas,” he said. Even though he and Mr. Markey have many of the same goals, Mr. Moulton argued that he is more pragmatic. Mr. Markey is running on Medicare for all, while Mr. Moulton favors an expanded public health care option. The housing crisis in Massachusetts, Mr. Moulton said, means that “obviously, whatever Senator Markey has been doing or not doing with regards to housing hasn’t worked.” He said that expanded rail transit could improve housing affordability and that Mr. Markey’s proposed transportation plan is out of the “1910s.”
None of this is particularly new or inspiring.
But what if we consider people other than Moulton? What about Pete Buttigieg? What about Gretchen Whitman? And even what about my own Governor, J. B. Pritzker? Alter may be right that no centrist Democrat has articulated a particularly stirring message, but I’d rather vote for one of them than for a “progressive” who has articulated a disturbing message, like AOC.
*More Woke Canada, and this reprehensible: the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) has reminded its staff and journalists not to refer to the 9/11 attacks as “terrorist” attacks, as the word “terrorist” is “loaded” and “controversial,” supposedly impeding journalism (h/t Jeff).
With the 25th anniversary of 9/11 on the horizon, the CBC has circulated a memo to reporters and editors across all its news platforms reminding them not to refer to the attacks that claimed 3,000 lives and changed the modern world as “terrorist attacks.”
The missive from the broadcaster’s journalistic standards and practices office, a copy of which was obtained by National Post, includes a section of the “longstanding language guidance” on the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks carried out by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda.
“Do not refer to the Sept. 11 attacks as terrorist attacks,” it reads about halfway through, with the first part bolded and the last two words linking back to the CBC’s internal language guide.
. . . Kerry Kelly, a public affairs spokesperson for CBC, told National Post in an email that “it is wholly inaccurate to state our journalists have been urged to declare that this was not a terrorist act.”
Rather, she said the memo was a regular reminder about adhering to the CBC’s language guide for “the terms ‘terrorist’ and ‘terrorism.’
“CBC preferences use of these words with attribution to credible sources, a practice shared by many of the world’s top journalistic organizations,” Kelly wrote, pointing to an October 2023 blog by Brodie Fenlon, CBC News editor in chief and general manager.
He was writing in response to a similarly leaked memo to staff regarding the use of the same words in reporting about Hamas’s terrorist attacks on Israel that had occurred a week earlier.
Staff will use the terms, he said, but they will always be “attributed to government officials, authorities, experts and politicians.”
“But CBC News does not itself designate specific groups as terrorists, or specific acts as terrorism, regardless of the region or the events, because these words are so loaded with meaning, politics and emotion that they can end up being impediments to our journalism,” Fenlon said, noting the policy has existed for decades and many news outlets employ their own.
The post included a portion of the language guide, which urges employees to “exercise extreme caution before using the words terrorist or terrorism” because they can be “highly contested” in some instances and potentially raise questions about the CBC’s “consistency and impartiality” in covering other attacks.
Well, language evolves, but this is not a natural evolution of language; it’s an attempt by the CBC to take the “terror” out of people who, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, are “[People] who who [use] violent and intimidating methods in the pursuit of political aims; esp. a member of a clandestine or expatriate organization aiming to coerce an established government by acts of violence against it or its subjects.” Is that a biased definition?
The OED adds that the word “is generally considered to be derogatory; hence the use of terms such as partisan, freedom fighter, etc., by those who approve the actions of the individuals concerned.” DUH! So what word are you going to use? “Freedom fighter” for the pilots of 9/11? I’m sure the CBC doesn’t do that, but it probably says stuff like “Hamas, generally considered by Western governments to be a terrorist organization.”
Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Andrzej is experiencing something similar to me:
Hili: Retirement is the busiest time of your life.
Andrzej: I get that feeling too, but since no one pays me for it, I can call it fun.
In Polish:
Hili: Emerytura to najbardziej pracowity okres w twoim życiu.
Ja: Też mam takie wrażenie, ale ponieważ nikt mi za to nie płaci mogę to nazwać zabawą.
*******************
From Jesus of the Day:
From Funny and Strange Signs:
From Weird, Fantastic, Beautiful and Odd: a honey badger who doesn’t give a toss:
It’s hard to believe this stuff, but that’s the Iranian theocracy. Read the whole tweet, along with Masih’s reply:
“So here is my answer to the mullah, in simple words: Women don’t need to cover themselves to control men’s behavior. Men need to control themselves.”
A cleric in Iran just announced that if a woman gets to choose her own clothes, then a man gets the right to rape her.
Do not scroll past that. Read it twice.
That is not a slip of the tongue. That is not a fringe opinion from the back of a mosque. That is Kazem Rohbakhsh an… pic.twitter.com/ik5fpapOds
— Masih Alinejad (@AlinejadMasih) August 27, 2026
From Malcolm, eight life lessons from cats (plus a coda); sound up:
Follow these life lessons and surely you’ll live a happier life 🤣 pic.twitter.com/CEi7x5n9Dt
— We don’t deserve cats 😺 (@catsareblessing) August 8, 2026
The Number Ten Cat corrects Trump’s latest stupid attempt at renaming:
“Ontario” is a Native American word. It’s from the Iroquoian language of the Wyandot people and means sparkling water.
“America” is from the name of Italian explorer Amerigo Vespucci. https://t.co/5Xd1HUzYlY— Larry the Cat (@Number10cat) August 27, 2026
From Jeff Maurer. I didn’t know that it was a custom to change Wikipedia photos after someone dies:
I hope they do that for me. And I mean that photo, of Dolly Parton — she looks light years better than I ever will. https://t.co/PwPfJ2O3AM
— Jeff Maurer (@JeffMightBWrong) August 27, 2026
Two from my feed. First, the renaming from the White House’s mouth. The name change will apply only to U.S. government use, not to other countries’ usage:
EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY: Lake Ontario is renamed to LAKE AMERICA! 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/ZFww8PexiW
— The White House (@WhiteHouse) August 27, 2026
I’m sure Dolly would be vastly amused by this:
CNN forced to apologize to Dolly Parton’s family for using photo of Vegas impersonator in covering icon’s death https://t.co/L6M20jULjY pic.twitter.com/QwYd0ulhCC
— New York Post (@nypost) August 27, 2026
One I reposted from The Auschwitz Memorial:
This French Jewish boy was gassed to death as soon as he arrived in Auschwitz. He was four years old and would have been 89 today had he lived. https://t.co/QNAovhMO3O
— Jerry Coyne (@Evolutionistrue) August 28, 2026
And one from Doctor Cobb, showing a male elk apparently having a dream:
This elk appears to be dreaming! About a pristine lake? About finding an apple orchard? About being late for school?#mammals #nature #deer #love #trailcam #Seattle #wildanimals #goodmorning #PNW #nokings #wildlife #elk
— Menestune (@menestune.bsky.social) 2026-08-26T13:48:16.714Z
It’s not a phone, it’s a computer!
😁
Ha! It is, Bryan, but its tactile human interface is soooo tiny for us arthritic alte kockers.
Jerry, I read WEIT daily, but have commented less these days for two main reasons: 1. The other readers are in many cases real subject matters experts and add meat, whereas I would add only half-educated opinion except in areas such as aerospace or k-12 ed, where I do feel free to comment; so I defer to them in other areas, and 2. I do not want to violate the 10% guidance of da roolz by too much, sometimes holding back until I see other comments to use my 10% most judiciously, but then the end of the day has come and I have yet to comment.
You bring an amazing range of information to your readers and I have no idea how you can do it day in and day out. But please continue as long as you are comfortable doing it.
Oh and ps, I must say Fauci is a true American hero both in the science he has personally participated in and that fundamental research he has supported over the years. These republicans are nothing but bullies. I cannot put into words how difficult it is for a lone civil servant to absorb the constant threat of the weight of the entire federal government apparatus.
Hear, hear! To paragraphs 2 and 3, Jim – you said it far better than I could; also, mine would be pushing it to say quarter-educated opinion.
Excellent response Jim.
I love the Van Gogh clip. If you go to Arles they have signs around town showing where some of his pictures were painted. My favorite is one near the Rhone with a small tree in it. The tree is still there, but is very large.
I first saw that Dr Who clip on this website some time ago. I love it. If not for your website I would never have known about this or many other things.
… “If not for your website I would never have known about this or many other things.”
well put.
Dr. Coyne, still reading, after all these years. Thank you.
I read WEIT and the comments every day. Since the comments on Israel seem uniformly one-sided, I will not comment for fear of being banned (in case that would prevent me from having access to the other things that are usually interesting).
One-sided yes, on the side of liberal civilization against barbarism.
As for Jim above, hear, hear! In spades!!
Yes, the ban policy is, to me at least, very unclear. There is no warning, no explanation, your comments just suddenly stop appearing. [Sarcasm and weird humor should probably be strictly labeled.] But it is temporary (6 months to a year?).
I’m ambivalent about labelling, and ‘weird’ is in the mind of the beholder. I generally avoid labelling weird humour, “Hey, woo-hoo, that was a joke; get it?; hahaha” for fairly obvious reasons; and, no harm, no foul. With sarcasm, for those who do not get it and take offence at the literal meaning, some of them IMO deserve to be offended (which is one of the features of sarcasm), but there is always the risk to innocent bystanders. I try to strike a balance, but it’s a fallible judgement call.
My gripe about moderation is that the automated criteria for kicking a post into moderation is opaque, to me at least. I would prefer having the grading rubric be public knowledge (like Da Roolz are), and/or having the automated message say roughly why some ISTM inoffensive comment got kicked to moderation.
Moderation is essential to enable sensible discussions and arguments amidst the howling Internet chaos, and I would much rather this site erred on the side of over- rather than under-moderation.
It might seem one-sided, but the perspective is a welcome counterpoint to the, not necessarily well informed, outlook provided by the main media sources that I typically encounter. I admire JAC’s courage in representing his point of view, as well as those of some Israeli outlets, flames-be-damned.
Since Jerry invites comments, here’s a comment (though some of us likely over-comment under Da Roolz as it is 😵💫).
Capitalism is a victim of its own success. It produces such prosperity and security that everyone (in Western capitalist countries) is now both wealthy and utterly coddled (compared to any other time/place/system).
And like a 5-yr-old who takes being looked after by its parents for granted, they take that wealth for granted. They don’t realise that it is (in historical terms) highly unusual and that they should greatly value the system that produces it. Instead, again a bit like a 5-yr-old railing against its parents, they blame “the system” for every little imperfection and think that they know better.
I would add that Americans, in general, and the current generation of youths, in particular, are ignorant of other countries and of history. If you only know one place, then, obviously, it’s the worst place you know. I happened to read this quote last night, from Pierre vergniaud, a member of the French Convention, who went to the guillotine with the other Girondists: “If you destroy commerce, you decree famine.” The truth of that has been demonstrated repeatedly.
Yes, Coel. Many of our problems are caused by the abundance our system has provided over our lifetimes and (by the data) increasing wealth.
They can be problems for sure but they’re so much better than the reverse (problems of want, poverty war.)
D.A.
NYC
Excellent comment by Coel. I also agree with Jerry that these poll questions about socialism, what are we supposed to do with the answers as the term socialism is undefined in these questions?
Gen-Z socialism, from Zohran to Zack and beyond. The Economist, June 6, 2026
The world’s leftists are embracing a new set of economic ideas
https://archive.ph/0tFkk
Voters are, on paper, less socialist than a few years ago. After jumping to a peak of 5% in 2018-21, the share of Americans who described themselves as “extremely liberal” has fallen to 3.4%. Yet this is not because people have become more right-wing, but because they have lost interest in -isms. A poll by Harvard University’s Institute of Politics found that among young Americans, support for both capitalism and socialism fell sharply between 2020 and 2025 (see chart 4).
In place of ideology, people want someone to raise their incomes and cut their costs. Not since 1975 have so many Americans wanted government action to “improve the standard of living” of the poor, according to the General Social Survey, a long-running poll. They want someone to stop AI from wrecking society.
That’s a distinct possibility. Here’s an alternate take:
I read a big (tens of thousands of subscribers) left leaning political site. Articles get hundreds of comments. I see little interest in socialism, per se. But I do see a strong interest in universal healthcare. That does lead to some people supporting candidates like El-Sayed in Michigan.
Also, I think most subscribers are not young. Many are retired. This isn’t surprising: it’s not free, and older, retired people have more money and time.
It’s possible that the people in the survey are young, and they have a very different situation.
The cost of housing is very high compared to what it was when I was young. Many are priced out. In my city a real estate agent told me young people cannot buy without substantial parental help. I suspect this is contributing to radicalism.
Why housing is so expensive is unclear. In Canada it seems at least partly connected to an over ambitious immigration plan and it’s simple supply and demand.
I believe the appropriate shorthand term is “fat and lazy”.
In the wake of the Orange One’s (attempt at) renaming of Lake Ontario to Lake America, here a few suggestions for Canada to rename the Great Lakes:
Lake Ontario –> Lac Maison-Blanche flambé
Lake Superior –> Lake Up Above America
Lake Erie –> Lake South Toronto
Lake Michigan –> Lac Vengeance du Carney
Lake Huron –> Lac Oie du Canada
Trump is about to name Lake Erie after himself. He is going to add a second “E” to the beginning of the name.
Funny how the “Can’t change any names from the 19th century because history” crowd has no problem with what Trump is doing.
I am surprised that the U.S. president, a noted scholar, does not appear to know that the hated Canadian province of Ontario was named after the lake that he just renamed. Does that mean the U.S. will also rename that province to “America”? I am sure that his first choice was to have both the lake and province be known as “Donald J. Trump”. (Or simply Lake Trump).
Hi Jerry,
Lake America Great Again?
I’m still reading. Please keep going!
😀
I’ve seen the Van Gogh clip many, many times. It’s beautiful.
I’m reading. I don’t comment often. Doesn’t the website track visits to posts? I often click on them instead of tracing them from the main page, in the hope that the click gets registered somewhere. Woulda’t that be more indicative of readership than comments?
I read you every day and make a point to look at the Auschwitz Memorial picture. I’m calling myself a classical liberal now because the Democratic Party has left me. I’ll vote for them, though.
A vendetta implies that the pursuit is unjust. Pretty sure the pursuit of justice against Fauci is just. That will be for courts to determine, though.
I have never commented before, but I read this blog every day and really enjoy it. I agree with your take on most things, and certainly the important ones. I can’t talk politics with my kids anymore (all 40 something professionals) as they continue to move farther and farther to the left. I still consider myself more or less center left. Particularly disappointing is their view of the whole Hamas/Israel conflict. Anyway, thanks and keep it up.
What will Trump do when he discovers that the new Lake America is the smallest of the Great Lakes? That Lake Superior is, um, far superior (in size, and as we all know, size does matter) to Lake America? Some senior advisors are gonna have to come up with new names, by golly.
Masih. She can post about atrocities 24/7, and the world does not care. I do care, and many of my friends care, and there is at least one website that reposts what she reports, and the world does not care. Well, we always knew that most people in the world do not care about things that are far away from them; perhaps that is human nature. But these days, we have well-funded organizations dedicated to human rights and abolition of abuses. Some of these organizations are quite large and have many supporters. And they do not care about the things that Masih posts. We do not hear a peep from them, even though Masih (and others like her) provide ample evidence that the abuse is ongoing and large-scale.
Some of these organizations were founded by people with a specific, narrow agenda. But others were founded by people with real concern for human rights, and have degenerated into organizations simply following the latest fad (and we know what that is)—even though that fad may be nowhere near the abuse scale happening elsewhere. Such is not concern for human rights—it is virtue signalling.
I hope that Masih and others like her stay strong. They are heroes in every sense of the word. They are willing to endanger their own lives for others. I brooks say that they are worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize, but in this era, I am not sure that the Nobel Peace Prize is worthy of them.
Dang, I tried to edit, but something went wrong with my connection.
I wanted to add that I try to read this site every day—I enjoy it ceremoniously, and would comment even more but for the Dread Roolz (which make sense, and are one of the reasons that the site is so enjoyable).
We should all appreciate that doing this every day, and maintaining the site, are not a small amount of work. For anyone with any doubts about the importance of this site, just take a look at the issues promoted here. First of all, Evolution, and science in general—at a time when society is questioning the very things that are the source of human advancement. Second of all, issues like antisemitism, at a time when open antisemitism is becoming fashionable. And then there is Masih and others human rights issues that are largely ignored by the world. And the nature photos are fantastic-thanks to all those who send them, and to Jerry for hosting them. (I would be happy to send some of my pictures, but I am such a terrible photographer that they would not pass threshold.) And the quirky stuff like funny signs always make me laugh. Finally, the posts about food, cats, and ducks, not necessarily in that order. I like all that stuff, and many of the people who post here have expressed similar sentiments.
Thank you Jerry, for your efforts, keep up the good work. Keep up in good health, and especially pay attention to your digitus tertius so you can respond to those who find fault with the site.
Yes! Starwolf to all of the “meat and potatoes” in both of your posts here; and as far as what trump will do when he finds out that he has renamed the smallest lake, he will simply do what he always does: lie time after time and say its the biggest until his low information supporters believe it.
I second everything Starwolf wrote. Thanks Jerry.
I’m juuuust gonna put in a
“+1”
b/c it annoys the boss.
And yes, I am a stinker!
🙂
D.A.
NYC
What is so strange to me is how certain great tragedies from far away receive little to no attention, while the tragedies in Gaza seems to have bent the world. On that one, I blame Hamas, but “the world” seems to have a different perspective on that.
Didn’t you hear, Mark? Ghaazah is actually located a few miles of off Long Island, NY, off LA, just north of Sydney and nearly at the heart of Toronto. And as for Londonistan: totally Pal.
We’re -all- crying over Ghaaazah now.
D.A.
NYC
I agree with your sentiments – thanks for expressing them so clearly.
One minor quibble, however. Lake Ontario may be the smallest of the Great Lakes in surface area, but Lake Erie is shallower and thus has only about one third of Lake Ontario’s volume.
Highly unlikely that Trump would look beyond the surface, I realize.
“Lake America” or… WTF? What a mad king moment.
Who TROLLS their best friends?
He’s so reflexively vindictive. Why can’t we get another bunker or a bigger ballroom at the W.H. to distract and keep him busy?
Can we get a cute, 30 year old brunette E. European accented W.H. spokeswoman to give him SOMETHING TO CHASE?
(sigh)
D.A.
NYC
I enjoy and read your posts. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
Every day I marvel at the variety, insight and depth of various topics. Thank you! I am grateful for all your work in putting it together. Your column has become an integral part of my morning awakening. You are our teacher and we hope you will continue to inspire us with wonder.
I read the posts daily.
And let’s not forget that Tim Curry has also moved on. I am waiting for memes about Dolly and Dr. Frank-N-Furter together.
I read this site every day. It’s everything that I hoped for when I first started using the WWW 30 years ago, before the madness of social media and outrage farming. I don’t comment often because I’m not well-versed in science. I come here to learn from my superiors. I restrict my participation to subjects where I can justify claim knowledge, such as law, literature, the splendor of cats, and some pop culture topics.
Alas, not everyone loved Dolly:
https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-906654
Bow ties: Dr. Daniel Griffin, the indefatigable MD whose Clinical Update posts like clockwork on This Week in Virology just past midnight Friday night, wears a bow tie for nearly every podcast. They all have images of mostly viruses or the occasional bacterium. Some must repeat but I don’t recall any. His collection must be vast.
Exceptions – sometimes when he’s on vacation, like on a sailboat or abroad doing humanitarian work in Africa he’s tieless, but he still records a podcast. I don’t think he’s missed a week since I started following at the very start of the pandemic in 2020.
Bow ties are the traditional neckware of MD’s, chemists, and at one time gas station attendants (remember the Texaco man?) Any other occupations come to mind?
And you may remember that Dr Dan started in Covid time (2020) with a simple specific remit to provide a boots on the ground reports on conditions at nyc area hospitals. In the beginning, he would steal a few minutes from rounds by car phone from a hospital parking lot, as a part of the regular weekly TWiV, only later (i do not recall details or when) sliding into a shorter ~30 min, independent TWiV Clinical Update which became a regular weekly affair. And like WEIT, dr dan does not miss a beat, through the miracle of zoom or the like appearing (i think) from Africa, south America, Asia, sailboats, lakehouse vacations…really quietlyincredible.
Thx, I didn’t know/remember how Clinical Update started.
My day doesn’t start until after I have read WEIT and all the comments. I learn so much!
I’m also in awe of the amount of work and time that goes into creating the content daily. Much appreciated!
I read WEIT every morning, all posts and all comments.
I am yet another daily reader but sporadic commenter. My mornings won’t be as rewarding if WEIT disappears before I do.
As for the decreasing support for capitalism, I’d say the increasingly common perception is that it has brought us a society in which the overwhelming majority of the country’s wealth is controlled by an increasingly small fraction of the population. If that perception is accurate (and I believe it is), it is difficult to see a desirable future.
Mega wealth owned by a few, especially if it’s in the form of shareholdings of companies that they founded, is not that significant and causes few problems. A much better indicator of what matters and what affects the economy and society is money spent, turnover.
There are about 100 mega-wealthy people in the US (> $10 Billion), and they will spend about, what, $100 million a year each maybe? (I’m not including share values going up or down if they’re not sold).
That adds up to a turnover of $10 billion or so a year by the mega-rich. That compares to a total US turnover (GDP) of $30 trillion. It’s a trivial proportion, less than a thousandth, that causes no actual problems. In Western capitalist countries, the vast majority of money spent each year is spent by and for the benefit of the broad mass of people.
“Mega wealth owned by a few, especially if it’s in the form of shareholdings of companies that they founded, is not that significant and causes few problems.”
Too early to tell, it’s never happened to this extent before. Well, it did during the Gilded Age, and we know how that turned out. I’m confused why people think wealth disparity in the past, which always led to major societal upheaval (are there examples where it hasn’t?), is different than during this particular present. What’s changed? And perhaps we’ll come to realize “mega wealth…causes few problems,” but good luck convincing the masses even if it’s fact. The wealthy are a very easy scapegoat at the moment, and I don’t see that easing either. Alas, climate change will continue changing the game; that’s the major genesis of black swan events that will keep coming. Nepal, anyone?
I am far from convinced that billionaires are in any way a net benefit for mankind. We’re selfish animals living in and for the now, what can possibly go wrong with people buying anything they damn well want, including governments, courts, media, production, on and on.
Mega wealth would be a problem if it distorted society. So, for example, if half of Ancient Egypt’s labour went into building the Pharoah’s pyramids, or if a third of a feudal society’s labour went into building and supporting the king’s palaces or the church’s cathedrals and monasteries, then that’s a big issue.
How much of your labour went into Jeff Bezos’s mega yachts last year? Likely, the only relevant transactions were when you bought something from Amazon, and were happy with the deal, feeling that you were happy to pay (a rather small amount) for the service you received. This sort of mega wealth, which comes from providing a service or product that large numbers of people want and are happy to pay for, does not seem to me to be a problem. Why would it be?
HOMES —> SHAME
Right. It used to be an anagram of SHMOE. Now it is an anagram of SHAME.
I read WEIT without fail but don’t comment frequently, mostly to restrain myself from my “XKCD: Duty Calls” problem.
I just sent in my ballot for the upcoming Massachusetts primary. Most of the Democratic incumbents (there aren’t any Republican incumbents) in our Congressional delegation are solidly “progressive”, whatever that means. Markey is definitely past his sell-by date but Moulton hasn’t really managed to differentiate himself or inspire in terms of new policies or ideas. In my opinion, Moulton blew it when he retracted his earlier comments against allowing men into girls sports. Apparently the voltage from that particular rail was just too high for him. I think that he could have been much more interesting to more voters had he stood by those comments, but then I’m not an knowitall pundit.
I’m a very loyal follower of WEIT. I am not as articulate and knowledgeable as some of your readers so I don’t comment. I have learned so much from the posts and the comments.
No show can make grown men tear up like Doctor Who. That was a great episode!
Always gets me.
Wow! Look how many comments you’ve gotten so far! Here are a couple more…
I am watching the continuing attack on Anthony Fauci with deep concern. I have concern for Fauci and I have concern for the future of the relationship between science and government. Given that Congress can make anyone miserable they don’t like—and even put that person in prison—why would anyone want to serve? Fauci is an old man who served the nation well for decades. Hounding him to death is no way to honor his contributions.
It’s hard to gauge U.S. public opinion on socialism, as this would require a clear definition and a clear understanding of that definition by those being surveyed. It seems to me that any such survey would suffer from vagueness regarding what is actually being measured. I’d rather surveys ask specific policy questions, such as “Are you in favor of a national healthcare system, whereby the costs are paid though premiums imposed on taxpayers.” Asking about whether one favors “socialism” or “capitalism” won’t really get anywhere unless there’s a shared understanding of what those things mean.
When I read the phrase “exciting, moderate Democrats” the word “oxymoron” immediately came to mind. (Of course, I couldn’t help it.) I associate excitement with novelty, not with moderation, and it may be that others do, too. A moderate Democrat would have to have a very big personality to overcome the appeal of novelty. Bill Clinton had such a personality, but what about the current crop of Democratic hopefuls? The biggest personalities seem to be on the far left.
When I read that the CBC instructed its correspondents not to characterize the 9/11 attackers as “terrorists” I took it to mean that the CBC wanted some of the action in the ongoing pi**ing contest between the U.S. and Canada.
Finally, on Lake America. Can President Trump really rename it? The U.S. doesn’t own the Canadian half of the lake. So maybe the name of the lake changes in the middle. Nobody will pay attention to this nonsense—I hope.
I read your site every day, but rarely comment. Keep it up & thanks!
Me too. Love WEIT.
Jerry,
I’ve read and enjoyed every one of your posts for many years. I very rarely comment because I don’t feel a need to. By the time I read this late in the morning on the west coast one of your other readers has inevitably said exactly what I would have. (And another has said the opposite — the dialog is one of the best features of WEIT).
Please do not interpret a lack of comments as a lack of interest. As long as you’re willing to provide this service for us, it will be enormously appreciated.
We look forward to the CBC describing the 9/11 airplane hijacking operations as mere “Decolonialization”. And today’s younger generation is already aware that “Socialism” has nothing to do with the exploits of the Unified Socialist Party in Venezuela, the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party in Syria, the Socialist Unity Party in East Germany, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in Eurasia. These features of public understanding no doubt follow from higher education’s emphasis on Other Ways of Knowing. The next step in Other Ways, of course, will be general acceptance that a trans-kangaroo is a kangaroo.
I read ~every day, and although I enjoy the posts on American politics and the situation in Israel I have little to say that’s useful or relevant.
On Canadian politics and media on the other hand…
Not calling 9/11 “terrorism” except when some quoted expert uses the word is par for the course at CBC, where the reporters and news editors have to refrain from ordering orange juice at breakfast until someone else specifies that those tart spherical fruits with a tough rind and wedge-shaped sections are “oranges”.
Also since I have nowhere else to report this: I had breakfast yesterday sitting elbow to elbow with the leader of the Green Party of Canada, Elizabeth May! And I’m happy to say she was completely charming. Wrong about almost everything, but a cheery and entertaining conversationalist. Held court for an hour, told stories about getting arrested at a pipeline protest, explained (incorrectly) why Canada is exporting bitumen to the USA, quizzed both my kids about their university and work, then breezed off to do canvassing for a federal by-election next week in my city. Also happy to report that I was well behaved, smiled and nodded, and managed not to contradict her ludicrous claims about politics, economics, and her own party history. Mischief managed.
Good for you Mike! I don’t think I would have been able to be so polite. In the past, I had respect for her and some of the Green Party’s objectives (though I have never voted for them), but after October 7, seeing her stand up in Parliament and rant & rave against Israel, not exactly condoning Hamas, but pretty damn close, I have no use for her. You could practically see the steam coming from her ears as she screamed in that rant. It was embarrassing and also made me upset and angry.
As for the CBC not calling 9/11 terrorism, I have no words…
I read WEIT every day and have learned so much. Today, for example, I delved into the life of honey badgers. I also pause on every single Holocaust picture and say the name of the person. I love Jesus ‘n’ Mo. And of course the cats and ducks, but for me, especially the cats.
Thanks for that Claudia. I have the same habit, inspired by the quotation “You die twice: first, when you take your last breath, second, when your name is spoken for the last time.”
I also look at them and say their name. I think I post more than maybe I should. Thinking about it now, I sure have learned a lot from WEIT.
Ahaha yes Claudia I saw May’s speech in the House in 2024. Awful. Yesterday May proudly told us about having come back to be leader of the Greens to put things in order. I bit my tongue: the Greens in Canada were in disarray because the previous Greens leader Annamie Paul (a black Jewish woman and civil rights lawyer) had been hounded out of the leadership by party members for being insufficiently antisemitic after the October 7th attack by Hamas. [The interim leader was a they/them enby with zero political experience, and the current deputy leader is named Rainbow Eyes (no kidding).] Breakfast with my family didn’t seem like the right time or place to find out whether May herself is an antisemite.
It could have been worse. You could have been breaking your fast with Pierre Poilievre.
“As for the CBC not calling 9/11 terrorism”…
All I could think of is, tell that to all the passengers on board those aircraft, the people in the Twin Towers.
I read you every day and if I happen to miss it because events overtook me, I silently kick myself and get caught up. I would be sad if you stopped your daily posts. Please keep them going as long as you can!
I read WEIT and the comments every day. I have learned much from it. It is my most important news source.
I read WEIT every day. It’s both fun and informative.
The world is full of politicians and ideologues that think they can achieve good ends with the strategic use of misinformation. While this may sometimes achieve short term goals it will almost certainly do more harm in the long term. That misinformation becomes the lens through which many people interpret new information and the ignorance only increases.
What I think the world could use more of is people who understand the significance of truth and who use logic and evidence to expose it as much as possible. That’s what I see here at WEIT nearly 365 days a year.
Jerry, for the record, I read WEIT daily but don’t comment often. Please keep posting.
Not only do I read all of your posts, the contents often become conversations between my husband and myself. I’m a huge fan, very appreciative of the work you do to make the posts, and even though I don’t comment much, I’m reading every single one and grateful when they show up in my inbox.
Does commenting drop off in the summer vacation months the way it does on the weekends?
I read every day. However sometimes I read on my phone….
Though I rarely post, I never miss a Hili Dialogue.
Thanks for all the work you put in to this wonderful site.
I have been reading WEIT regularly (most days) for more than a decade. But I comment very seldom – as a non-scientist South African, it would be difficult to add valuable commentary.
Jerry’s analyses and interpretation of US politics, and especially on Jews/Israel, as well as the comments of many readers, provides me with my most trusted information on those issues.
Thank you, Dr Coyne!
I am reading!
This website is a treasure, and you are too, Dr. Coyne.
Being in Japan, I know whenever I attempt to enter the ‘conversation’ and comment, I’m Johnny-come-lately. Still, I appreciate, and read, all comments.
And I read, and say out loud, pronouncing as best I can, the name of each and every person in the Holocaust post. Heartbreakingly aware you will not run out of names.
Being another Japan resident (and an Australian at that), I too find that so much has been said in the comments before I see them that I am usually at a loss as to how I could contribute in any way. And I, too, read all the comments, appreciate most of them, get slightly irritated by a very few of them, and (almost ritually) say the name of everyone depicted in the Holocaust post. My late mornings/early afternoons would be very different without WEIT.
No one has said it yet, but we all think it, here it goes: I love you Jerry Coyne! and by extension WEIT. Simple as that. I know you can’t keep this assiduous schedule forever, you are human after all (sometimes I have my doubts). But dammit, while you’re producing WEIT, I’m with you all the way.
And I miss your wine reviews. I know, insomnia is a bithc (misspelled on purpose).
I read every post on WEIT every day. Unfortunately, since I’m a night owl, you all have come and gone by the time I get to reading these posts, so posting comments feels like whistling in the wind. Not to mention how intimidating it is.
PCC(e), if by a miracle you actually read this, thank you for all you do here. WEIT is by far my favorite site to read on a daily basis. I hope you will continue for as long as it brings you pleasure.
βPer
Yes, I have a similar problem. Given the structure of my normal schedule I can rarely look at WEIT in the morning, a problem exacerbated by living on the West Coast and being in a time zone behind most of the other readers and commentators. Sometimes when posting a comment I have the feeling that I am just talking to myself. This one is is a prime example.
But I love WEIT and join the sentiment for hoping that it will continue for as long as you enjoy producing it.
Another long term reader but only very occasional commenter… being an Aussie I usually only see your posts 12 hours after they’re made so always feel a little late to the party… most times someone has already posted something along the lines that I would, so I avoid doubling up.
Long story short, this site is wonderful and I hope that it continues for many a year to come!
Regarding Wikipedia photos of celebrities, Wikipedians seem to have a weird obsession with using the most recent available photo of a person in the infobox (the introductory biographical summary box), even if it’s of poorer quality or less flattering than an iconic portrait from 10 years earlier, or from the peak years of the person’s notability. “Newer photo is better” seems to be a more common mantra than “better photo is better”. After a person dies, there seems to be more common sense granted, with high quality/iconic portraits outweighing recency.
Of course there’s a constraint that Wikipedia editors must work with photos that are freely-licensed or in the public domain, so may have limited options to choose from. And somewhat ironically, once a person dies, if there are no free images available they may get the best photo possible, even copyrighted, since fair-use of non-free photos can apply to subjects who are deceased.
I, too, love WEIT. Yesterday was the first day in quite a while that I missed my daily dose! (Here I am, catching up!)