Category Archives: Politics

Who's Got the Juice?

Posted on by

Compare the population density of the world, with the nighttime image, which should be some kind of proxy of electric power availability.

In most places, there is a reasonable correlation with high population density giving you bright lights. In some places, like the US, even low population density is noticeably lit up. Now take a peek at Nepal and Bangladesh, just above India. That’s scary to me; all those people living in close proximity without access to modern “conveniences.” Scary in a different way is central China, because one might suspect that electrification is going to be expanding there soon, with all the implications to carbon being dumped into the atmosphere.

Parity Transformation

Posted on by

“Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black”

Imagine that hundreds of black protesters were to descend upon Washington DC and Northern Virginia, just a few miles from the Capitol and White House, armed with AK-47s, assorted handguns, and ammunition. And imagine that some of these protesters —the black protesters — spoke of the need for political revolution, and possibly even armed conflict in the event that laws they didn’t like were enforced by the government? Would these protester — these black protesters with guns — be seen as brave defenders of the Second Amendment, or would they be viewed by most whites as a danger to the republic? What if they were Arab-Americans? Because, after all, that’s what happened recently when white gun enthusiasts descended upon the nation’s capital, arms in hand, and verbally announced their readiness to make war on the country’s political leaders if the need arose.

It's My Party, and I'll Cry if I Want To

Posted on by

Court to hear suit over “Tea Party” name

Nearly three dozen people and groups who called themselves part of the Tea Party movement filed suit against O’Neal and two associates in January, accusing them of trying to “hijack” the movement and confuse the public.

Reminiscent of the tussle between the Judean Peoples’ Front and the Peoples’ Front of Judea. (Thtwike him, centuwion! Thwow him to the gwound!)

Lights! Camera! Ticket!

Posted on by

Math tutor uses numbers to fight red light camera ticket

When his wife received a ticket in the mail recently, the first thing she said was the yellow light was too short.

So Mike, who works with numbers all the time as a math tutor, put it to the test.

“I said, ‘If it’s really short, then you got short-changed and you got a ticket illegally,'” said Mogil.

The speed limit on Collier Boulevard, where she was cited, is 45 mph. According to county guidelines, the yellow light should be 4.5 seconds.

Mogil said he tested it 15 times with an average of only 3.8 seconds.

Good for him, showing with empirical data that the light was wrong. Evidence wins. Maybe it’s just me, though, but the story seems to be hinting that anyone who is not a math teacher/tutor, or perhaps a similarly-accomplished professional, would be incapable of performing this kind of analysis. I really hope that timing a light with a stopwatch and averaging the results is within the capabilities of anyone licensed to drive a car.

Mogil says he’s already checked 65 intersections and found that only seven yellow lights are long enough.

I have read of areas where red-light cameras were installed, and the contractor shortened the length of the yellow light in order to jack up revenue — they get a share of the ticket proceeds. This is either negligence or fraud. I hope they find out which.

The $64,000 Question

Posted on by

($64,000 being “big money” ages ago, before anyone who wanted to be a millionaire had a chance to be able to become one via a game show)

The context of the quote is really not all that important, though if you read the article in which it appears, an opponent of the recent U.S. healthcare legislation admits he’s unfamiliar with all the details he’s opposing. He says, “I can’t tell you exactly what the deal is.”

Then comes the money shot:

If you can’t tell us exactly what the deal is, why are you opposing it and fighting against it?

This applies to pretty much everyone who is in opposition to some scientific tenet, and especially to situations where the argument has gotten political. Anti-relativity cranks? They don’t understand relativity — invariably they will insist on a preferred reference frame or absolute simultaneity. Screw nature and what we actually observe. Quantum theory? Nah, God doesn’t play dice. Everything secretly really has a trajectory. My classical solution is just as good at solving this one problem. QM just can’t work that way, experimental evidence be damned. Evolution? Nope, the world is just 6000 years old. I’ve got a book that says so, Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs and besides, evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics. Global warming? Bzzzt. Inhofe built an igloo after it snowed in Washington DC. It hasn’t warmed since 1995. Besides, Al Gore is fat.

This is painfully common — some of the loudest, angriest critics of the Affordable Care Act are also some of the least informed, most confused, embarrassingly ignorant observers anywhere. In this case, Cassell has become a national joke because he’s repulsed by a health care reform plan that he fully admits he doesn’t understand.

It’d be funny if it weren’t so pathetic

This turns into a template

This is painfully common — some of the loudest, angriest critics of the [Area of Science] are also some of the least informed, most confused, embarrassingly ignorant observers anywhere. In this case, [Name] has become a national joke because he’s repulsed by a scientific theory that he fully admits he doesn’t understand.

It’d be funny if it weren’t so pathetic

And that’s so true. It is pathetic that people can oppose something they don’t understand. They just know it’s wrong, dammit; who cares if they’re tilting at windmills? That they’ve been lied to, and they uncritically accepted (and perpetuate) the lie, because they can’t be bothered to think and/or become informed. We’re tempted to laugh, but there’s that sickening thought that these people vote, and the people they vote for think they can reshape scientific truth by decree, in order to align it with some ideology they possess.

So try and reveal the real truth of the matter:

Ask them what the deal is, and if they can’t tell you exactly what the deal is, ask them why they are opposing it and fighting against it. I fear it will do little good with people who refuse to think or become informed, but it’s worth shot.

No More Funny Voices

Posted on by

Going, Going, Gone

Though the [Federal Helium Reserve (FHR)] still holds more helium than any other stockpile by far, its stores are rapidly diminishing. Since 2003, the US Bureau of Land Management has been methodically selling off the FHR’s hoard (and repaying the $1.4 billion debt) in compliance with a 1996 Congressional act that called for phasing out the reserve by 2015.

Echoing years of complaints from the scientific community, in January the US National Research Council (NRC) released a report condemning the liquidation of the FHR as a shortsighted blunder that has thrown the global market into turmoil and hindered scientific research.

Paging Professor Eppes

Posted on by

Fighting crime with math: Model explains hot spots of illegal activity

Using a decade of data from the Los Angeles Police Department, UC Irvine criminologist George Tita and colleagues developed a mathematical model of how urban crime hot spots form and spread. It reveals two distinct types of areas that respond differently to suppression tactics.

Illegal activity follows a discernible pattern, Tita says: “Criminals forage for opportunities to commit crimes, much like bees search for pollen or butterflies for nectar. Foraging patterns are predictable, whether you study human or insect behavior.”

The Most Ridiculous Thing I’ve Heard … Today. This is not a Repost.

Posted on by

Brooklyn Dem Felix Ortiz wants to ban use of salt in New York restaurants

“No owner or operator of a restaurant in this state shall use salt in any form in the preparation of any food,” the bill reads.

Now, I know I’ve tried to make the case that food preparation, as practiced by most people, is not science, this does not change the fact that what happens in the preparation of food is actual chemistry. And that if you change the ingredients, you change the food. Note that “no salt” is not the same as “no sodium.” Potassium chloride is still a salt, it’s just not table salt. And the bill says “salt in any form.”

I understand the intent is probably to eliminate the excess salt in some foods, but the choice of adding salt, or not, to a food after it has been prepared is not the same as eliminating it during the preparation. In bread, for example, it plays a chemical role”

By mixing with salt, wheat flour produced gluten from gliadin and glutenin whose elastic property is characteristic in bread and noodles.

and it has more roles, too, other than taste. (Hmmm, there’s a salt manufacturer’s association. Of course there is.)

Add to this the fact there is salt already present in many foods. Can you add eggs to a recipe without running afoul of the law? Cheese has salt in it, too. Remember, it’s “salt in any form.” What a stupid proposal.