Whatever Would We Do?

Warmists Are Starting To Neuter Themselves To Reduce Their Carbon Footprint.

It's an ill wind that blows no one good...

The IPCC is causing ideologically based self-neutering amongst its believers; the next generation will benefit, fer sher.

Is Global Warming Toast (a la Judith Curry)?

Judith Curry is quoted here:

"Judith Curry, professor and chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, said if the "if the pause continues beyond 15 years (well it already has), they are toast.”

And there is more:

"There have been many reports that have shown how climate models have vastly overestimated "warming." For instance, a study in the journal Nature Climate Change "compared 117 climate predictions made in the 1990's to the actual amount of warming" and 114 of those predictions overestimated the amount of warming. Other studies have found that various climate models used by the United Nations have "forecasted two times more global warming than actually occurred."

After years of having "settled science" (as if there is such a thing) jammed down our throats as the Chicken Littles ran around the world screeching "carbon credits" and "world taxation", it's a welcome respite.

View Into An Abortionist's Mind

From Brietbart.com:

Jia Tolentino interviewed Susan Robinson, one of only four American abortionists who openly perform third-trimester abortions. Robinson is featured in the new documentary After Tiller, which premiered in New York last weekend...

From hairpin.com:

Tolentino: I was really moved and amazed by the scene where you're writing down a baby’s name, noting the family’s request for a memory box and a viewing, showing the little ink footprints. Do families often want to engage with their baby like this after an abortion? How many people are ready to—as you say—say hello to their baby at the same time that they’re telling it goodbye?

Robinson: With fetal anomaly patients, we ask them right up front if they plan to hold their baby after it's born. These patients, their emotional needs are so different from the ones who are looking at their pregnancy as an absolute disaster, who are just thinking, “Get it out of me, please, please, please.” Those patients—the maternal indications patients—they are not relating to their fetus as a baby, they’re relating to it as a problem.

But with a fetal indications patient—if she refers to it as her baby, I'll refer to it as her baby. If she’s named the baby, I’ll use the baby’s name too. I would say that most of these patients do decide to see and hold their baby, although many of them have a hard time dealing with the idea at first. We’ll take remembrance photographs, we’ll give them a teddy bear, the footprints. I mean, imagine being six months pregnant and finding out your baby’s missing half its brain, and you’ve got this nursery you’ve painted at home, you’re so ready—I don’t want them to go home from the procedure with absolutely nothing to remember and honor the baby, and its birth.

Tolentino: Wow. You’ll say “birth?”

Robinson: Yes. I try to mirror what will be the most consoling to the patient. In general, these patients – fetal indications – do talk about giving birth, so I’ll say that as well.

After Robinson said she sometimes will say “non-denominational prayers” with the mother and the family following the abortion, Tolentino wondered about this seemingly “macabre” situation of loving a baby in one’s arms “that you just committed yourself to ending its life…”

“That’s not macabre!” said Robinson. “Yes, that’s the first part of the procedure. We sedate the patient and euthanize their fetus, their baby, with an injection. The fetus passes away, doesn’t feel anything.”

Nope. Nothing macabre about killing someone, then calling it "birth" and cradling the just-killed carcass lovingly.

Taking Awhile

Is Evolution True or Fact or Managed Supposition?
What started as an answer to an Atheist regarding the debunking of “evolution as Truth”, has exploded into a full blown article on “What Qualifies As Knowledge?” (working title only). I currently have it only a quarter done, but I promised it out too soon and the massive expansion from a single point (wait; that was the Big Bang)… ok the increase in density (no wait that’s looking backward into the Big Bang)….

It’s just taking longer than I thought. Here’s a contingent outline that might not apply at all:

What Can Be Known
Introduction

A. The use and misuse of Logic in Pursuit of Ideology
B. The Rational Necessity of Supporting One’s Worldview
C. Inability to Support One’s Worldview
D. Evidential Theory, primary.

Part I Induction As Knowledge

A. Empiricism as disciplined induction (w/deductive subcomponents)
B. Hypotheses vs Knowledge
C. Limits
D. Dependencies
E. Application to Evolution Arguments (and Atheism/Materialism)

Part II Deduction As Knowledge

A. Logic, a summary
B. Mathematics, an overview
C. Necessary Precursors to Empiricism
D. Deduction

(1) Deductive Formatting
(2) Grounding
(3) Reductio Ad Absurdum
(4) Probability

E. Applicability to Evolution Arguments (and Atheism/Materialism)

Part III Evidentiary Theory

A Types and Quality of Evidence

(a) Physical
(b) Inductive
(c) Deductive
(d) Historical/

(B) Evidence As Truth
(a) Kinds of Truth
(b) Incorrigibility

Part IV What Qualifies As Knowledge?

A. Subjectivity As Defeater Of Objectivity.
B. Is Materialism Knowledge?
C. Is Skepticism Knowledge?
D. Probability And Bayes’ Theorem

Part V. Is Evolution Knowledge?

A. What is actually knowable from the fossils.
B. What is Actually Knowable from DNA
C. What is Actually Knowable from Empirical Observation
D. Power of Predicition; Utility for Biological Research.
E. What is Disallowed Under The Ideology of Exclusivity of Materialism.
F. What Can Be Rationally Concluded Regarding Evolution?

Addendum:
Also a section called:

How Atheists make non-rational demands of theists' evidence, which they cannot in any manner produce in defense of their own beliefs (i.e., completely irrational).

DOJ: Keeping Blacks In their Place - on the Democrat Plantation

Outrageous. According to Watchdog.org, the DOJ is preventing many black chidren from leaving poorly rated schools and attending high quality schools using vouchers.

"More than 90 percent of voucher recipients are minorities, and more than 80 percent are assigned to D or F schools."

And,

" Students could leave public schools only if their leaving would shift the demographics away from segregation."

And they'll stay where they're put, if Holder's DOJ has its way. Obama killed vouchers in DC the first day of his administartion. The Left fights vouchers tooth and nail; they lose folks off the reservation if they get real educations. The segregation excuse is an indication of the actual concern held for blacks: no education, that's OK, improper ratio of races: that's criminal.

It's unique, using Rasssism to effect racist ends.

FOX Sports Broadcaster Fired For Opposing Same-Sex Marriage While Not Even At Work

Maybe I should start collecting these things for those who are Christian to reference. We'll all suffer this sort of abuse for whatever our beliefs might be, Christian or not, if they are not Leftist approved.

FOX goes over the edge:

“I was shocked that my personal religious beliefs were not only the reason for Fox Sports firing me but I was completely floored when I read stories quoting Fox Sports representatives essentially saying that people of faith are banned from working at Fox Sports,” James told Breitbart News. “That is not right and surely someone made a terrible mistake.”
Craig Jones

No mistake, Craig. You can't hold a job if you have non-Leftist opinions, so never let them be known. Challenging the Narrative is not taken lightly or without punishment where possible.

Pelosi and De Facto Atheism

According to The Washington Times, the Catholic prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura has called out Nancy Pelosi on her internal contradictions of claiming to be a Catholic while also pimping abortion:

"House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has no Catholic right to be granted Communion, said the leading cardinal of the highest court at the Vatican.

Mrs. Pelosi should be denied Communion until she changes her advocacy views on abortion, Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke said, according to the Western Center for Journalism.

PHOTOS: Famous quitters: Those who bailed rather than face scandal, scrutiny or stress
That’s canon law, not opinion, he said. Canon 915 states that Catholics who are stubbornly contrary “in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.”

And Cardinal Burke said Mrs. Pelosi fits the definition.

“Certainly this is a case when Canon 915 must be applied,” he said, the Western Center for Journalism reported. “This is a person who obstinately, after repeated admonitions, persists in a grave sin — cooperating with the crime of procured abortion — and still professes to be a devout Catholic.”

The cardinal also said that Mrs. Pelosi is a perfect example of Catholics who separate their faith from day-to-day living.

“This is a prime example of what Blessed John Paul II referred to as the situation of Catholics who have divorced their faith from their public life and therefore are not serving their brothers and sisters in the way that they must — in safeguarding and promoting the life of the innocent and defenseless unborn, in safeguarding and promoting the integrity of marriage and the family,” he said.

The cardinal, an American, is the prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura in Rome, Life News reported.

I have wondered for years why the Catholic Church did not stand up for itself in this matter; now it has. So what about Joe Biden?