Dobrzyn: Sunday, with bonus cherry pie recipe

September 28, 2015 • 1:30 pm

I was in bed most of the day yesterday, so I’ve little to document, but here are three photos. First, Cyrus, sleeping on the d*g bed with a protective leg over Hili. I have to admit that this is cute:

Hili and Cyrus

For afternoon tea Malgorzata made a delicious apple-and-walnut pastry, which she said was a Jewish recipe for Rosh Hashana, the Jewish New Year (it was Sept. 13-15). Both the apples and walnuts came from the trees in the garden.

It was an absolutely spectacular dish, the crust gleaming with egg-yolk glaze; and I suspect she’ll provide the recipe if sufficiently importuned by readers. Tomorrow we’ll return to having cherry pies (see below).

Apple cake

Our evening meal was simple, which was good as I hadn’t much appetite. I was told that this was a typical Polish meal: pork roast with quince paste on the side, served with salad and potatoes. I was too unwell to wash it down with my favorite Zubr beer.

Dinner

Finally, this is for all those readers who asked me to rub Hili’s belly for them. DONE!

P1090056

And lagniappe: a recipe, perhaps the first I’ve put up as a standalone post. Several readers asked for the recipe for Malgorzata’s renowned cherry pie with walnut crust. Here in Dobrzyn it is made with the orchard’s own sour cherries and walnuts, but you can buy frozen sour cherries in the U.S. or, I suppose, use canned pie cherries if that’s the only thing available.

This is the best cherry pie I’ve ever had. The walnuts (and butter) in the crust contribute considerably to its excellence, as do the fresh-picked cherries, which are pitted after harvest and then frozen for my arrival. The recipe has been posted by Malgorzata in comments sections over the past year, but I’ve collected everything in one place. First, a picture:

pie

And the recipe. I’ve converted Polish measures, which involve weight and the metric system, into American ones:

Walnut crust:

150 gram flour (1.2 cups if you’re using all-purpose flour)
150 gram (1/3 pound) ground walnuts (or hazelnuts or almonds)
200 gm (0.4 lb) butter or margarine
100 gram (0.2 lb) castor sugar (this is sold in the U.S. simply as “superfine sugar”)
1 raw egg yolk
Depending on what you are using it for, add vanilla sugar or cinnamon or almond oil.

Work quick together all ingredients with your fingers and put into the refrigerator for half an hour before rolling the crust and putting it into into the baking tray. See below for how to make the top “crust”: 2/3 of the dough is used to line the tray, with the other third grated on top.

Cherry filling:

1 kg (2.2 lb) pitted cherries (you can use either fresh or frozen)
2 tablespoons sugar
1 tablespoon potato flour (cornstarch is an acceptable substitute)

Cook cherries (without any water! they have enough juice)
Remove 100 mililiters (0.4 cups) juice and pour it into a mug
Add sugar to cherries and let them boil another minute
Dissolve potato flour in 100 ml juice and add to boiling cherries, stirring until they thicken.

Cool the mixture.

Take 2/3 of the dough and cover a baking tray. Pour cherries over. Take the grater and hold it over the tray. Using the biggest holes in the grater, cover the cherries with crumbs from the remaining third of the dough.

Bake for 35-45 minutes at 180ºC (355ºF).

Pope implicitly supports Kim Davis’s refusal to grant marriage licenses to gays

September 28, 2015 • 12:00 pm

Let us not forget that although the Pope has great p.r. and hits all the right notes with the American public, he still adheres to the Church’s doctrine that homosexual acts are “grave sins.” And he claims that any exercise of religion in the public sphere is a “right” that cannot be abrogated. According to NBC News, the Pope aired the latter view to reporters while flying back to Europe on the Papal Plane (“Shepherd One”).

While returning from his visit to the U.S., the pontiff told reporters aboard the papal plane Monday that anyone who prevents others from exercising their religious freedom is denying them a human right.

. . . The pontiff was asked: “Do you … support those individuals, including government officials, who say they cannot in good conscience, their own personal conscience, abide by some laws or discharge their duties as government officials, for example when issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples?”

He did not refer specifically to Davis in his reply, saying: “I can’t have in mind all the cases that can exist about conscientious objection … but yes, I can say that conscientious objection is a right that is a part of every human right. It is a right. And if a person does not allow others to be a conscientious objector, he denies a right.”

What about the “right” not to be infected by someone who refuses vaccination on religious grounds? Or the “right” of children to be given medical care when their parents object on religious grounds? Or the “right” of gays (now an official legal right!) to get a marriage license? The story continues:

Francis added: “Conscientious objection must enter into every juridical structure because it is a right, a human right. Otherwise we would end up in a situation where we select what is a right, saying, ‘this right that has merit, this one does not.'”

Asked if this principle applied to government officials carrying out their duties, he replied: “It is a human right and if a government official is a human person, he has that right. It is a human right.”

Well, yes, conscientious objection is a “right” in the sense that one can object, but that doesn’t mean that you’re free from punishment for exercising that “right”. I would have gone to prison, for instance, if the government hadn’t granted me official CO status allowing me to work in a hospital.

But alternatives like that aren’t always available. The courts have decided that exercising religious freedom isn’t an untrammeled “right” that can always be exercised without penalty, especially if it conflicts with one’s official duties or with laws. The Kim Davis case is still hanging in the air, but if the government cannot accommodate religious beliefs that keep one from doing one’s job without onerous and elaborate fixes, the tenor of laaw is that those beliefs cannot be enacted.

And, contra the Pope, we can indeed select which rights have merit and which do not. That’s nothing new. Religious “rights” that prevent others from obtaining their own legal rights, like marriage licenses for gays, don’t have merit. Religious objections to vaccination, though allowed in 48 of the 50 US states (West Virginia and Mississippi are the exceptions), do not have merit, for they endanger society as a whole as well as children too young to make their own decisions. Religious exemptions of pharmacists from dispensing contraceptive devices or medication, though allowed  in six states (Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Georgia, Mississippi and South Dakota), have no merit because they prevent or obstruct others from getting legal medication.

Taken to its extreme, the Pope’s view is that any religious person who works for the government or caters to the public can avoid doing certain duties on religious grounds, regardless of how important those duties are or how much they inconvenience others. If you’re a Catholic waiter, for example, you can refuse to serve gay couples or sell them food.

In general I don’t like discussions of “rights,” as their assertion is often a way to shut down discussion. Let’s instead talk of consequences: the consequences for society’s well being if religious people are allowed to shirk certain duties. When you think that way, as in the case of vaccination or, perhaps, a small county office where there’s one Catholic clerk who objects to gay marriage, or a pharmacy with one pharmacist, you’ll find that yes, some religious exemptions have merit and others don’t.

h/t: Randy

America’s repugnant bootlicking of Saudi Arabia

September 28, 2015 • 10:30 am

According to Amnesty International, Saudi Arabia’s human-rights record is one of the most abysmal in the world. Freedom of expression and assembly are severely curtailed, there are many arbitrary arrests, with many held without being charged, those jailed are tortured and beaten, women have institutionalized second-class status, as do migrants, and there is flogging, amputation of limbs, and, of course, death sentences for “crimes” like sorcery and adultery. It’s a place of medieval barbarity.

One case that has recently come to world attention is that of the Saudi Ali Mohammed Baquir al-Nimr, now 21, who was sentenced to death by beheading for “crimes” committed when he was 17. After beheading, he’s slated to be crucified, with the headless body displayed to all on a cross. As Amnesty International reports:

In May, the SCC [Special Criminal Court in Riyadh] sentenced Ali Mohammed Baqir al-Nimr to death after convicting him on charges that included demonstrating against the government, possession of weapons and attacking the security forces. He denied the charges and told the court that he had been tortured and forced to confess in pre-trial detention. The court convicted him without investigating his torture allegations, and sentenced him to death although he was aged 17 at the time of the alleged offences.

See here for more information about the case; the “weapons” and “attack” charges are bogus.

Despite the Saudi’s dismal record, the United Nations appointed a Saudi diplomat as head of a human rights panel. It’s not clear how much power Faisal bin Hassan Trad, head of the Saudi delegation to the UN in Geneva, will have, but the UN Watch site suggests that he will certainly have more than symbolic power, as his council selects representatives to monitor human rights throughout the world.

The U.S., especially under a Democratic President, should be a beacon in defending human rights. To be sure, Obama is trying to close the disgraceful Guantanamo detention facility, whose existence is indefensible. But we have several blind spots, and one is defending—or rather refusing to criticize—Saudi Arabia. After all, they’re our “ally” and give us lots of oil.  The wages of diplomacy, apparently, include the dissimulation demonstrated by State Department spokesman Mark C. Toner, who went through this song and dance about Saudi human rights with reporters at last Tuesday’s daily press briefing:

QUESTION: Change topic? Saudi Arabia.

MR TONER: Saudi Arabia.

QUESTION: Yesterday, Saudi Arabia was named to head the Human Rights Council, and today I think they announced they are about to behead a 21-year-old Shia activist named Muhammed al-Nimr. Are you aware of that?

MR TONER: I’m not aware of the trial that you – or the verdict – death sentence.

QUESTION: Well, apparently, he was arrested when was 17-years-old and kept in juvenile detention, then moved on. And now, he’s been scheduled to be executed.

MR TONER: Right. I mean, we’ve talked about our concerns about some of the capital punishment cases in Saudi Arabia in our Human Rights Report, but I don’t have any more to add to it.

QUESTION: So you —

QUESTION: Well, how about a reaction to them heading the council?

MR TONER: Again, I don’t have any comment, don’t have any reaction to it. I mean, frankly, it’s – we would welcome it. We’re close allies. If we —

We welcome it as close allies? Seriously?

QUESTION: Do you think that they’re an appropriate choice given – I mean, how many pages is – does Saudi Arabia get in the Human Rights Report annually?

MR TONER: I can’t give that off the top of my head, Matt.

Translation: “They’re our close allies so they can do what they want to their citizens”

QUESTION: I can’t either, but let’s just say that there’s a lot to write about Saudi Arabia and human rights in that report. I’m just wondering if you that it’s appropriate for them to have a leadership position.

MR TONER: We have a strong dialogue, obviously a partnership with Saudi Arabia that spans, obviously, many issues. We talk about human rights concerns with them. As to this leadership role, we hope that it’s an occasion for them to look at human rights around the world but also within their own borders.

Translation: “I am going to move my lips but say nothing.”

QUESTION: But you said that you welcome them in this position. Is it based on improved record? I mean, can you show or point to anything where there is a sort of stark improvement in their human rights record?

MR TONER: I mean, we have an ongoing discussion with them about all these human rights issues, like we do with every country. We make our concerns clear when we do have concerns, but that dialogue continues. But I don’t have anything to point to in terms of progress.

Translation: “Well, we’re concerned, but the Saudis don’t seem to be doing anything, so they’ll remain our friends and close allies.”

QUESTION: Would you welcome as a – would you welcome a decision to commute the sentence of this young man?

MR TONER: Again, I’m not aware of the case, so it’s hard for me to comment on it other than that we believe that any kind of verdict like that should come at the end of a legal process that is just and in accordance with international legal standards.

I’m not sure what “international legal standards” Toner’s talking about, for as far as I can see international criminal law applies only to issues like genocide and crimes against humanity. Clearly, though, the Saudi legal process, at least for Muhammed al-Nimr, is unjust. But we dare not say that.

I’m not a diplomat, so clearly there is some delicate balancing going on here that’s beyond my ken. Still, it’s disgraceful for the United States to countenance the barbarity of Saudi Arabia simply because they cooperate with us (to their advantage, of course) in the war on terrorism, and also sell us one million barrels of oil per day. What if North Korea had oil?

At the very least, Obama and the State Department should take the position that the Saudi treatment of dissent, women, and prisoners is unacceptable. We cannot at the same time excoriate ISIS for torture, murder, and beheadings while turning a blind eye to the same acts by the Saudi government.

The leader of Britain’s Labour Party, severely etiolated as it  is, has called for David Cameron to condemn the treatment of this young man. As a final irony, the UN’s Office of the Commission of Human Rights has urged Saudi Arabia to spare Al-Nimr’s life because of trial irregularities and his age at the time of the supposed crime. Can’t the U.S. do at least as much as the U.N.?

Big announcement by NASA about Mars today: 11:30 a.m. EDT

September 28, 2015 • 9:30 am

Reader Tom C. calls our attention to a big announcement today, and he speculated a bit about it:

There’s a NASA press conference regarding something cool on Mars at 11:30 EDT.  I’m hoping for HD images of brachiopod-like fossils embedded in a dry stream bed, but I’ll bet on the discovery of liquid water on the surface.  We shall see…

This post is going up one hour before the press conference, which will be livestreamed here. The announcement by NASA, in part, is this:

NASA will detail a major science finding from the agency’s ongoing exploration of Mars during a news briefing at 11:30 a.m. EDT on Monday, Sept. 28 at the James Webb Auditorium at NASA Headquarters in Washington. The event will be broadcast live on NASA Television and the agency’s website.

News conference participants will be:

·         Jim Green, director of planetary science at NASA Headquarters

·         Michael Meyer, lead scientist for the Mars Exploration Program at NASA Headquarters

·         Lujendra Ojha of the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta

·         Mary Beth Wilhelm of NASA’s Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California and the Georgia Institute of Technology

·         Alfred McEwen, principal investigator for the High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment (HiRISE) at the University of Arizona in Tucson

A brief question-and-answer session will take place during the event with reporters on site and by phone. Members of the public also can ask questions during the briefing using #AskNASA.

The title of that page is “NASA to announce Mars mystery solved,” and since I doubt there’s life there (it would have leaked already had that been true), the “solution” couldn’t be “no life on Mars”. Our data wouldn’t allow us such a sweeping conclusion. No, I agree with Tom that it’s the presence of liquid water. Readers are invited to add their own speculations below.

Those pesky atheist scientists: wrong about God, wrong about global warming

September 28, 2015 • 8:30 am

Before I show you a political cartoon sent by a reader, let’s remind ourselves how much more atheistic American scientists are than their fellow citizens. Below is an excerpt from a piece I wrote last March for the New Republic:

Surveying American scientists as a whole, regardless of status, a different Pew poll showed that only 33% admitted belief in God, with 41% of scientists being atheists or agnostics. (The rest either didn’t answer, didn’t know, or believed in a “universal spirit or a higher power.”) Among the general public, on the other hand, belief in God ran at 83% and nonbelief at a mere 4%. In other words, the average scientist is ten times as likely to be an atheist or an agnostic than is the average American.

The degree of scientists’ nonbelief goes up with their professional status. [Elaine] Ecklund’s earlier work found that 62% of scientists working at “elite” universities were atheists or agnostics, with only 33% professing belief in God. And, considering members of America’s most elite scientific body, the National Academy of Sciences, we find that only 7% believe in a personal God while 93% are atheists or agnostics about a personal God. (In contrast, 68% of Americans—nearly ten times the percentage of scientists—believe in a personal God.)

I won’t belabor this correlation, but I suspect it involves not only nonbelievers being preferentially attracted to science, but also the practice of science itself eroding belief in gods. For example, older scientists tend to be less religious, while their non-scientist cohorts tend to become more religious as they age.

Now to a political cartoon referring to scientists’ nonbelief—in a strange way. It’s by Michael Ramirez (b. 1961), a two-time Pulitzer-Prize-winning artist of a decidedly conservative bent, who has been involved in quite a few controversies (the L.A. Times stopped carrying his cartoons in 2005). Reader Ollie sent a cartoon by Ramirez with this note:

Ramirez is a conservative political cartoonist and I almost never agree with him on anything.  But he got this one right…albeit not in the way that he intended. You might find this cartoon amusing.

ramirezscientistcartoon

There are of course two ways to interpret this cartoon. This would be my read if I didn’t know who drew it:

  1. The Pope notes that scientists overwhelmingly accept that global warming is caused by human activity.
  2. Scientists tend to be right about such issues.
  3. Therefore, scientists are probably also right in claiming that there is no God.

But of course it’s Ramirez, and what he really means is this: scientists are fallible, and are clearly wrong about both global warming and God. In that sense it’s a bad political cartoon, for its meaning reverses itself depending on your view of science.

Just to show you what I think he means, here’s another one of his cartoons (the “stick head” in the last panel is his rendition of Obama):

mrz090515dAPR20150904114520

And some of Ramierz’s other conservative panels:

mrz090715dAPR20150908044833

mrz090815dAPR20150908044533

This one is particularly nasty. Given Ramirez’s global-warming denialism, I’d put his head up there instead of Hillary’s:

mrz083115dAPR20150831054604

Readers’ wildlife (astronomy) photographs

September 28, 2015 • 7:15 am

As most of you know, last night there was a special total lunar eclipse, one producing a large reddish”blood moon.” It’s not the red color that was unusual, for that occurs during all lunar eclipses (it’s due to the scattering of reflected light by our atmosphere), but that the moon was at its perigee: the lowest point in its orbit, so it looked a tad larger. Timeanddate.com describes the rarity of these “supermoons”:

Total eclipses of Super Full Moons are rare. According to NASA, they have only occurred 5 times in the 1900s – in 1910, 1928, 1946, 1964 and 1982. After the September 27/ 28, 2015 Total Lunar Eclipse, a Supermoon eclipse will not happen again for another 18 years, until October 8, 2033.

The Guardian has a whole photo gallery from around the world. But Reader Randy Schenck sent photos of the whole event taken from his home in Iowa, one of the places where the eclipse was most visible on our planet. His notes:

The following eight pictures were taken with the regular DMC-FZ200 to record the eclipse.  Started with the full moon before the eclipse began at 7:27 pm. central daylight time as the moon came up in the ESE sky.  It was a clear and perfect evening for this viewing.  .  

Moon Eclipse Sept. 27, 2015 002

The next seven pictures were after the eclipse started as follows:

8:15 p.m.:

Moon Eclipse Sept. 27, 2015 007

8:22 p.m.:

Moon Eclipse Sept. 27, 2015 008

8:35 p.m.:

Moon Eclipse Sept. 27, 2015 009

8:59 p.m.:

Moon Eclipse Sept. 27, 2015 011

9:08 p.m.

Moon Eclipse Sept. 27, 2015 013

9:20 p.m.:

Moon Eclipse Sept. 27, 2015 018

9:35 p.m.:

Moon Eclipse Sept. 27, 2015

Monday: Hili dialogue

September 28, 2015 • 2:25 am

It’s Monday, but of course every day is a work day in Dobrzyn, so there’s little to distinguish today from all other days. As for yours truly, my cold is slowly abating, though I have to say it was a rough night. Another day of rest and I will, I hope, be almost back to normal. Even the Furry Princess of Poland was concerned, and moved my placecard:

Hili: Where is Jerry?
A: He is in bed with a cold.
Hili: Get well soon, Jerry!

P1030438
In Polish:
Hili: A gdzie jest Jerry?
Ja: Leży w łóżku, przeziębiony.
Hili: Zdrowiej szybko, Jerry!

 

Warwick students rescind ban on Maryam Namazie

September 27, 2015 • 4:35 pm

by Matthew Cobb

The statement by the Warwick University Students’ Union – it was they that had refused her permission to speak, not the University – includes the promise that:

“Warwick SU will issue an unequivocal apology to Maryam Namazie for this egregious and highly regrettable error.”

And concludes:

We want to assure everyone of Warwick Students’ Union’s continued commitment to free speech. We also want to take this opportunity to apologise to everyone who has expressed concern, or disappointment, or who has been hurt by this significant error and, as we said above, we will be issuing a full and unequivocal apology to Maryam Namazie.

It isn’t clear who exactly refused Maryam permission to speak at the Students’ Union. The statement says:
Speaker invitations that may involve such issues are routinely considered by the SU President, who will also take advice from senior SU staff. This did not happen on this occasion. Neither the SU President, nor senior SU staff, were consulted as they should have been. This is a significant error for which there can be no excuse.
Whatever the case, the ban has been rescinded and the meeting will go ahead. Excellent news.
.