Note to readers about emails

November 14, 2017 • 7:15 am

I am finding it increasingly difficult to keep up with the volume of email from readers, and this will become even more difficult as I travel during the rest of this year. Therefore, I ask readers to follow this protocol until informed otherwise: please do not email me more than once every three or four days. While I appreciate readers sending me items that might interest me—that, in fact, is how I get the subjects of many of my posts—I can’t keep on top of gazillions of emails, and I sometimes find myself distressed as I don’t even have time to acknowledge them all. If you have items to send me, either space them out or collect them in single spaced emails.

There are two exceptions:

1.) If I make typos or other errors in my posts (a frequent occurrence), please inform me ASAP.

2.) Readers’ wildlife photos are always welcome, and you can send them at any time.

Thanks for your consideration. —The Management

Tuesday: Hili dialogue (and Leon monologue)

November 14, 2017 • 6:30 am

https://twitter.com/BoringEnormous/status/930333277453471744

Yes, good morning; it’s Tuesday, November 14, 2017, and National Guacamole Day as well as World Diabetes Day. Just a note: as I’m preparing for a trip and have multiple things to do (haircut, going downtown to get a new battery put in my watch, etc.) posting will be light from tomorrow through Monday of next week, when I return. As always, I do my best.

Whether you look at events, births, or deaths, not much happened on this day in history. On November 14, 1851, Melville’s Moby-Dick was published in the U.S. In 1922, the BBC began radio service in the UK, and 45 years later,  American physicist Theodore Maiman received a patent for the world’s first laser, the ruby laser.

An animated Google Doodle (below) celebrates the 131st anniversary of the hole punch. As the Spectator notes, devices to punch holes in paper were patented as early as 1885, but Google gives the kudos to another patent awarded on this day:

Google gives the honours of having invented the paper punch to the Germans, however. Friedrich Soennecken made his patent for a paper punch device in November 1886.

How many of us still use this device? I don’t think I’ve punched a hole in a decade. It’s a weird thing to celebrate! However, Soennecken invented more than that; as Wikipedia reports, he devised the kind of round, continuous writing that most of us use on the now rare occasions we write by hand:

His main invention is the “round writing” style of calligraphy and the pen nib associated with it.  Round writing was designed to be a visually appealing, standardized style of penmanship which was easy to learn and execute, and Soennecken published books on the topic in several languages.

Here’s the Doodle:

Notables born on this day include Claude Monet (1840), Nobel Laureate Frederick Banting (1891, helped discover insulin), Aaron Copland (1900), Joseph McCarthy (1908), and Prince Charles (1948). Here’s a nice Monet, “Cat Sleeping on a Bed”:

By the way, one of our readers has a cat named Clawed Monet, which I think is the best cat name ever.

Those who fell asleep on this day include Alexander Nevsky (1263), Gottfried Leibniz (1716), Booker T. Washington (1915), Grace Jones (2013, a British “supercentenarian who lived until 23 days shy of her 114th birthday), and NPR correspondent Gwen Ifill (2016).

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, for once Cyrus objects to being encatted:

Cyrus: Sometimes I feel excluded.
A: What from?
Cyrus: From privacy.
In Polish:
Cyrus: Czasem czuje się wykluczony.
Ja: Z czego?
Cyrus: Z prywatności.

There are more troubles for Leon’s family: the contractor engaged to pour the foundation for their wooden house has reneged, and others are also trying to raise the price of the wooden house his staff bought in Southern Poland over a year ago. Do we have a contractor here that can go to Poland to help them out? In the meantime, Leon prowls the uninhabited site:

Leon: Look how nimbly I move!
A tweet sent by Matthew showing a picture from an old calendar. Is this the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy?

Spot the sheep dog:

From Heather Hastie. Look at that joey get in the fooking sack!

https://twitter.com/CUTEST_ANlMALS/status/928882277429411840

And all cats have a little Maru in them:

Dara Ó Briain on science, quackery, and creationism

November 13, 2017 • 6:15 pm

I’m sure I’ve posted this video at some time in the past, but it must have been long ago, and it’s worth seeing again.( Besides, I just watched it.)

Here Irish comedian Dara Ó Briain defends science against various species of quackery. He reminds me a bit of George Carlin, and I love the “get in the fooking sack” bit, which should become part of every skeptic’s vocabulary.

. . .and here he is on creationism. Note the accurate characterization of evolution by natural selection: “The whole point of evolution is that random things just happened, and the useful ones hung around.”

This is not from The Onion

November 13, 2017 • 12:00 pm

Click on the screenshot to go to the article:

If you need confirmation, go here.

Needless to say, Sarsour has no expertise in anti-Semitism (except how to promote it), nor, apparently, do the other panelists. This is one example of how many liberals, among them Jews, promote the undermining of their own principles and well-being for fear of offending another group.

This is similar to a headline that would say “The New School Invites Richard Spencer To Lead Panel on Anti-Racism”.  After all, Spencer says he’s not a racist, just an “identitarian.” And Sarsour claims she’s not anti-Semitic, just anti-Zionist.

When will people wake up and realize that Sarsour is a canny hustler whose real aim is to make herself famous, and gain public office, by playing the Oppression Card (and I don’t mean the Jewish Oppresion card)? And why haven’t they realized this already?

h/t: Orli

NYT op-ed: Black professor says that he’s teaching his children that they can’t be friends with whites

November 13, 2017 • 10:40 am

Here we have a sad example of someone who’s been driven into unreasonable thoughts and behavior by Trump’s election, and puts it on display in the New York Times. (Click on screenshot below to go to the op-ed.) The person is Ekow N. Yankah, an African-American professor at the Benjamin Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University. According to the piece, his wife is “bi-ethnic”, apparently having a white mother and a black father. But that doesn’t stop Yankah from answering the title question with a firm “NO!”

Yankah’s whole attitude towards white people changed with Trump’s election. When he grew up in the Midwest, he didn’t experience much racial tension, but that’s all changed since November. And indeed, while I’m not sure that Trump’s election created racism, it certainly brought the bigots out of their lairs and, to some extent, “normalized” bigotry—or at least made it more public. Yankah cites the lack of attention to the drug problem in black communities, as opposed to the focus on the largely white opioid crisis, as one symptom of racism. But what gets him most is simply Trump’s election and surprising popularity among Americans.

Yes, Trump is a moron, and clearly doesn’t speak out strongly in favor of helping the poor and dispossessed. And yes, a lot of people voted for him, though not all share his bigotry. But to Yankah, the latter doesn’t matter, for he’s decided, based largely on Trump’s election and popularity, that he’s going to teach his sons not only to be wary of white people, but that they can’t be friends with any of them, including children of the many whites who despise Trump.  A few snippets:

Donald Trump’s election has made it clear that I will teach my boys the lesson generations old, one that I for the most part nearly escaped. I will teach them to be cautious, I will teach them suspicion, and I will teach them distrust. Much sooner than I thought I would, I will have to discuss with my boys whether they can truly be friends with white people.

. . . As against our gauzy national hopes, I will teach my boys to have profound doubts that friendship with white people is possible. When they ask, I will teach my sons that their beautiful hue is a fault line. Spare me platitudes of how we are all the same on the inside. I first have to keep my boys safe, and so I will teach them before the world shows them this particular brand of rending, violent, often fatal betrayal.

. . . Of course, the rise of this president has broken bonds on all sides. But for people of color the stakes are different. Imagining we can now be friends across this political line is asking us to ignore our safety and that of our children, to abandon personal regard and self-worth. Only white people can cordon off Mr. Trump’s political meaning, ignore the “unpleasantness” from a position of safety. His election and the year that has followed have fixed the awful thought in my mind too familiar to black Americans: “You can’t trust these people.”

Several times in the article Yankah mentions “safety”, which of course resonates with those of us who hear the same thing in college. For blacks, perhaps, the risks of personal injury are higher since the election, as data do show a rise in hate crimes (many with black victims) since the election. But Yankah doesn’t cite this data, and one gets the feeling that it doesn’t matter: the more public displays of bigotry by Trump and some of his supporters are sufficient to make Yankah fear for his children and, most distressing, to teach them to avoid all white people, regardless of the content of their character. But does befriending a white child really make his children more unsafe? I find that hard to believe.

He goes on:

I do not write this with liberal condescension or glee. My heart is unbearably heavy when I assure you we cannot be friends.

. . . For African-Americans, race has become a proxy not just for politics but also for decency. White faces are swept together, ominous anxiety behind every chance encounter at the airport or smiling white cashier. If they are not clearly allies, they will seem unsafe to me.

Here Yankeh is judging people solely by the color of their skin rather than the content of their character.

At the end, Yankah admits that he does have white friends, but ones that have proven their credibility by having engaged in anti-racist protests. As for the rest of white people, well, his kids will be taught to avoid them. This makes me sad because, living near the University of Chicago’s famous Lab School, which is deeply dedicated to diversity, I often see mixed-race groups of children hanging out, playing sports, and just being friends. (Granted, the Lab School is expensive, though it grants many scholarships, but it’s not a cross section of Chicago’s black community. Still, I’m pretty sure Yankah makes a decent living.)

While I sympathize with Yankah’s increased wariness, and hatred of Trump, and do not have black children (or any children), it seems to me counterproductive to teach your kids to view all white people as the enemy. That will foster a persistent divisiveness in America, a divisiveness even worse than what we see now. If I believe one thing strongly, it’s that bigotry is best dispelled by familiarity: not by withdrawing to within your own group, but by mixing with others and experiencing our common humanity. That sounds Pollyanna-ish, but I feel it strongly. And if Yankah prevents his children from becoming friends with white people—just as when white people teach their kids to not befriend blacks—then we’ll forever form two separate and mutually suspicious groups. Somehow, I think, if Martin Luther King were alive, he’d disagree with Yankah’s views.

NPR goes soft on faith again

November 13, 2017 • 9:00 am

I’ve kvetched before about the religiosity and faitheism flaunted by Scott Simon of National Public Radio (see here and here), and about the soft-on-faith attitude of NPR in general. They rarely seem to give atheists a good hearing, but there’s always plenty of opportunity for the numinous, as in the brief interview below as well as the weekly lachrymose lucubrations of Krista Tippett & Company. This brief NPR interview from Saturday (click on first screenshot to listen and see a transcript) is described like this:

The words “thoughts and prayers” are often criticized after mass shootings. Scott Simon talks to David French of National Review, who argues prayer can be the most rational and effective response.

First of all, I don’t see anything in French’s response that says that prayer is the “most rational and effective” response to mass shootings. If you can find it, show it to me.

UPDATE: Reader Mary, in comment #16 below, shows that the quote comes from French’s article in the National Review. And it’s even worse than you think: here’s one quote from French:

“There’s a bottom line here: Either you believe that God intervenes in the affairs of men or you don’t. And if you do, then you know that no one and nothing is more powerful than the creator of the universe. That means that while prayer is not the only response to evil, it is both the most rational response and, in all likelihood, the most effective response.”

The bit above is simply how NPR wanted to sell the interview. But even a believer can’t possibly think that the most rational and effective response to a mass shooting is to say a prayer. Well, listen for yourself.

While I found this interview weird, what’s more disturbing is the lack of any similar response from nonbelievers, who have plenty to say about “thoughts and prayers” after tragedies. The trope “our thoughts and prayers are with the families” sounds good, for it’s a kind of virtue flaunting, but unless it’s matched with either direct expression of those thoughts to the people affected, or tangible action to comfort them and prevent further tragedy, they are completely useless. The thoughts are of course no more useful than prayers.  But you’ll wait a long time to hear an atheist discuss the issue on NPR. And if you’re like me, hearing the ubiquitous “our thoughts and prayers go out to the families and friends” is like listening to nails on a blackboard.

To be fair, French does say that T&P are best supplemented with actions, but doesn’t add that they’re useless without actions:

For example, French clearly thinks that prayer by itself has an effect, even if it’s not helping those who died go to Heaven.

Right. Well, you know, I think a lot of people, when they critique thoughts and prayers, don’t really realize what people are praying for. You know, what people are praying for is comfort for those who are grieving, courage for people who are responding. You know, they’re even praying for inspiration in ideas and how to confront this crisis.

So you know, it’s – the prayer life of a Christian is something that’s very, very rich. And prayer saturates their lives. And it’s going to be – not just a – it’s going to be an automatic response to a crisis. And it’s going to be something that is – provides great comfort to a great deal – you know, a great many people. So when you’re targeting prayers, a Christian, for example, would look at that and be, frankly, kind of puzzled by it.

How, exactly, does prayer comfort anyone but the person who prays—unless that person expresses condolences to the grieving?

I won’t belabor the rest of the short interview, which is more emblematic of NPR’s uncritical attitude of religion than of arrant stupidity, but I want to show one more exchange between Simon and French:

SIMON: Jeannie Gaffigan, the comedy writer and producer who has been publicly battling a brain tumor and happens to be a person of faith, this week tweeted, I’m living proof that prayer works. She’s feeling better now. But it also takes enormous effort along with prayer, sometimes a lifetime of struggle and dedication. Do you agree with that?

FRENCH: Oh, absolutely. I believe – you know, there’s a scriptural principle that faith without works is dead. In other words, you should pray and you should act. But I think the main criticism that many of these Twitter activists are offering is that they’re saying, don’t say thoughts and prayers. Say what I want you to say. And in a political environment where there’s sharp polarization and very different ideas about how to respond to a crisis, that’s just never going to happen. And besides, what use is an activist tweet anyway?

First of all, there’s Simon’s uncritical acceptance that prayer becomes more efficacious with practice. Well, it probably becomes easier with practice, but Simon implies that it works better with practice. Does he mean works to reduce tumors, or just to feel better about them? It’s not clear, but I suspect it’s both.

As for French’s Dictum that “faith without works is dead”, yes, faith without works is useless, but there’s an entire set of Christian religions that believe in the principle that faith alone makes a religion live, and brings salvation, and that works aren’t needed for salvation.  This is called justification by faith alone, or sola fide, and is followed by some Protestant sects like the Lutherans. In other words, you can be Hitler, but if at the end of your life you finally accept the salvific power of Jesus, you go to Heaven. (I don’t think I’m exaggerating here.) And sola fide, like French’s own doctrine of “justification by faith and works,” has also been supported by citing Scripture.

Finally, it’s true that, as French notes, an activist tweet is pretty useless—but so are thoughts and prayers.

Reader “Airbag Moments”, however, had a stronger dislike of this program, and not only sent me the link but the following message, and two tweets he sent:

Scott Simon’s choice to cover the story from this angle, to defend prayer in general, and the awful use of prayer by pro-gun politicians in particular, says everything you need to know. I like to call Simon out on Twitter because I know he reads it – and often engages with me. So I Tweeted this example of the original and my fantasy improved version of the story:
Yes, it would be nice to have Simon do a second show with Dawkins.  The thing is, however, that Simon interviewed Dawkins back in May, and took an aggressive and confrontational approach completely unlike his bum-licking of Mr. French. So it goes.

Reader’s wildlife video

November 13, 2017 • 8:15 am

This is a stupendous feat of ingestion, and so I’ll put it up by itself. The video was shot by reader Rick Longworth, who calls it, accurately, “Big Gulp.” His notes:

Here we see a green heron (Butorides virescens) downing a good sized bullfrog (Lithobates catesbeianus) near Poughkeepsie, NY. This is my first attempt at digiscoping. I used a Vortex Razor spotting scope and a Olympus Tough camera. My adapter was home made out of plastic until I get the right parts and camera system.

Be sure to put it on full screen (click on “vimeo” at lower right and then enlarge), and note how the heron dips the frog in water repeatedly, presumably to lubricate it for the journey down the gullet:

Look at that distended crop! I bet it didn’t eat again for a few days.