In a spectacular miscalculation, Obama administration allows Shell to drill for oil in the Arctic

May 12, 2015 • 11:08 am

Some “environmentally sensitive” administration! The Obama administration, curses be upon it, has just announced that it will grant permits to Shell to drill for oil in the Arctic, off the cost of Alaska. The decision, of course, is being universally applauded by petroleum companies and decried by environmentalists. I don’t know a single environmental organizations that’s in favor of this.

The dangers are clear: the seas are rough, the logistical problems are formidable, and there are animals who breed, feed, and migrate there. In case of an accident, help will be very far away. Do we really need the oil that badly, or is Big Oil simply leaning on the administration?

And let us be clear: the question is not whether there will be a spill that devastates the environment, but when. But of course when it happens, Obama will be long out of office, and there’s nothing we can do about it.

Everything that needs to be said about this stupid venture is in these paragraphs from today’s New York Times:

The Obama administration had initially granted Shell a permit to begin offshore Arctic drilling in the summer of 2012. However, the company’s first forays into exploring the new waters were plagued with numerous safety and operational problems. One of its oil rigs, the Kulluk, ran aground and had to be towed to safety. In 2013, the Interior Department said the company could not resume drilling until all safety issues were addressed.

The report was harshly critical of Shell management, which acknowledged that it was unprepared for the problems it encountered operating in the unforgiving Arctic environment.

But the administration said that since then, the Interior Department has significantly strengthened and updated drilling regulations. And outside experts said that while the challenges of Arctic drilling were steep, the new plan surmounted them to some extent by allowing drilling only in the summer months and in shallow waters.

Regulations may lessen the chance of an accident, but they don’t reduce it to zero. Given enough time, we’ll have one. May Ceiling Cat have mercy on our souls, and, more important, on the souls of the fish, polar bears, beluga whales, narwhals, and other animals who are about to get coated.

I feel betrayed.

The bad news: still another Bangladeshi secular blogger murdered

May 12, 2015 • 9:10 am

This is the third time in a year—the third time a secular blogger has been accosted on the streets of Bangladesh and brutally hacked to death with machetes.  This time, according to The Washington Post, it was Ananta Bijoy. He was young, like the other two, and Al-Qaeda, which claimed responsibility for at least one other murder, may be behind this one as well:

Ananta Bijoy Das, a Bangladeshi writer known for advocating science and secularism, was hacked to death by masked men wielding machetes while on his way to work Tuesday morning.

Das died instantly in the attack, police in Sylhet city told the Associated Press. He is the third Bangladeshi writer to be killed in less than four months.

Though police did not offer a motive for the killing, they mentioned to Al Jazeera that Das has written about science and the evolution of the Soviet Union. He was also a blogger for Mukto-Mona, or “free mind,” the site launched by prominent author Avijit Roy, who was killed at a Bangladeshi book fair in similar fashion in February.

“Mukto-Mona … is about free thinking and is about explicitly taking on religious fundamentalism and particularly Islamic religious fundamentalism. [Das and Roy’s] names have been on lists of identified targets,” Sara Hossain, a lawyer and human rights activist in Dhaka, Bangladesh, told the BBC.

The sad part is that there appears to be little we can do, for even protesting to the Bangladeshi embassy is likely to be futile. As the WaPo reports:

But among Bangladeshi liberals, there’s little confidence that attacks on secular writers will be punished.

“The culture of impunity that has spread over the last few years clearly has very damning results,” Arifur Rahman told IHEU after Washiqur Rahman was killed. “… The word ‘Nastik’ (atheist) has been vilified in Bangladesh (and the rest of the Muslim world); they are seen as sub-human, it is OK to kill them.”

1661764_10152342707542176_2137781481_n
Ananta Bijoy Das, posted in February, 2014 on his Facebook page

 

h/t: Jelger

The good news: big attrition of Christians in the U.S., atheists and agnostics increasing

May 12, 2015 • 8:30 am

I’m giving the good news to you first, as there’s bad news immediately to come. A Pew Survey released today, which polled more than 35,000 adults, shows that the proportion of Christians in America is dropping sharply, while the “unaffiliated” are taking their place. As the report notes,

The Christian share of the U.S. population is declining, while the number of U.S. adults who do not identify with any organized religion is growing, according to an extensive new survey by the Pew Research Center. Moreover, these changes are taking place across the religious landscape, affecting all regions of the country and many demographic groups. While the drop in Christian affiliation is particularly pronounced among young adults, it is occurring among Americans of all ages. The same trends are seen among whites, blacks and Latinos; among both college graduates and adults with only a high school education; and among women as well as men.

. . . However, generational replacement is by no means the only reason that religious “nones” are growing and Christians are declining. In addition, people in older generations are increasingly disavowing association with organized religion.

You can find a full pdf of the report here, but for the moment here’s all ye need to know (note that the reported changes are only over the last 7 years). The “unaffiliated” (note, not all of these are nonbelievers, for many are religionists who don’t claim church membership) rose 6.7%, The decrease in Christians breaks down as follows: Evangelical Protestants down 0.9%, Catholics down 3.1%, and mainline Protestant down 3.4%; that totals 7.4%. (Non-Christians, presumably largely Muslims, rose 1.2%).  Now I’m not sure whether proportions or absolute numbers are what we should be looking at (more Christians means more mischief), for, after all, the population has grown, but the total number of Christians has still decreased as well. Read and rejoice:

PF_15.05.05_RLS2_1_310px

More good news: both among the unaffiliated and in the population as a whole, the proportion of agnostics and atheists is increasing:

The religiously unaffiliated population – including all of its constituent subgroups – has grown rapidly as a share of the overall U.S. population. The share of self-identified atheists has nearly doubled in size since 2007, from 1.6% to 3.1%. Agnostics have grown from 2.4% to 4.0%. And those who describe their religion as “nothing in particular” have swelled from 12.1% to 15.8% of the adult population since 2007. Overall, the religious “nones” have grown from 16.1% to 22.8% of the population in the past seven years. As the unaffiliated have grown, the internal composition of the religious “nones” has changed. Most unaffiliated people continue to describe themselves as having no particular religion (rather than as being atheists or agnostics), but the “nones” appear to be growing more secular. Atheists and agnostics now account for 31% of all religious “nones,

As you see, the proportion of nonbelievers, while still quite small, has nearly doubled in both the population at large and among the unaffiliated. That means that the nay-sayers can’t claim that the “nones” are still religious, just not affiliated with a label: Screen Shot 2015-05-12 at 6.51.50 AM

Still more good news: the unaffiliated are getting younger and the Christians are getting older. As they find their way to Heaven (or to the Eternal Barbecue Below), the population will become more secular:

While many U.S. religious groups are aging, the unaffiliated are comparatively young – and getting younger, on average, over time. As a rising cohort of highly unaffiliated Millennials reaches adulthood, the median age of unaffiliated adults has dropped to 36, down from 38 in 2007 and far lower than the general (adult) population’s median age of 46.4 By contrast, the median age of mainline Protestant adults in the new survey is 52 (up from 50 in 2007), and the median age of Catholic adults is 49 (up from 45 seven years earlier).

PR_15.05.12_RLS-00

The gender composition of believers versus “nones” (unaffiliated) is strikingly different, with more women in the former group. That’s been the case for some decades:

As in 2007, women continue to make up more than half of nearly every Christian group. Roughly two-thirds of Jehovah’s Witnesses are women, as are 59% of those who identify with the historically black Protestant tradition, 55% of those in both the evangelical and mainline Protestant traditions and 54% of Catholics and Mormons. Most religiously unaffiliated adults, by contrast, are men. Fully two-thirds of self-identified atheists are men, as are 62% of agnostics and 55% of those who identify religiously as “nothing in particular” and further say that religion is unimportant in their lives. Among those who describe their religion as “nothing in particular” but say that religion is at least somewhat important in their lives, however, there are about as many women as men.

I hate to say “I told you so,” but Professor Ceiling Cat predicted this trend toward secularization several years ago. But it’s really a no-brainer: secularism is increasing all over the West, and traditional faiths look increasingly less credible. Christians are voting with their feet. And even though many of the “unaffiliated” are believers, refusing affiliation with a church is the first step on the road to unbelief. It also shows, at least to me, that the truth claims or religion can outweigh its social “benefits”, for there’s no need to leave a church (and not join another) if the church itself is meeting your needs for human fellowship.  (I presume the “unaffiliated” are not simply joining megachurches that have ping-pong tables and babysitting, for then they’d be “affiliated.”)

Finally, the level of intermarriage between people of different faiths has increased tremendously: in 1960, only 19% of married people were of different faiths, but that figure has risen to 39% in the latest survey. I suspect, but am not sure, that mixed-faith marriages are more likely to breed unbelievers than same-faith marriages.

When you extrapolate this trend over time, you’ll see that in half a century there will be a substantial proportion of nonbelievers in the U.S. New York Times and New Yorker take note—you ignore this at your peril.  Of course the trend is reversible; as Dan Dennett said in a recent Wall Street Journal piece, “Why the future of religion is bleak“:

Could anything turn this decline around? Yes, unfortunately. A global plague, a world war fought over water or oil, the collapse of the Internet (and thereby almost all electronic communication) or some as-yet unimagined catastrophe could throw the remaining population into misery and fear, the soil in which religion flourishes best.

Let us pray this won’t happen. But nobody can deny that over the past half century, religion has been on the run. Nobody, that is, except religiously obtuse people like Damon Linker, who, in a vicious response to Dennett in The Week, says this:

What Dennett doesn’t mention is that the Pew study also predicts that 66.4 percent of the country will call themselves Christians in 2050 — down from 78.3 percent in 2010. That’s a noteworthy drop. But it still has Christians, along with smaller religious groups (which make up 8.1 percent of the total), amounting to roughly three-quarters of the U.S. population.

Three quarters of the country amounts to a “bleak” future for religion?

This is the desperation move of a beleaguered and God-fearing man. Who ever said that the U.S. would become like Sweden overnight?

Readers’ wildlife photographs

May 12, 2015 • 7:45 am

First, four pictures from Stephen Barnard, who has a huge backlog in the queue. These include a cryptic animal; can you spot it?

The eaglets (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) are growing fast.

RT9A4639

A Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus) attacking a Northern Harrier ( Circus cyaneus) that was robbing nests.

RT9A4680

American Avocets (Recurvirostra americana):

RT9A4688

Meadow Vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus) 🙂 :

RT9A4623

I don’t even have to feed Deets any longer, but I do. This is a huge year for voles. Their population peaks every few years, and this is one. They’ve done a number on my lawn. If you go out in the desert to a quiet place you can hear them eating. I think it’s a reproductive strategy to overwhelm the predators with numbers, somewhat like 17-year locusts.

Finally, reader Michael Day sent a lovely photo from Georgia (US!):

I was hiking this past weekend with my daughters and some friends. We were on the Bear Hair Gap Trail in North Georgia, most of which lies within Vogel State Park. Many of the native wildflowers are a week or two behind and have not produced many flowers, but the native “Flame” azaleas (Rhododendron calendulaceum) were in full bloom all along the trail. As I snapped the attached picture, a bonus Tiger Swallowtail (Papilio glaucus) showed up for a drink. Check out the filaments on those stamens!

Flame azalea

Tuesday: Hili dialogue

May 12, 2015 • 5:10 am

Personal update: my back continues to improve, but I’m still banned on Facebook, which for some reason really irks me, for no reason was given—and how can you respond to an unknown accusation in an appeal? Well, it’s not the end of the world, for there are many noms and good times to come. Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili (to paraphrase the Beatles) is making a hole where the bugs get in:

A: Hili, what are you doing?
Hili: I’m making the holes bigger because otherwise the insects cannot get through.

P1020621In Polish:

Ja: Hili, co ty robisz?
Hili: Powiększam dziurki w siatce, bo insekty nie mogą się tu dostać.