John F. Kennedy, Reflecting on Nov 22,1963 some 61 years later

 On this day in 1963, at about the time I’m typing this, recess was over for the younger kids at John J. Audubon elementary school. I found myself climbing back up the stairs to my third grade classroom when I overheard an older boy coming down the stairs for their recess time. He was telling his friend, “did you hear, they shot the president.”

My parents being civic and interested in the politics and world affairs, plus proud Democrats, we knew all about our President. For my sibs, along with millions of other Americans back then, the Kennedy’s were like distant relatives, meaning it was personal - and the words were like a punch in the belly. Reinforced by our sad struggling teacher explaining what was being broadcast on the news and informed us school was over for that day and that we should go home to our families. We left school and all of us walked back home to be with our parents.

Dear Sabine Hossenfelder, why blame climate scientists for the politicization?

 

Dear Sabina Hossenfelder, 

I’ve been watching your YouTube videos for a while and for the most part, I enjoy them, because I love the topics, your informative sharp style, and you were refreshingly free of red flags. As I became a fan, I’ll admit I got some weird vicarious kick at discovering you were born in Frankfurt am Main during the time I was living there, during my 3 years in BRD & CH.

Then you started talking about climate scientists, people I’ve enthusiastically followed and learned from since my high school science classes (grad of ’73), and a topic I have closely followed for over a half century since.  Now, listening to you harp on climate scientists, I do see red flags cropping up, which I feel obligated to share as far and wide as my meager efforts will afford, via an email and posting at my blogs.

Your July 20th, “Fossil Fuels Don’t Come From Fossils? Tucker Carlson Fact Check” brought my feelings to a boil.  Now I want to do a little fact checking of your attitude and words, along with their unfortunate implications, in a society where determined willful ignorance runs rampant.

Fossil Fuels Don’t Come From Fossils? Tucker Carlson Fact Check

Sabine Hossenfelder - July 20, 2024 

5:44

“The world is full of untruth and half truth, right that's the whole problem right.”

8:14

"… Dr. Soon then goes on to complain about how climate scientists reacted to the opening statement from Al Jaber at the COP meeting earlier this year.

In the beginning of this cop 28 meeting,  the chairman, …  was saying that ‘there's no scientific reasoning to say that we should phase out fossil fuels.’ “

“He’s right. But then he backed off because of all this, baa-baa. …”

“There's no scientific reasoning to say that we should phase out fossil fuel.”

This isn’t an academic argument.  This is the stuff of rhetorical gamesmanship.    

No parameters, no nuances.  Give it a think Sabina. 

 

On Abortion Rights, considering the fundamentals.

 

I want to start with the greatest truth humanity has achieved, we are born out of Earth’s processes.  It’s a truth born out of our increasing understanding of human history going back into the dimmest reaches of Earth’s deep time.  Beginning with geology, then biology joined in, then complex biology, then living sensing creatures that created environments and ecology in an ever changing world.  Folds within folds of cumulative harmonic complexity flowing down the cascade of time, rushing into a future inhabited by humans.  

Birth and death is our lot.  It has always been part and parcel of our human condition.  It can’t be moralized out of existence by idealistic extremists who believe “God” is personally speaking with them.

Pregnancy is never a guarantee.  A fetus is a seed, a being, a human potentiality.    Spontaneous natural abortions, miscarriages happen.  A fetus may be a human, but it doesn’t take on the mantle of personhood until those first breaths of life-giving air are infusing its lungs and pumping through its arteries and veins.

It should be significant that the fact of practicing abortions is older than civilizations, with Jewish scripture going into details on the topic, explaining why within particular circumstance abortion is a sad inevitability and that it is okay in the eyes of their God.  (God never promised us a rose garden!)

Beyond that, in a free society, legally speaking, why doesn’t a woman deserve the Right to Self-Defense along with Sovereignty Over Her Own Body?

Pregnancy is a difficult gauntlet, always will be, there will be deaths.  Those deaths aren’t confined to unborn beings, all too often the mother is also at mortal risk.

  

When push comes to shove, a just law would clearly acknowledge that a woman’s life is more precious to her existing family and society than an unborn potentiality.

Another factor all too often forgotten is that facing an abortion situation is nothing any woman (or young girl & her family) ever wants, life thrusts the situation upon her, and it is foremost she, herself, who must continue carrying the consequences of her choices, as others lose interest with the passage of time.

Another unspoken matter is that most often she’s also acting with the best interest of the unborn life within her at heart.  The fetus inside of her will always matter more to herself, than to any moralizing bystanders.  Women should be entrusted above all others, with the responsibility of making their own best informed choices about their own pregnancies.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“Unless we are changing minds we are losing.”

 

Over at CenterForInquire discussion forum I've found myself using the line, “Unless we are changing minds we are losing,” often enough that it's received a little push back.  Since it's a nice summary of where I'm at currently I want to repost my thoughts over here. 

"Unless We Are Changing Minds We Are Losing"

What does that even mean?

Basically, it’s an observation of the obvious.

Unless we are enticing people to reevaluate their own assumptions, we are going to continue propagating the same escalating mistakes, leading to yet more of the destruction humans are so famous for.

For the most part people haven’t a clue what’s going on in the greater world around them, it simply doesn’t matter to them. That state of mind needs to change before any constructive changes are possible.

A desire for fact based understanding that’s rational enough to accept new data, recognize and own mistakes, and to learn from those mistakes.

---

My personal litany would look something like this, of course others have their own perspective, and theoretically in the end we balance each other out, at least in a healthy pluralistic society it would look like that.

A deeper appreciation for the seasons and flow of Earth’s deep time and our evolutionary roots.

The need for a deep down profound appreciation for the Human Mindscape ~ Physical Reality divide, and its cascading implications.

A deeper appreciation of the fact that we are evolved biological animals, kin to all other creatures that ever lived upon this planet.

The fact that it’s Earth that created us,
and we who create our gods.

Challenge Jesus the “Savior” with the appreciation for Jesus the prophet (and life coach).

Enrich our imaginations with the appreciation that the Bible is a creation of our own human drama, processed through our own hearts, minds, & souls.

…

Enunciate a woman’s Right to Self Defense, and sovereignty over her own body.

Acknowledge that sad truth that, when push comes to shove, a woman’s life is more important than the unborn Potential Person forming within her.

A living fetus, that is a human potentiality, takes on the mantel of personhood during its first breaths of life.

Abortion and earlier infanticide are sad but unavoidable facts of human history.

…

Seriously confronting our climate & resources problems requires an internal appreciation that we must learn to accept doing with less.

We can’t fool mother nature.  

But that’s me, what about others? Here’s where my suggestion for a
Democratic Party Online Discussion Forum. comes into play.  

Unfortunately seems like less and less people are into discussing ideas, so there’s that.

I did notice today that some poll finally showed trump’s 35% diehards has cracked, and slipped to 25% - that’s big & promising, if true, that’s why it’s double important for Democrats to try doubly hard to engage with right wing citizens who’ve been fed way too much KoolAid.

Their state of mind literally is the product of strategic brainwashing and we ought to try confronting that with a certain degree of compassion. Even as some of their ideas are absolutely reprehensible and objectionable and destructive.

=================================

Democratic Party Online Discussion Forum

==================================

Comment to the above

L.:

I think the lists of beliefs are out there.

It’s not about the lists, it’s about people actually discussing them.

L.:

I don’t like political platforms for the reason that it can appear I support the whole platform because I voted for one person. That’s why I emphasize getting to know people who think differently, and growing some mutual respect, then listening can begin, and change can happen.

We can’t ignore that the political system rules our lives on many levels, because it isn’t perfect or neat enough for polite company is a poor excuse to abandon and ignore it.

I’m all for all the nice discussion groups you can form, nothing wrong with that, except that it simply isn’t enough.

Heck the formula is as simple and straight forward as making compost*, nothing has changed in ages: A healthy democracy demands an informed and engaged electorate.

The Democratic Party needs to grow cohesion within the Democratic Party, every bit as much as it needs to figure out how to reach out and better explain themselves.  That's why I think a Democratic Party Discussion Forum would be a great place to inform, network, build ideas, reengage the grassroots roots and so on.  

Democratic Party Discussion Forum - think about it.

=======================================================================

(~40%green, ~40%brown, ~20%food stuff - keep moist, aerate)

Says the proud owner of a beautiful compost harvest.

,image1440×1384 548 KB

image1116×1508 464 KB

Dear Democratic Party (callers) . . .

In response to the flood of Democratic Party donation pitches I receive and since I don't have money for all of them, I want to tell what I do have to offer.  Need a dynamic researcher, drop me a line.  Here's an introduction along with some relevant links.

Democrats need more than cash!  The DNC need to better inform and engage their grassroots base, that means using every resource available, and that should include starting a Online Democratic Party Discussion Forum where people can share their ideas and network, educate, nurture enthusiasm, engage your base.  If we aren't changing minds we are losing. 

"Considering our dysfunctional public dialogue, in 14 verses."

Democratic Party Online Discussion Forum

Googling, “Why are Democrats losing voters?” reveals that voters who care are feeling so disenfranchised by the Democratic Party that they are turning off in droves. 

This, during a year that should have every Democracy loving American energized and looking for how they can best participate in the coming election, it’s frightening.

After all, more than anything this election will be about the future of open and fair elections in the USA. Beyond that, it’s going to be a national referendum between the importance of honesty and truth in America’s public dialogue vs. a descent into anger driven anarchy. No exaggeration, simply pay attention to how the Republican Party has been engaging in every imaginable dirty trick to stymie future election participation and voting legitimacy.

Successful politicians require strong, informed, proactive support at their backs if they are to lead, yet the DNC seems to be doing little to nurture that sort of buy-in from their grassroots. Why?

The DNC’s disregard towards rank and file concerns is reflected in the constant bombardment of DNC’s boilerplate donation pitches, as though donating money was all We The People are good for. I understand the need to fundraise, but what about making us feel like active participants through straight talk, informing us of challenges, calling for feedback, being responsive, nurturing engagement.

The DNC should earn its money by informing and engaging constituents in a way that makes sense to us and connects with our lives. Creating relevance, encourages enthusiasm, produces participation.

Why not use the internet? Why not create a quality internet platform for having constructive political dialogue?  By Democrats for Democrats!

The Democratic Party Online Discussion Forum. (continued)

Diary, responding to Dr. J.W. Geier (21-10-09) It's not the sun, or bad models.

 

John W. Geier MD, commented at 

Robert Holmes aka 1000Frolly PhD. Conman is, as Conman does.

... 

The main science issue is that the Earth cannot act as its own experimental control.

Computer models of the Earth’s climate reflect the biases and knowledge gaps of the modellers and amplify errors over time.

It is unfortunate that the other terrestrial planets in this solar system are quite different from Earth.

The climate is a holistic function of the stellar flux, atmosphere and distribution of land and ocean on a planet.

september 28, 2021 at 10:53 PM

{ I’ve been busy with chores, so not much going on at my blogs.  Getting an intelligent comment, let alone any serious discussion, is fairly rare, so sometimes there's many days where I don't bother checking my comments folder.  

This morning I found a comment from a couple weeks ago (how the time flies) it was refreshingly coherent, at least against the backdrop of what I usually get, and it offers me something worth discussing. The sort of comment I feel obligated to post and respond it.  

Dr. John Geier's comment fits that bill.  Even if I believe he's being deceptive, and missing the forest for the trees.  Thing is, I imagine he might well be deceiving himself first and foremost.  Which is why I want to try and explain what he's missing, hopefully doing a little better than the time before.}

citizenschallenge responds to Dr. Geier …

With all due respect Dr. Geier, that is nonsense. We know plenty well what is going on within our global heat and moisture distribution engine. Science has been intensely studying our atmosphere since the 1940s - nature is not some trickster and we don't need another Earth to experiment with in order to understand how our Earth's geosphere/biosphere behaves.

Why do you set impossible expectations? 

Considering God as a creation of our own human minds. (workbook #c)

This comes from a conversation over at CenterForInquiry discussion forum under the far ranging thread headed: Why Did You Choose Atheism?  It’s part of my workshop.

post #117 - Sep 4, 8:33 PM

Write4u comments: “Evolution is established science.”

I offered a slight adjustment.

Citizenschallenge:  Evolution is established by scientific evidence.    : -)

Now if only we really let that lesson soak in, as we think about who and what we are.

As for God, I would suggest that the evidence points to God being the product of our minds. And where did that come from you ask?

Responding to a Christian's missive - (workbook #b)

Unknown commented on "An Honest Look at The Limits To Growth (Ugo Bardi)" 

 Awaiting moderation.

Comment Rejected… on the grounds that I won’t be a billboard, I’m looking for serious dialogue!

but I will build a response post around it.

Since Mr. Unknown’s missive comes at a good time and I’m in this ‘workshop mode’  I’m going to dissect his allegations as an exercise in explaining my ideas.  He and others are invited to share responses, here or at the CFI Forum.

Aug 25, 2021:  Unknown commented on "An Honest Look at The Limits To Growth (Ugo Bardi)"

Mr Unknown writes:  Citizenschallenge, you have been tricked into believing the creator of this earth has limits to what he can and will do. 

___________

The “creator” of this Earth is star dust and the work of billions of years worth of physics, geology, biology and cumulative change over time, that is Evolution.

___________

Cc, I used to believe as you do and so started a recycling center in 1974 in N. Calif in southern Humboldt County. I wanted to save the planet but i had much much more to learn and i did. 

___________

Yes we certainly have plenty to learn when we’re still green behind the ears - oh but what fun years those were.  Fortunately, usually I took grandpa's advice: “Listen!  Even if you already know it all.  Shut up and listen, you just might learn something.”

You have created your own version of who I am, it does not fit the reality.  

Although I’ll admit I know about Humboldt county back in da day: “sinsemilla, send some to me-ia”    ;-). 

And okay it would have been nice to be part of helping save our biosphere, the planet will get by.  The global support systems we depend on, not so much.  It’s truly heartbreaking witnessing how horribly self-centered and greedy and self-destructive our generation wound up being.  Even after all we had learned about the ways of Earth.  

But, that’s another story.

___________

It took total surrender to the only one who rules heaven and earth. 

___________

What’s that even mean “taking total surrender”?  

Total surrender to the Bible?  Total surrender to a slick talking preacher who got his hooks into ya?

I didn’t need to surrender to anything, all I needed was to open my eyes and senses to observing, honest curiosity, learning and contemplating nature and Mother Earth.  

Observing, acting, thinking, learning, loving it and so on.   

It’s amazing how much mother nature can teach those who pay attention, sort of like the Bible told me: “Seek and ye shall find.”  Scientist sure have learned a great deal, we should pay attention to them.

Prof Trecek-King on Doing Your Own Research. What's the problem?

Recently SkepticalScience.com reprinted an interesting article: "Thinking is Power: The problem with 'doing your own research'” by Melanie Trecek-King Associate Professor of Biology at Massasoit Community College in Massachusetts, she also maintains the website Thinking is Power with a series called Don’t Trust Yourself.

The title and article caught my eye since I’m one of those who does a fair amount of my own “research” - someone who has also become leery of misleading labels and convinced of the importance of respecting definitions.  Too often a group of people will be tossing around a term with everyone investing it with their own poetic license. 

For example, poetically speaking I consider myself a “student of Earth,” but I don’t do any real research, any more than I’m a real Student. 

Fact is, I’m a lifelong enthusiast who does homework, trying to learn what I can about my subject of the moment.  It’s my honest curiosity that keeps me on the straight and narrow and defines the quality of my collective knowledge.

The serious college student, researcher, professor, scientist are on altogether different levels, ones that deserve to be recognized and respected by all enthusiasts.  After all, they do all the hard work, they digest the data, coherently report on it and share their efforts with the rest of us - that's how we learn.

That’s why I think Melanie Trecek-King words are overdue and should be part of any young student’s reading list.  They also belong on the enthusiast’s reading list because they make for a good self-evaluation checklist for those who fancy themselves lovers of learning and knowledge.

The professor’s article makes a fitting addition to my collection, and it gives me a chance to expand on her theme with the addition of some thoughts of my own, coming from the outside looking in, so to speak.

At first I wanted to select specific quotes, but her 900 word text is a concise whole that I couldn’t slice and dice without damaging, it deserves to be read in its entirety.  I thank Professor Trecek-King for allowing me to repost her excellent article.  

========================

The problem with “doing your own research”, 

by Melanie Trecek-King

The phrase “do your own research” seems ubiquitous these days, often by those who don’t accept “mainstream” science (or news), conspiracy theorists, and many who fashion themselves as independent thinkers. On its face it seems legit. What can be wrong with wanting to seek out information and make up your own mind?

The problems with “doing your own research”

1. That’s not what research is. 

Definitions matter. When scientists use the word “research,” they mean a systematic process of investigation. Evidence is collected and evaluated in an unbiased, objective manner, and those methods have to be available to other scientists for replication. 

Conversely, when someone says they’re “doing their own research,” they mean using a search engine to find information that confirms what they already think is true. We are all prone to confirmation bias, and the effect is especially powerful when we want (or don’t want) to accept a conclusion. 

Cc:  Definitions matter. 

Steven Koonin, liar for hire. A bibliographic collection - Student Resource

Let’s start with a couple short informed observations of why Steven Koonin’s “Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why It Matters”, is nonsensical claptrap.

There is no development of the arguments, no counter-points, no constructive back and forth, just the same arguments that they appear to have thought up once and never examined.

Personally, I like taking on smart criticisms. They help hone the science, clarify the arguments and point to areas of needed research. But there isn’t a single thing here worth taking on.

Dr. Gavin Schmidt, PhD

Director of GISS 

Climate scientist Ben Santer, (with appropriate links added by myself):

“It is simply untrue that Prof. Koonin is confronting climate scientists with unpleasant facts they ignored or failed to understand.” 

Dr. Ben Santer wrote in his resignation letter to Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory: “The climate science community treats uncertainties in an open and transparent way. It has done so for decades. 

At LLNL, we routinely consider whether uncertainties in models, observations, and natural climatic variability call into question findings of a large human influence on global climate. They do not.”

 My question: Why has Koonin rejected honesty, learning and self-skepticism, which are the foundations of serious science?

========================

Time to finally get “Steven Koonin’s liar for hire, a bibliographic collection” posted and behind me.  I need to complete this, rather than simply blowing it off, because I’m driven by my utter incomprehension at the success of Koonin’s 2021 stale rerun of the same one dimensional anti-science rhetorical campaign strategy pioneered by the Father of Science By Slander, Fred Seitz back in the tobacco war days.

“Steven Koonin’s Liar for Hire, a Bibliographic Collection”

A Student Resource

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Steve Koonin Coasts On ‘09-’11 Obama Gig, Pens 'Unsettled,' a Pre-Re-Debunked Climate Denial Book

ClimateDenierRoundup for Climate Hawks and Kos, 2021,05,06

Five statements author Steven Koonin makes that do not comport with the evidence.   

Marianne Lavelle, May 4, 2021, ClimateNews.org

Koonin’s case for yet another review of climate science

Gavin Schmidt @ 15 June 2019, RealClimate.org

EPA - Here's the Obama energy guy that Pruitt might hire

Robin Bravender, E&E News reporter, August 7, 2017, eenews.net

Climate Science Is Settled Enough - The Wall Street Journal’s fresh face of climate inaction.

Raymond T. Pierrehumbert, slate.com/technology

A New Book Feeds Climate Doubters, but Scientists Say the Conclusions are Misleading and Out of Date

Marianne Lavelle, May 4, 2021, InsideClimateNews.org

Steven Koonin to Step Down as DOE Science Honcho

Adrian ChoNov. 9, 2011, ScienceMag.org

Ben Santer: Climate Denialism has no place at Lawrence Livermore Nat'l Lab

Ben Santer, May 25, 2021, SkepticalScience.com and Union of Concerned Scientists

A critical review of Steven Koonin’s ‘Unsettled’

Mark Boslough, June 1, 2021, SkepticalScience.com and Yale Climate Connections

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse - Calling Out Democrat's Timidity. Pleading for the need to inform and engage.

Back in the 1960s and '70s, society and its leaders where confronted with the reality that the more we consumed and polluted, the faster our children and grand children would face horrific consequences.  It's 2021, yet the disregard continues, even as the consequences dance before our eyes.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse has a message for Democrats, leaders and voters, that we need to listen to and heed, or what's left of our democracy will disappear.  

https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov

I have a too tiny readership, though it does span the globe.  That's why I feel like I should apologize for my overly American-centrist tone.  

What can I say, this is my homeland, where I grew up, and where I've done most all of my traveling, where my friends and family and most of my memories exist and where I'll die, so it is what it is.  If anyone would care to share their perspective regarding these matters, please do leave a comment. 

We in America have been watching a ‘hostile takeover’ being waged upon our government.  Actually, too many have been oblivious to it.  This ‘hostile takeover’ attempt traces its roots to a reactionary rejection of both environmentalism, and human rights improvements by a few of the world's billionaires and tons of Dark Money.  

Why, because investing in the future threatened their gluttonous short term profit dreams.

It was a direct reaction to the increasingly successful human rights, and environmental movements of the '50s, '60s, ‘70s.  Back in the '50s scientists finally began to gain a realistic globally holistic, big-picture appreciation for Earth's interconnected complexity and harmony.  Plate tectonics, evolution, DNA and unraveling biological secrets, deconstructing atoms along with all their cascading implications and impacts.  

In the '60s this growing understanding received a slap in the face and kick in the butt, with the realization that the mathematical real-earth observational data regarding current trends was not looking good.

It’s Not A “Body-Mind Problem” - It’s An “Ego-God Problem.”

(updated January 1, 2022)

Among the lessons I’ve taken away from my Hoffman adventure is that as I’ve followed the philosophical roots of “dualism” back through Descartes (1600s) and on past Anselm (1000s), one thing has become clear. the entire philosophical edifice of this Mind-Body “Problem” was formed from within that Abrahamic God-fearing mindset that gave us the three major religions, with their self-serving patriarchal mentality, heaven and hell, along with branding dualism’s hard boundaries and need for a sense of certitude into our imagination and onto our expectations.

The Abrahamic worldview perceives people as isolated objects, not only from this planet, but each other, even from ourselves.  The creatures we live with and the landscapes we exist within are treated with contempt and wanton waste.

Regarding the “Mind-Body Problem.”  

Dr. Solms makes a wonderful analogy that highlights the error being made:

Question:  Was it lightning or thunder that killed the man?

It’s a meaningless question.

Lightning and thunder are simply different aspects of the same phenomena.

Our Mind and consciousness is the interior reflection of our living body (both its interior housekeeping and external interaction with the environment).  We simply cannot have one without the other.

We are embedded within an interconnected web of life and are the direct products of Earth’s Pageant of Evolution.

Why isn’t that reflected in modern philosophical discourse? 

Learning to appreciate the deep-time pageant of Evolution puts an entirely different richer light upon our interior existence.  An awareness that encompasses the whole of time and this planet that created us.

It also gives us a deep appreciation for the continuity of life.  Life is good, life is precious, but death is no enemy, painful though it may be.  Death is part of the cycle that brings forth new life.  Revel in the pageant you are blessed enough to be witnessing.  While you can. 

As for God?  

Who is “God,” but a creation of our unique complex human minds dealing with our day to days?   

Where did God come from?