First Immigrant Toddler

A Brit On America's Moment of Truth.

Scott Adams Tumbles to the Will To Power Party

The influence of Scott Adams is feared mightily by the Party of Corruption:

The Bully Party

I’ve been trying to figure out what common trait binds Clinton supporters together. As far as I can tell, the most unifying characteristic is a willingness to bully in all its forms.

If you have a Trump sign in your lawn, they will steal it.

If you have a Trump bumper sticker, they will deface your car.

if you speak of Trump at work you could get fired.

On social media, almost every message I get from a Clinton supporter is a bullying type of message. They insult. They try to shame. They label. And obviously they threaten my livelihood.

We know from Project Veritas that Clinton supporters tried to incite violence at Trump rallies. The media downplays it.

We also know Clinton’s side hired paid trolls to bully online. You don’t hear much about that.

Yesterday, by no coincidence, Huffington Post, Salon, and Daily Kos all published similar-sounding hit pieces on me, presumably to lower my influence. (That reason, plus jealousy, are the only reasons writers write about other writers.)

Joe Biden said he wanted to take Trump behind the bleachers and beat him up. No one on Clinton’s side disavowed that call to violence because, I assume, they consider it justified hyperbole.

Team Clinton has succeeded in perpetuating one of the greatest evils I have seen in my lifetime. Her side has branded Trump supporters (40%+ of voters) as Nazis, sexists, homophobes, racists, and a few other fighting words. Their argument is built on confirmation bias and persuasion. But facts don’t matter because facts never matter in politics. What matters is that Clinton’s framing of Trump provides moral cover for any bullying behavior online or in person. No one can be a bad person for opposing Hitler, right?

Some Trump supporters online have suggested that people who intend to vote for Trump should wear their Trump hats on election day. That is a dangerous idea, and I strongly discourage it. There would be riots in the streets because we already know the bullies would attack. But on election day, inviting those attacks is an extra-dangerous idea. Violence is bad on any day, but on election day, Republicans are far more likely to unholster in an effort to protect their voting rights. Things will get wet fast.

Yes, yes, I realize Trump supporters say bad things about Clinton supporters too. I don’t defend the bad apples on either side. I’ll just point out that Trump’s message is about uniting all Americans under one flag. The Clinton message is that some Americans are good people and the other 40% are some form of deplorables, deserving of shame, vandalism, punishing taxation, and violence. She has literally turned Americans on each other. It is hard for me to imagine a worse thing for a presidential candidate to do.

I’ll say that again.

As far as I can tell, the worst thing a presidential candidate can do is turn Americans against each other. Clinton is doing that, intentionally.

Intentionally.

As I often say, I don’t know who has the best policies. I don’t know the best way to fight ISIS and I don’t know how to fix healthcare or trade deals. I don’t know which tax policies are best to lift the economy. I don’t know the best way to handle any of that stuff. (And neither do you.) But I do have a bad reaction to bullies. And I’ve reached my limit.

I hope you have too. Therefore…

I endorse Donald Trump for President of the United States because I oppose bullying in all its forms.

I don’t defend Trump’s personal life. Neither Trump nor Clinton are role models for our children. Let’s call that a tie, at worst.

The bullies are welcome to drown in their own bile while those of us who want a better world do what we’ve been doing for hundreds of years: Work to make it better while others complain about how we’re doing it.

Today I put Trump’s odds of winning in a landslide back to 98%. Remember, I told you a few weeks ago that Trump couldn’t win unless “something changed.”

Something just changed.

—

You might like my book because Clinton’s bullies have been giving it one-star reviews on Amazon to punish me for blogging about Trump’s persuasion skills.

Leftist Morals, Moral Discrimination and Hypocrisy

Martin Luther King, Pussy Grabber

This has been known for some time, so it's not news - but it is pertinent to today's leftist hysteria.
This man has his own national holiday, and a great many streets and boulevards named after him. Even Ralph Abernathy found his sexual exploits repellant. But his national holiday will not be revoked, because: skin tone.

Why Not? Everything Else Is Topsy Turvy These Days

Researchers posit way to locally circumvent Second Law of Thermodynamics

In a universe where you can posit the existence of Maxwell's Demon, anything is possible.

How often do quantum systems violate the second law of thermodynamics?

In addition, this new formulation of the second law contains a very large amount of information, dramatically constraining the probability and size of fluctuations of work and heat and, tells us that the particular fluctuations that break the second law only occur with exponentially low probability.

And another kick in QM's teeth:

Quantum engines must break down

Our present understanding of thermodynamics is fundamentally incorrect if applied to small systems and needs to be modified, according to new research from University College London (UCL) and the University of Gdańsk. The work establishes new laws in the rapidly emerging field of quantum thermodynamics.

The findings, published today in Nature Communications, have wide applications in small systems, from nanoscale engines and quantum technologies, to biological motors and systems found in the body.

The laws of thermodynamics govern much of the world around us – they tell us that a hot cup of tea in a cold room will cool down rather than heat up; they tell us that unless we are vigilant, our houses will become untidy rather than spontaneously tidy; they tell us how efficient the best heat engines can be.

The current laws of thermodynamics only apply to large objects, when many particles are involved. The laws of thermodynamics for smaller systems are not well understood but will have implications for the construction of molecular motors and quantum computers, and might even determine how efficient energy extracting processes such as photosynthesis can be.

In this study researchers used results from quantum information theory to adapt the laws of thermodynamics for small systems, such as microscopic motors, nanoscale devices and quantum technologies.

Small systems behave very differently to large systems composed of many particles. And when systems are very small, then quantum effects come into play. The researchers found a set of laws which determine what happens to such microscopic systems when we heat them up or cool them down. An important consequence of their laws is that there is more fundamental irreversibility in small systems, and this means that microscopic heat engines can not be as efficient as their larger counterparts.

"We see that nature imposes fundamental limitations to extracting energy from microscopic systems and heat engines. A quantum heat engine is not as efficient as a macroscopic one, and will sometimes fail," said Professor Oppenheim, a Royal Society University Research Fellow at UCL's Department of Physics and Astronomy and one of the authors of the research. "The limitations are due to both finite size effects, and to quantum effects."

The researchers investigated the efficiency of microscopic heat engines and found that one of the basic quantities in thermodynamics, the free energy, does not determine what can happen in small systems, and especially in quantum mechanical systems. Instead, several new free energies govern the behaviour of these microscopic systems.

In large systems, if you put pure energy into a system, then you can recover all this energy back to use to power an engine which can perform work (such as lifting a heavy weight). But the researchers found that this was not the case for microscopic systems. If you put work into a quantum system you generally cannot get it all back.

Professor Michal Horodecki of the University of Gdansk, and co-author of the paper, said: "Thermodynamics at the microscopic scale is fundamentally irreversible. This is dramatically different to larger systems where all thermodynamic processes can be made reversible if we change systems slowly enough."

Flawed analysis casts doubt on years of evolutionary research

Flawed analysis casts doubt on years of evolutionary research

Studies based on the apparently flawed method have suggested Earth's biodiversity remained relatively stable - close to maximum carrying capacity - and hinted many signs of species becoming rapidly extinct are merely reflections on the poor quality of the fossil record at that time.

However, new research by scientists at the University of Reading suggests the history of the planet's biodiversity may have been more dynamic than recently suggested, with bursts of new species appearing, along with crashes and more stable periods.

The new study, published in Methods in Ecology and Evolution by Dr Manabu Sakamoto and Dr Chris Venditti, from Reading, and Professor Michael Benton, from Bristol, says a technique used to 'correct' records of diversity in fossils is actually giving misleading results.

It means almost a decade's worth of work aimed at providing an insight into evolution may be misleading as it was based on this fundamental error.

The method assumes that variations in the number of different fossils at any given time are a reflection of how much rock was available. It has been used in more than 150 published research papers since it was first used in 2007.

Dr Sakamoto, evolutionary biologist at the University of Reading, said: "Our work calls into question nearly a decade's worth of scientific reports and interpretations on the way life on Earth has evolved.

The researchers ran thousands of simulations to test the data correction method, but found it failed to return correct results in as much as 100% of the simulated cases.

Professor Mike Benton, Earth Scientist at University of Bristol, said: "The core assumption is that any portion of fossil diversity that can be explained by variations in rock volume should be explained by variations in rock volume. This assumption is based on no evidence.

"At the extreme, if you have no rock you get no fossils. However, there are many cases where two time intervals are represented by the same amount of rock worldwide, and yet fossil diversity varies massively. Explain that."

Earlier this year, Dr Sakamoto led research that revealed the dinosaurs were facing extinction even before the astroid strike that is credited with bringing about their ultimate decline.

Quality of the Fossil Record

How good is the fossil record?

The study, led by Dr Alex Dunhill, formerly at the Universities of Bristol and Bath and now at the University of Leeds, explored the rich and well-studied fossil record of Great Britain. Professional geological work has been done in the British Isles for over 200 years and the British Geological Survey (dating from the 1830s) has amassed enormous, detailed knowledge of every inch of the rocks and fossils of the islands.

Together with collaborators from the Universities of Bristol and Bergen, Dr Dunhill compared biodiversity through the last 550 million years of the British fossil record against a number of geological and environmental factors including the area of sedimentary rock, the number of recorded fossil collections and the number of named geological 'formations'. All of these measures have been used as yardsticks against which the quality of the fossil record can be assessed – but the new study casts doubt on their usefulness.

Dr Dunhill said: "We suspected that the similar patterns displayed by the rock and fossil records were due to external factors rather than the number of fossils being simply dictated by the amount of accessible rock. Our work shows this is true. Factors such as counts of geological formations and collections cannot be used to correct biodiversity in the fossil record."

The study benefits from the application of advanced mathematical techniques that not only identify whether two data sets correlate, but also whether one drives the other.

The results show that out of all the geological factors, only the area of preserved rock drives biodiversity. Therefore, the other geological factors – counts of fossil collections and geological formations – are not independent measures of bias in the fossil record.

Why The Left Loves Open Borders

Rigging Elections

It took Democrats a while to figure out that their grand strategy ought to be to give up on persuading the American people to elect them and instead for them to elect a new people.

Possession of a driver's license and pay stub does not a citizen make.

Perhaps if voters were registered only at birth or at the time of legal naturalization? But fraud has become easier to produce, and via hacking, easier to reveal. Still, laws don't matter any more as Obama/Hillary and their government of minions has proven conclusively.

I personally welcome all the foreign election observers, and I hope that they are effective. Our own government cannot be trusted with its own responsibilities anymore.

Weaponized Morality

Weaponized Morality

Indeed, the only people who actually do seem to believe the ideals underlying liberal democracy on their own terms are American conservatives, who are eternal losers that can serve only as gullible fools or controlled opposition.

This is not to say we are without idealism. We have a vision of hierarchy, of glory, of the upward path. But in what used to be our country, what should be sacred is cast in the dirt and what belongs in the gutter is trumpeted as an ideal. Our idealism is fueled by this terrible sense of betrayal, the raging fury that the institutions and figures who were supposed to secure our future have abandoned their responsibility and betrayed their duty.

Donald Trump, for all his faults, is a better man than anyone in the political class. Our own supposed leaders proudly boast they are plotting our deliberate destruction. The people who talk the most about “propriety” and “tone” are the same people who have unleashed death and chaos in pointless wars around the world.

“Morality?” Today, it’s just a shit test on a global scale, a public relations campaign, a marketing scam. To see a “Republican strategist” or a Beltway journalist pontificate about decorum is self-discrediting. To see the same people who celebrate the Folsom Street Fair suddenly clutch their pearls is revolting. It’s not about being “beyond good and evil” or denying standards. It’s about not falling for this same old con anymore.

And Here We Are

When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing; when you see that money is flowing to those who deal not in goods, but in favors; when you see that men get rich more easily by graft than by work, and your laws no longer protect you against them, but protect them against you … you may know that your society is doomed.
Ayn Rand