"But then, there is the "progressive" class ... that aimless mass of Western humanity so burdened by cultural self-loathing that it is to Islam, as ungulates are to lions."
"Her father called 911 on Wednesday, saying he had 'slapped' his daughter during an argument at their apartment."
Maybe he forgot he was under Canadian law for a moment, as Islamic law is curiously less gung-ho about penalties for parents who kill their children, especially when one stops to think of what's higher on the list for Sharia's punishments. That includes apostasy from Islam for which the penalty is death, according to Muhammad's own command. That is also of interest here in light of the victim's reported refusal to participate in prayers.
For "the science is settled crowd", being polite is now a thing of the past. While their house of bad science collapses around them, they have no intention of letting go, nay, they plan on stepping it up:
That means we no longer have the luxury of polite, time-consuming public debate on the issue. "We have to be much more aggressive about pinpointing our enemies, and doing it early—showing how and where they are spending their money to undermine our efforts," he says. "We need to learn how to inflict pain on the opposition."
The environmental movement must also do a better job of linking climate directly to shrinking harvests, falling water tables, receding glaciers, extended droughts and more violent storms. Already, food, water, and climate problems are simultaneously hitting many nations. It's happening now, and we need to connect that to climate change in the minds of all people.
Of special note among the AGW faithful, is that science has nothing to do with activism. Once convinced that they are right, there is no need for further thought, no need to engage the brain in that most valuable of human attributes ... skepticism.
But there's a much deeper problem than whether I am personally irked or not. Your insistence that your policies are necessary and beneficial to business is utterly at odds with what you and your administration are saying elsewhere. You pick a fight with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, accusing it of using foreign money to influence congressional elections, something the chamber adamantly denies. Your U.S. attorney in New York, Preet Bahrara, compares investment firms to Mexican drug cartels and says he wants the power to wiretap Wall Street when he sees fit. And you drew guffaws of approving laughter with your car-wreck metaphor, recently telling a crowd that those who differ with your approach are "standing up on the road, sipping a Slurpee" while you are "shoving" and "sweating" to fix the broken-down jalopy of state.
This is a repost of a piece we did in 2008. It seems more applicable today than it did even in 2008, especially since we now know beyond a doubt that AGW proponents would have the bunk-meter flashing RED after the first two of Carl's points.
Here is the Carl Sagan's bunkometer (taken from Demon Haunted World) , which we can apply to AGW theory. If you're still married to AGW when you're done ... consider yourself religiously attached and beyond redemption ... I suggest you hurry to your local grocery and buy tin-foil:
Whenever possible there must be independent confirmation of the “facts”
Encourage substantive debate on the “evidence” by knowledgable proponents of all points of view.
Arguments from authority carry little weight as “authorities” have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that there are no authorities; at most; there are “experts”.
Spin a variety of hypotheses. If there’s something to be explained, think of all the different ways in which it could be explained. Then think of tests by which you might systematically disprove each. The ones that survive are the ones to do in depth study on.
Do not become attached to any hypothesis just because it’s yours. Find reasons for rejecting all, including your own, hypothesis.
Quantify. If whatever you are explaining has a measure, quantify it so that measurement is more possible. Vague hypothesis, or those difficult to quantify will be the most difficult to prove or disprove. ie: AGW causes more hot, and more cold weather events.
If there is a chain argument, then each and every link must work, including the premise.
Use Occam’s Razor; which is to choose the hypothesis that explains the data in the simplest terms.
Ask: is the Hypothesis testable and falsifiable. Hypothesis that are not testable are not worth much. Could you duplicate accurately, at least theoretically, the hypothesis?
Although the trial of Dutch MP and critic of Islam, Geert Wilders, and its serious implications for free speech in Europe, is once again creating a furor in the press, another high-profile trial of a critic of Islam -- Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, in Austria -- is being overlooked.
Ms. Sabaditsch-Wolff now faces up to a three-year prison sentence if convicted of "inciting hatred against a religious group" and "defamation of religion" in a lecture in 2009 on the "Islamization of Europe."
Day in, day out, the story in Afghanistan is the same. The Taliban are being hunted mercilessly. American air assets have been flooding the battlespace in the surge, and the enemy is being worn down. Thousands of US soldiers are spreading out into the countryside and kicking over Talbian ant-hills, and in each case the result is the same ... dead and scattered Jihadists.
This is the part that we hear so little about; all we hear about are the ISAF AND USA deaths ... or civilian deaths. It's like watching a football game where only the other team's scores are given. You have no idea if your side is winning.
The fact of the matter is that the Taliban have never faced what they are facing now. Their leaders are killed almost as fast as they assume their positions (even in Pakistan) ... their fighters are killed day and night in a massively one-sided battle ... and they are losing. For the first time the Taliban are willing to negotiate ... why ... because they are losing not only the battle, but the will. Their factions are fragmenting and a growing number of fighters are coming home. There is a limit to how many young men are willing to leave their villages never to return.
The following video shows in great detail how many Taliban meet their end. The message to those picking up the bits and pieces of their former jihadist buddies is clear ... "If you want some; come and get it":
The following quote is not based on any Christian doctrine ... or at least any mainstream doctrine. It's what you'd find in Animism or Voodoo. My personal opinion is that Mo is simply playing at things she knows little about, like Christianity; it's all just a show:
"It means all the world to us to know that there are prayer circles out there and people who are keeping the spirits clean around us,"
It's truly amazing what on occasion drips from the mouths of the insincere.
Leading Canadian Climate scientist, Professor Tim Ball emailed this author to add his own comments and suggests the issue of residency time was part of the strategy to increase the focus on CO2. He says, "It is part of a bundle of claims about CO2 that are now shown false and Dr Kaiser's is another major correction. I believe they were all produced with malice and forethought driven by the political need to demonize CO2." Professor Ball further believes such a position is supported by the evidence of how the RS dealt with other issues including advocacy of dubious computer programs.
How do peace talks with the Taliban differ from those suggested by Jack Layton several years ago? It's simple really.
The Taliban today are fracturing because they are being slaughtered ... especially their leadership. The sheer weight of arms being brought to bear via the surge is causing fighters to come in from the cold.
When Jack made his naive suggestions several years ago, the Taliban had no intention of coming to the table because they were in a position of strength. "Peace" talks back then would've been capitulation talks on our part.
The main question at this time will be; how hard a line will Karzai hold ? He has less incentive to be conciliatory than in the past ... after all, the very Taliban leadership he is negotiating with will likely be dead by the time the next round of talks commence if US forces will it.
Psychologically, Taliban fighters in the field are being worn down. To take leadership positions is to die; and even as fighters are hunted mercilessly by US forces, terrorist leadership negotiates ... the incentive to die is suddenly paper thin.
Furthermore, with Special Forces facilitating the return of fighters to their villages (reintegration), morale among Taliban must be falling.
U.S. Gen. David Petraeus has confirmed that NATO has provided safe passage for top Taliban leaders to travel to Kabul for face-to-face negotiations with the American-backed Afghan government.
Petraeus declined to provide details of the alliance's role in the clandestine talks -- discussions that he described as "preliminary." The Afghan government has previously acknowledged that it has been involved in reconciliation talks with the Taliban with some NATO help.
Petraeus told reporters at the United Services Institute on Friday that it would "not be the easiest of tasks" for a senior Taliban leader to make his way to the capital, Kabul -- unless NATO forces permitted it.
He says NATO is "aware of it and allows it to take place."
Taliban video ... note the fear; note the dying fighters; note the accurate incoming rounds (sparks). This is happening day in day out, and even in Pakistan leadership are being hunted ruthlessly and killed in their beds almost daily via Drone. Imagine the fate of the fighters in the video if ISAF aerial support arrives.
... floating trial balloons for the boss ... or going roque?
Maverick Max went rogue again in a Toronto speech on Wednesday by advocating Ottawa get out of transfer payments to provinces while giving legislatures more tax room to finance the health, social welfare and education services they are constitutionally obliged to deliver.
For Jim Flaherty, who rolled out a blueprint on Tuesday showing continued growth in the social transfer envelope well into the next government’s mandate, the notion of surrendering $40 billion worth of fiscal clout over the provinces is a severely alien concept.
"What crap!" Hillier writes in the new edition of A Soldier First, an advance copy of which was obtained by The Canadian Press.
"The National Defence Act is clear — our sons and daughters need to have direction from the leaders that Canadians have elected, and they need to have that direction passed through the Chief of Defence Staff without interference from bureaucrats who have no preparation or training for this task, and no responsibility for those lives.
"Any governments who permit anything different should have their rear ends booted out of office by moms and dads of those serving sons and daughters."
