Science is not supposed to be partisan

This is how they think science works

But it’s unavoidable when one party is explicitly anti-science. Scientific American scrutinizes Project 2025 from the perspective of science, and you won’t be surprised to learn that a substantial part of that document is explicitly about politicizing science. Let’s start by replacing civil servants with Republican hacks.

Project 2025 presents a long-standing conservative vision of a smaller government and describes specific, detailed steps to achieve this goal. It would shrink some federal departments and agencies while eliminating others—dividing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention into two weaker entities, for instance, and abolishing the Department of Education (ED) entirely.

What is even more unusual, and also mapped out in detail, is a plan to exert more presidential control over traditionally nonpartisan governmental workers—those Trump might describe as members of the “deep state,” or regulatory bureaucracy. For example, Project 2025 claims that the the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and other scientific institutions are “vulnerable to obstructionism” unless appointees at these agencies are “wholly in sync” with presidential policy. To that end, it would reclassify tens of thousands of civil service jobs as political positions that answer to the president.

Obstructionism, in their mind, is when someone competent and qualified tells a MAGA Republican that their ideas are wrong. Project 2025 hits a whole bunch of topics: abortion, agriculture, climate change, education, environment, health care, and technology. Do those sound like areas where science might possibly make an informed contribution? Or would you prefer to have some smug graduate of a backwoods Bible college dictating policy?

Ugh. “Cultural Christian.” That’s an excuse for a lot of stupidity

That photo is nauseating. Elon Musk is not at all pious — he’s blatantly pandering to conservatives who are often religious. Now he’s calling himself a “cultural Christian,” a phrase I’ve heard a few times before, and never fails to make my stomach churn.

Describing himself as “cultural Christian,” Musk indicated his guiding belief goes back to that of seeking greater understanding. “That is my religion, for the lack of a better way to describe it, it’s really a religion of curiosity,” he said. “The religion of greater enlightenment.”

And then applying his First Principles mindset, Musk extrapolated that what follows from that goal is to have “consciousness expand in scale and scope” by increasing population and allowing differing perspectives. Or put differently, more babies and free speech.

Yeah, that’s short for “white nationalist”. He’s also claiming to have been a thoughtful scholar of religion…until he discovered that science fiction was a better fit.

As he grew older, Musk has said, he turned to the great religious books—the Bible, Quran, Torah, some Hindu texts—to deal with an existential crisis of meaning. And he looked to philosophers such as Arthur Schopenhauer and Friedrich Nietzsche.

But not until the boy discovered science fiction, he says, did he begin to find what he was looking for. In particular, he says, it was the lesson he took away from the “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” that the purpose of life wasn’t so much about finding the big answers but asking the right questions.

I don’t believe he ever read those religious texts or those philosophers, making him similar to Donald Trump. But I can believe he read Douglas Adams, although he didn’t understand him.

Elon is a perfect example of a real-life Otto.

What voting block will he piss off next?

I wouldn’t have guess the Irish, but the Irish would notice.

“Has anybody ever seen the movie ‘Gangs of New York’? ” Vance queried at a press conference held at the Milwaukee Police Association. “That’s what I’m talking about.

“We know that when we have these massive ethnic enclaves forming in our country, it can sometimes lead to higher crime rates,” Vance stated. “What we want is an American immigration policy that promotes assimilation.”

This is what happens when you base your policy on what movie you’ve seen. The facts are a bit different, though.

However, studies have indicated that migrants are no more likely to commit crimes than native-born Americans. The fictional film is set in 19th-century New York and centers around a feud between rival gangs of different backgrounds. The protagonist is an Irish immigrant seeking revenge for his father’s murder, reports the Journal Sentinel.

The Danes better watch out if he ever watches The Salvation.

Or maybe he’ll center immigration policy on a viewing of Alien: Romulus.

Bad Grandpa

There is a town in Washington state which has built almost 30 dinosaur statues and installed them in parks. It’s called Granger, WA, and I have probably passed through it in the past — it’s near Yakima and the Tri-Cities, but they only started celebrating dinosaurs after 1994, after my time. As you might predict, some people don’t like it.

Here’s one old man complaining about it in the Tri-City Herald.

During my grandson’s dinosaur obsession, he brought home an elementary school library book that taught dinosaurs came into existence by means of evolution. He told me that he asked the school librarian if there were any books that taught that God created them, and he was told no.

I wish our public schools would present creationism (Intelligent Design) as a possible alternative. I shared my story with a local school board member to bring awareness and, hopefully, to include a few books that promote a viable option to evolution.

We are frequent visitors to different branches of the Mid-Columbia Library and at the time, we couldn’t find any physical books on dinosaurs that didn’t teach the theory of evolution. We requested they purchase “Dinosaurs for Kids” by Ken Ham, who is noted for building the full size replica of Noah’s Ark in Kentucky, named Ark Encounter. This particular book offers a view based on creationism. They were kind enough to purchase the book, and it is now a welcome addition to the library for our grandson and others to enjoy.

Or laugh at, as the case may be.

He does obliviously fail to notice one thing, though: the libraries aren’t afraid to include a wacky book from a religious source, but you won’t find any science books at the Ark Park. He does not, in fact, have any factual basis for presenting the narrow, sectarian cult beliefs of Answers in Genesis as comparable to the books the library did stock. Oh, he does have the usual argument from personal incredulity.

Both creationists and evolutionists easily acknowledge that the modern day inventions of a F-22 fighter jet, the Freedom Tower, or Mount Rushmore couldn’t have happened by accident or chance, but had to have a designer. I believe a much more complex structure, a living breathing human being, had a creator.

To me, it seems to be a blind leap of faith that the universe popped into existence as if by magic; in that matter created itself out of nothing by sheer random accident.

This seems to defy all science and mathematical probability, in my opinion. Others can consider another perspective, but I’ll stick with the idea that God, who wants a personal relationship with us, created this beautiful world by design.

So…he misrepresents evolution, which does not argue that complex organisms arose entirely by chance; he conflates evolution and the origin of the universe; he has an opinion that evolution defies science, rather than being part of it; he claims to have knowledge of the personal choices of an invisible intangible supreme being that created a universe of many trillions of stars so that he could be friends with a few mammals on one planet. I pity his grandson.

He ends his silly little opinion piece with what he probably considers a clever remark.

Dinosaurs may be extinct, but my beliefs don’t have to be.

I don’t think he understands that words like “extinct” can have multiple meanings, or that his beliefs aren’t persecuted — witness the Mid-Columbia Library’s response to his request.

You might be wondering how this random old guy has such authority in science that he can be advising the local school board. Here are his qualifications:

Lee Walter is Sunday School superintendent at Columbia Bible Church in Kennewick and vice chairman of the Tri-Cities Child Evangelism Fellowship.

No qualifications at all, no understanding of science, but his opinions are regularly featured in the Tri-City Herald — and he’s distressed that he can’t find his religious myths sufficiently represented in the public library.

Does anybody else find the concept of a Child Evangelism Fellowship distinctly creepy? What kind of person signs up for that?

Where have all the creationists gone?

Remember when we used to have creationists pop up in the comments here to spew stupid arguments and everyone would be wrangling over their inanities? They haven’t been coming by in recent years. I’d like to fantasize that we educated them all and they all learned the errors of their ways, but we know that’s not true. More likely, we have a reputation as an intensely hostile environment, and they migrated to occupy a more suitable niche.

But where?

I think I found them. Their new habitat is…Instagram.

Here’s a delightful little video, a guy doing a parody of Rage Against the Machine, changing they lyrics of “Killing in the Name” to explain how species change over time (sorry, I can’t imbed Instagram videos here, you’ll have to click on the link to see it). It’s short, it’s amusing. But it’s the comments that are amazing. I snipped out a small collection of the garbage posted there.

It’s funny how the upper echelons of biology, genetics, and evolutionists have disproved this. But the regular people and educational institutions haven’t caught on yet.

The fossil record doesn’t support the theory of evolution

Darwin has been debunked

But if all mammals came from fish, why are there still fish?

The laws of thermodynamics disprove evolution. Especially the second law.

But wait. Why are there still horses?

Interesting mix of micro evolution, a proven fact, with macro evolution, a long debunked theory

Evolution is a fun fantasy

Requires faith to believe we came from nothing, just like it requires faith to believe in God creating us. Fascinating the study abiogenesis, in the beginning, how it all could have started. I don’t have enough faith to believe we are one big accident, but that’s just me. 😉

we don’t evenadapt…we die if there is a 1 degree celsius difference from a country to another and u say we evolve? get outta here.

It’s an effen THEORY …

Christ is Lord

Brings up a good question about the ethics of fertility treatments and surrogacy. Some genes aren’t meant to be passed but we decided we’re going to force them down the line

Then explain this, why do monkeys and primates still exist if we EVOLVED from them.. would they have not died out? That sure is what the lyrics here imply, as well as the THEORY of evolution. Just admit, you dont have an answer for EVERYTHING.. Sorry.

Now do a song about how the fossil record is littered with evolutionary dead ends. Oh, wait…

The funniest part is there is no evidence of macro-evolution(monkeys to humans) but extensive evidence of micro-evolution(Darwins birds). God created all. Ecosystem factors created adaptations post creation.

Some of it might be sarcasm, like the “Why are there still…” comments. I didn’t include the sensible comments, like, “Imagine being a country that still has to explain evolutionism. I live 1km from the Vatican and NO ONE questions Darwin. Only ‘mmmurricah 😂” But it’s impressive how creationists have adapted by migrating to more favorable environments where they can double down on their folly.

I’m afraid to look at TikTok now.

How weird are they getting?

This weird.


Trump supporters are carrying around a pretend jar of JD Vance’s jizz to mock Democrats that are unable to conceive children, just in case anyone wonders why we think they are a cult and just plain fucking weird

Even if it’s just pretend, this is a gross concept.

In which I am entertained by the antics of economists

A trio of economists, Card, Angrist, and Imbens, won the Nobel Prize in 2021 for a natural experiment that showed that a commonly held belief about the relationship between the minimum wage and unemployment wasn’t always true. That seems reasonable to me — economics is basically about human psychology, and psychology sometimes gets strange. One strange psychological aspect of some economists, though, is that they have the notion that economics is as robustly mathematical and predictable as physics, and questioning the reliability of economics is heresy. Some economists were furious about an experiment that called their assumptions into question.

Their research didn’t conclude that an increase in the minimum wage would boost employment in every circumstance. Far from it.

But it challenged the view that an increase in the minimum wage would always lead to unemployment.

However, their findings weren’t welcomed by the establishment.

In fact, they sparked an emotional debate in the economics profession.

American economist James Buchanan, a Nobel Laureate himself (in 1986), was scathing of the suggestion that a core “law” of economics might not be universal after all.

“The inverse relationship between quantity demanded and price is the core proposition in economic science, which embodies the presupposition that human choice behaviour is sufficiently relational to allow predictions to be made,” Mr Buchanan told the Wall Street Journal in 1996.

“Just as no physicist would claim that “water runs uphill,” no self-respecting economist would claim that increases in the minimum wage increase employment.

“Such a claim, if seriously advanced, becomes equivalent to a denial that there is even minimal scientific content in economics, and that, in consequence, economists can do nothing but write as advocates for ideological interests.

Cool. Keep in mind, Buchanan is defending economics with that statement.

Also worth keeping in mind: Buchanan was a Libertarian with a capital L, a senior fellow of the Cato Institute, and has been called The Architect of the Radical Right. But as we all know, conservative politics is totally apolitical, so his strong advocacy for ideological interests doesn’t count.

An additional comment: it turns out that considering evidence counter to dogma is the behavior of whores.

“Fortunately, only a handful of economists are willing to throw over the teaching of two centuries; we have not yet become a bevy of camp-following whores.”

He sounds like a fun guy.

Did they really need to remake Alien?

I kind of enjoyed Alien: Romulus. It’s a solid, workmanlike ‘haunted house in space’ movie — creepy, scary, and, unfortunately, familiar. If you like Alien, you’ll like Alien: Romulus because at it’s heart it’s exactly the same movie with different set dressing.

I had the leisure to think about what I was seeing, since the plot wasn’t much of a distraction, and I found myself wondering about the biology of the xenomorphs. There’s a lot of silliness there. One small thing I noticed was how slow and awkward the xenomorphs are. No real predator would stop and vogue in front of its prey, slowly opening its jaws to extend a second set of jaws while hissing and dripping. It’s become an indispensable trope in these movies, and sure, it’s intended to slowly ramp up the tension, but that’s not how predators act.

I feed spiders twice a week. Here’s how they act: they take their time prepping. They go on alert when something stumbles into their web, orienting themselves and rising up on their legs and paying close attention. That could be a terrifying moment in the scary movie, with that moment of tension, but when it is time to attack, they don’t delay — they move fast. They dart forward, immobilize the prey with more silk or a swift bite. They don’t stupidly pose prior to trying to disable the big creature they want to eat.

Maybe you’re not acquainted with spiders. I’ve also been attacked by a dog. It did not run up to my leg, stop, cock its head, snarl, and then slowly try to bite my calf (try, because I pedaled my bike and got away). If you’re making your living by killing your food, you don’t make it a cinematic experience, you get the business over with as quickly as possible.

Another thing that bugged me was all the slime. I don’t object to wet puppets, but the action is all taking place on a big metal ship. Where is all that water dripping off these aliens coming from? Wouldn’t a ship be equipped with dehumidifiers to extract all that water out of the environment? I know there were several scenes with partially flooded chambers, but why? I’m sure condensation is an issue in a ship, but in the future, ships in the vacuum of space don’t need to conserve air and water? How nice for them.

I’m not going to try to address the energetic cost of synthesizing and containing a highly reactive substance in their blood that has the ability dissolve its way through multiple levels of a metal spaceship.

I guess I’m a bookburner now

Oh dear. I replied to a question on Threads, which was asking what to do with a collection of right-wing media. I suggested that it ought to be burned.

imajazzbaby: I am in a quandary. I am currently cheating clearing out my late father’s house. His red neck MAGA house. It’s actually not too bad, flags, war eagles, “United We Stand” stickers on the windows. But there’s a huge stack of Dennis Prager books. Plus the complete works of Ayn Rand 🤮
I don’t believe in burning books. But I don’t want to donate that crap and send it out into the world either.
Any ideas on what to do with them?
pzmyers: Nothing is sacred. Burn the trash. You are not saying others can’t read them (although they shouldn’t) but that you are decluttering your personal property.
I am sorry that your father had such poor taste in books. That does not mean you are obligated to propagate it.

Note: this is very different from denying others the right to read these books — no one is obligated to preserve every item a deceased parent once owned, and that includes books. I’m going to have to clean out my mother’s bookshelves, and she used to be a regular reader of books, mostly detective stories, murder mysteries, that sort of thing. They’re all getting tossed, one way or another. I know well that irrational feeling that every item the loved one touched should be preserved and passed on to generation after generation, but I don’t think my children, or my children’s children, would actually be grateful to someday inherit a few houses full of old stuff.

Here’s a completely different situation:

“Hundreds of New College of Florida library books, including many on LGBTQ+ topics and religious studies, are headed to a landfill,” Sarasota Herald Tribune reports.

“A dumpster in the parking lot of Jane Bancroft Cook Library on the campus of New College overflowed with books and collections from the now-defunct Gender and Diversity Center on Tuesday afternoon. Video captured in the afternoon showed a vehicle driving away with the books before students were notified. In the past, students were given an opportunity to purchase books that were leaving the college’s library collection.”

Purging a library of every book on certain topics is a whole ‘nother ball of wax. Traditionally, they ought to have all the jugend gathered around a bonfire.

By the way, I have a bookshelf full of truly awful creationist books, and I’m not sure what to do with them. I’d leave them to a library as a historical resource, but not if they would just check them out to readers who might consider them validated because they are in a formal collection. I’ll probably suggest that they be incinerated or placed in a landfill.