More kili

Why? Because it looks pretty.

Fact:

Horror movies are never scary.

Thought of the day

Human beings are more important than the abstract ethical principle of liberty.

Conservative definitions

There is a lot of political rhetoric out there; it comes from all areas of the political spectrum and it isn’t used to bolster the effectiveness of any given argument. It is the argument. That said, the biggest offenders are conservatives. Much of the rhetoric they use is meant to elicit an emotional, knee-jerk reaction: ‘If I say these words, people will make this tenuous connection to what I really mean.’ For instance, “Tea Party” is meant to evoke a righteous fight for liberty, especially from taxation without representation (forget that all these Teabaggers use public roads to drive to their rallies). But all rational people know that isn’t what it means at all. It may superficially reference the Boston Tea Party and manage to get sympathetic conservatives to emotionally connect the current ‘movement‘ to that historic moment, but down deeper it’s simply a code for Racist Republican.

But that isn’t the end of the list, not by a long shot. There is a lot more conservative code floating around out there, so I think it would be appropriate for me to try and clear some of it up right now. Here’s a list of words conservatives frequently use followed by what they really mean.

Science – Something to be rejected if it conflicts with my previously held beliefs
“The science behind global warming is doubtful…oh, and we should loosen pollution restrictions on big business.”

Tax & Spend Liberal – A Democrat with the same economic policies as Republicans
“Obama is just another tax & spend liberal…even though Bush’s last budget deficit was greater than Obama’s first.”

Atheism – Religious faith
“Atheism requires just as much faith as Christianity…nevermind that I don’t think I have faith that unicorns don’t exist.”

Religious Faith – A virtuous position
“Remember Doubting Thomas? Even though he didn’t believe until he had evidence, Jesus (inexplicably) declared that he had faith and that faith was a good thing…oh, and forget that I’ve already shit all over the idea of faith to bring you down to my level of infantile thinking; faith is good when it’s my faith. And by ‘my’, I probably mean the faith my parents told me to have.”

Patriot – A conservative
“John McCain is a patriot for serving his country…just pretend like I’m not a fundamentally dishonest hypocrite when I smear John Kerry’s record.”

Working Class – Whites
“We need to strengthen the power of the working class…and the strength of my deadbolt – I saw a minority in my neighborhood today!”

People on Welfare – Minorities
“People on welfare are just mooching off the working class…excuse me while I buy this fresh Maine lobster with my food stamps.”

Liberal Media – Anything that isn’t FOX Noise
“The liberal media is just trying to take Christine O’Donnell down because they’re afraid of change in Washington…can we just forget that she doesn’t know anything about the First Amendment? Bringing that up is liberal bias.”

Liberty – Economic greed
“The government is taking away my liberty with all these taxes…I just wish they would fix all the potholes so I have a more comfortable ride when I take my kids to public school.”

Small Business Interests – Big business interests
“It’s a small business interest to cut taxes for those making over $250,000…because businesses create jobs purely based upon lower taxes, not anything to do with demand, right? And tax cuts don’t hurt and increase the deficit, right?”

Activist Judge – A judge who made a decision with which I disagree
“I can’t stand those activist judges who ruled that anti-sodomy laws are illegal…excuse me while I poke my wife in the pooper – it’s not sodomy if it’s with a woman, right?”

Elitist – Someone who is smarter than I am
“Atheists only scored higher on that religious quiz because they’re so elitist…who knew Martin Luther started the Protestant Reformation? Wasn’t he that black guy? He was probably on welfare.”

Open-minded – Agreeing with me
“You don’t find ‘intelligent design’ convincing? You just aren’t open-minded…huh? Oh. No, I won’t bother to study evolution before I reject it. That leads to bad things.

Muslim – Terrorist
“I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

Thought of the day

Doubting Thomas provides a good example of how to approach extraordinary phenomena. Jesus, however, professes the idea that it is good to believe without evidence (faith). In this story, he provides a bad example of how to approach anything not mundane (and probably many things that are mundane).

It seems like everyone is endorsing Eliot Cutler

Every time I open up Facebook or check the local links Yahoo! sends me, it seems I see a new endorsement for Eliot Cutler for governor of Maine. I’m thinking that everyone is feeling the emotion-driven anger at the establishment right now, but unlike redneck conservatives, all these papers are actually putting thought into who they want to lead Maine. Cutler is the clear choice – he has a masterful grasp of all the issues and he offers realistic solutions. (I know, I know, conservatives…a smart guy?! What an elitist!)

Vote for Eliot Cutler.

Thought of the day

I travel not to go anywhere, but to go. I travel for travel’s sake. The great affair is to move. ~Robert Louis Stevenson

Weirdest search terms yet

Every so often someone will find FTSOS with weird search terms. Usually the person is just looking for porn and happens to hit upon a few tags I happen to have. Other times, though it isn’t so weird, the person is looking for the astronomer Michael Hawkins. But I think this one takes the cake for just plain weird:

michael hawkins kilimansharoo

It isn’t weird because one person found FTSOS that way – six people got to this site using those terms. That or, I suppose, one very strange individual.

Ignoring evolution

There were two major factors which contributed to the ruining of Soviet agriculture from the 1930’s into the 1950’s. First, Stalin accused wealthy farmers of withholding production from the state. This led him to institute a policy of force collectivization where small-scale farms were forced to be managed as single large-scale productions. The government would take the amount of grain it thought it should have while also placing peasants in work camps to complete the ideal of big time farming for the community. Unfortunately, it was from these peasants, not the few wealthy farmers, where grain had been taken. This discouraged workers from producing more; those in camps tended to die. The ideal of people working for the good of the group had been undermined by what was effectively slavery; workers were forced into collectivization and had no power to determine working conditions (thank goodness for unions in the U.S.).

Second, and far, far, far more importantly, Trogim Lysenko emerged to become a major political figure (though he called himself a scientist). The government recognized that its policies of the late 20’s and early 30’s had failed to produce more output, and now they needed to find a way to not only fix their political liabilities (angry and disenchanted peasants), but they also needed to make their land produce more.

The big deal with Lysenko was that he rejected Mendelian genetics, instead favoring Lamarckism. This seemed intuitively sound on an extremely immature and scientifically ignorant level; it was that intuitive appeal that helped convince Stalin:

But that is not the point just now. The point is that our practice, our reality, is providing new arguments against this theory, but our theoreticians, strangely enough, either will not, or cannot, make use of this new weapon against the enemies of the working class. I have in mind our practice in abolishing private ownership of land, our practice in nationalising the land, our practice which liberates the small peasant from his slavish attachment to his little plot of land and thereby helps the change from small-scale peasant farming to large-scale collective farming.

Stalin was using “theory” in reference to political theories, but we can see clearly that he was willing to favor his own ideology (“practice”) over anything remotely abstract. That is why Lysenko became so political successful. His own theories jived with the Soviet ideal of forced collectivization; perform a little biological magic on some crops and voila! everyone has enough food and an angry peasantry isn’t all that important.

During the years Lysenko’s ideas reigned, Soviet agriculture suffered tremendously. He was ignoring how evolution works; populations are not permanently improved through environmental changes. Change may happen through epigenetics, but as Jerry Coyne explains, this does nothing to alter the basis of biology. In order to improve agriculture, practice (not in the ideological sense) has its role, but ultimately we must be sure our ideas fall within the theoretical (in the scientific sense) framework we have established – especially since we know it is true.

High school refs may be punished for supporting cancer research

It’s Breast Cancer Awareness Month right now and a lot of people are doing a lot of good things to support research. One example comes from Washington where a group of high school refs decided to donate their playoff paychecks to breast cancer research – while using pink whistles. Unfortunately, Todd Stordahl, chair of the Washington Officials Association, wants to be a stupid prick.

The chair of the WOA, Todd Stordahl, told KING 5 News and MyNorthwest.com he has little choice but to discipline officials who used colored whistles. He claims that letting them continue without punishment would send the wrong message to student athletes.

“They chose not to ask for permission, not to go the right route,” Stordahl told KING 5. “It sends the wrong message to kids that are playing the game. ‘If they broke the rules why can’t I do the same.'”

Though no discipline has been decided upon, Stordahl indicated it was likely that pink whistle-blowing officials would be suspended for two playoff games. That would not only keep the referees from working at the annual pinnacle of their sport, but also cost them two game checks.

Ha. The wrong message? The wrong message?! How about this message, Stordahl:

Your mundane, stupid, silly, trivial, unimportant, meaningless rules don’t fucking matter. You’re taking money away from breast cancer research. How about you ask all those high school athletes with relatives with breast cancer if this is what they want? Ask them in 25 years if they feel they learned a valuable lesson from an asshole like you.

Fortunately, the refs aren’t backing down:

Meanwhile, MyNorthwest.com is reporting the PNFOA (Pacific Northwest Football Officials Association) is arguing the dress code for officials does not technically specify that only black whistles be used, which means any suspensions would be unwarranted. That follows a Tuesday PNFOA meeting in which the group’s president, Mike Livingston, said the board voted unanimously to use the colored whistles, regardless of penalty.

The officials themselves seem to be on board with the PNFOA decision, due to a commitment the referees felt to both breast cancer awareness and each other. There’s little indication that the threat that came Thursday night from the WOA will keep them from using the pink whistles they intended.

“A lot of the guys in the association have been touched by breast cancer in some way,” referee Jeff Mattson told MyNorthwest.com. “So we decided to take on the Susan G. Komen Foundation.”

It’s plainly sad that it’s actually necessary for anyone to delve into the legal minutiae in order to win this argument against that scumbag Todd Stordahl. We’re talking about human lives. I hope Stordahl gets fired.

Stordahl’s email: tstordahl@woa-officials.com