The Ashley Madison Hack Shows We’re Too Dumb to Cheat

The Ashley Madison Hack Shows We’re Too Dumb to Cheat

America’s on the downward slope. I’ve suspected this for a while, and it wasn’t just the professional football players who blew off their own fingers with fireworks, or the looming spectacle of Donald J. Trump, Legitimate Presidential Contender, or the approval of a lady libido enhancing drug with the unpronounceable name Addyi instead of the infinitely better She-Zam!

For the last week I’ve been on a book tour, which, admittedly, can leave you with a dim view of your fellow man. You’re visiting a city per day, exposed to humanity at its most raw, undefended, and coughing-without-covering-its-mouth: people in airports, people in taxi lines and train stations, people in transit, people with their masks off, their guard down, and their manners and good sense evidently checked for the duration of their trip.

I have seen the best minds of my generation fumble with their belts in security lines and forget to take their bottled water out of their purses before sending them through the scanner in spite of T.S.A. employees whose job it is to stand in front of the conveyor belts and drone “No bottled liquids.”

Idiots. Dummies. Dodo birds. Our once-great nation is full of them. On Sunday, I was sitting in the Quiet Car on a train from Boston to New York when a couple came down the aisle, blinking and peering around like owlets who’d been rousted from their nests.

They didn’t notice that there was, at the entrance to the car, a storage rack for luggage. Each one of them was hauling a gigantic suitcase they were unable to lift, a fact I learned after they announced it, loudly and repeatedly. Nor did they care that, as they stood in the aisle, wondering out loud how they were going to store their bags, they were blocking several dozen travelers behind them.

Once seated, the man peered up at one of a dozen QUIET CAR signs, then leaned toward what appeared to be a long-suffering spouse. “OH,” he yelled. “THIS IS THE QUIET CAR. WE’RE IN THE QUIET CAR.”

“SHH!” went the quiet car.

NYTimes

BBC News coverage of terrorism – July 2015


State subsidized ‘journalism’ of any kind should be viewed with utmost caution

BBC Watch

The Israel Security Agency’s report on terror attacks during July 2015 (English here, Hebrew here) shows that throughout the month a total of 107 incidents took place: 63 in Judea & Samaria, 42 in Jerusalem, one incident of missile fire from the Gaza Strip and one incident of missile fire from the Sinai Peninsula.

Two Palestinian civilians were killed and two injured (in the arson attack in Duma on July 31st) and three members of the Israeli security forces were wounded in those attacks. The agency recorded 90 attacks with petrol bombs, one stabbing, two shooting attacks and 12 attacks using explosive devices.

BBC News website reporting on those 107 attacks was confined to two incidents: the July 3rd firing of three Grad missiles from Sinai by ISIS’ ‘Sinai Province’ affiliate was covered in one written report and the July 31starson attack in Duma

View original post 111 more words

Solar Panel Prices Won’t Stay Low For Ever


who’d ever seen that coming? ‘free’ energy doesn’t exist.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

th

How often do we hear how advances in solar technology have made the costs of panels so cheap that they can now compete against fossil fuels?

What you rarely hear is that the real reason is there has been a glut of solar panels on the market, caused largely by the Chinese wanting to muscle into the market with mass production, designed to undercut and force other manufacturers out of the marketplace. In other words, exactly the same tactics they have used with other industries and products.

It never seems to have occurred to these reporters that as soon as demand for panels begins to escalate, spurred on by government mandates in the west, not only will the glut disappear but prices will skyrocket. This process will of course be accelerated by the closure of existing capacity, unable to compete.

It looks as if this process may…

View original post 767 more words

On Wikipedia, politically controversial science topics vulnerable to information sabotage

On Wikipedia, politically controversial science topics vulnerable to information sabotage

Since years ago William Connolly got banned from editing global warming related posts due to profound bias finally realisation creeps in that it wasn’t a fluke. Wikipedia, facts by consensus, is quickly becoming just another desinformation site. Unfortunately it’s still the mainstay of any student or otherwise ill informed person so idiocracy is a mere waypoint to pass.

Wikipedia reigns. It’s the world’s most popular online encyclopedia, the sixth most visited website in America, and a research source most U.S. students rely on. But, according to a paper published today in the journal PLOS ONE, Wikipedia entries on politically controversial scientific topics can be unreliable due to information sabotage.

Co-author Dr. Gene E. Likens is President Emeritus of the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies and a Distinguished Research Professor at the University of Connecticut, Storrs. Likens co-discovered acid rain in North America, and counts among his accolades a National Medal of Science, a Tyler Prize, and elected membership in the National Academy of Sciences. Since 2003, he has monitored Wikipedia’s acid rain entry.

Likens explains, “In the scientific community, acid rain is not a controversial topic. Its mechanics have been well understood for decades. Yet, despite having ‘semi-protected’ status to prevent anonymous changes, Wikipedia’s acid rain entry receives near-daily edits, some of which result in egregious errors and a distortion of consensus science.”

In an effort to see how Wikipedia’s acid rain entry compared to other scientific topics, Likens partnered with Dr. Adam M. Wilson, a geographer at the University of Buffalo. Together, they analyzed Wikipedia edit histories for three politically controversial scientific topics (acid rain, evolution, and global warming), and four non-controversial scientific topics (the in physics, heliocentrism, general relativity, and continental drift).

Using nearly a decade of data, Likens and Wilson teased out daily edit rates, the mean size of edits (words added, deleted, or edited), and the mean number of page views per day. While the edit rate of the acid rain article was less than the edit rate of the evolution and global warming articles, it was significantly higher than the non-controversial topics. Across the board, politically controversial scientific topics were edited more heavily and viewed more often.

“Wikipedia’s entry sees 2-3 edits a day, with more than 100 words altered, while the standard model in physics has around 10 words changed every few weeks, ” Wilson notes. “The high rate of change observed in politically controversial scientific topics makes it difficult for experts to monitor their accuracy and contribute time-consuming corrections.”

Likens adds, “As society turns to Wikipedia for answers, students, educators, and citizens should understand its limitations when researching scientific topics that are politically charged. On entries subject to edit-wars, like , evolution, and global change, one can obtain – within seconds – diametrically different information on the same topic.”

And still it’s  not clear whether acid rain or global warming actually existed/exists.
Source

Again confirmed, observational studies worthless

Again confirmed, observational studies worthless

Why stop at nutrition? How about the root of psychology/psychiatry? Aren’t those fields’ even worse in being a collection of self-reported/observed ‘afflictions’ compounded by bias and circular logic? From the early days the foundation for psychology has been laid by not truly compos mentis amateurs such as Freud or Jung. They lacked the scientific means & disciplines to properly examine that what they imagined they found. Shouldn’t the whole field of psy ‘sciences’ be reexamined from bottom up, starting with discarding those ancient assumptions as being no more than amusing tales told by the ancients?

The report by Archer and co-workers goes further, saying that continued funding for nutrition studies based on self-reported dietary data “constitutes an unscientific and major misuse of research resources” because people often misremember or deliberately misrepresent their diets. They cite a 2013 PLoS ONE study3 by Archer and two other colleagues, which looked at the prestigious US National Health and Examination Survey (NHANES) and suggested that 67.3% of women and 58.7% of men reported calorie intakes that were so high or low that they were physiologically implausible. The NHANES data were used by the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee in its scientific report to the US government. Archer said in an interview: “Anecdotal dietary data have no place in the scientific literature.”

Nature magazine

The Indians are on the warpath.

The Indians are on the warpath.

Pointman's

Something significant happened about two years ago and it was a signal that the times they were a changing. Greenpeace tried to disrupt a Russian drilling platform in the Arctic and the protesters were promptly arrested, with their ship being impounded. On previous escapades, the Russians kept the activists in jail for a few days before letting them free to become martyred ecowarriors in a blaze of publicity, but not this time. Various charges of a grave nature were laid against them as the bear threw a big scare into Greenpeace.

They were eventually pardoned by Gospodin Putin and the ship returned after a year moored in Murmansk, which means after being unused through a Russian arctic winter it’d have to be refurbished.

The message from Russia to Greenpeace and various other foreign NGOs, who thought they could interfere with what it considered to be its strategic interests, was quite…

View original post 1,053 more words

Genetic Makeup Leading Factor In Why Smarter People Live Longer, racism validated

Genetic Makeup Leading Factor In Why Smarter People Live Longer, racism validated

In other words, racism is a valid way to classify humans. Is not a pleasant fact for those who believe in equality, but that’s how it works. Your genetic makeup is the biggest contributor, and since groups of people share  genetic makeup it stands to reason to qualify them as a seperate group. Not politically correct, but nature has no knowledge of this concept and just goes on being a racist.

 

Smarter people tend to live longer than those with less luck in the intelligence department. Now, a new study hints at why: It’s (almost) all about good genes.

About 95 percent of the relationship between intelligence and longevity is explained by genetic influences on both traits, researchers reported July 26 in the International Journal of Epidemiology. The study was somewhat limited in that most of the participants took intelligence tests during middle age, rather than in their youth. By that time, the IQ results might be skewed by the cognitive decline of aging.

Nevertheless, the researchers say, the results suggest that brighter people don’t just live longer because they make healthier choices, or make more money that affords them better health care. Rather, they live longer because their genetic makeup favors both smarts and a long life.

“We found that the small relationship between intelligence and life span was almost all genetic,” said study researcher Rosalind Arden, a research associate at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

 
Source