science

Friday various

  • Mark Evanier on skepticism:

    I just like skepticism and wish we had more of it in the media. In fact, I wish we had more skepticism of the skeptics since despite what some skeptics seem to think, going against the Conventional Wisdom doesn’t automatically mean your wisdom is correct.

    I was very briefly a member of the (I think now defunct) Penn State Skeptics Society. I attended a meeting or two, and later went to hear James Randi speak when they brought him to campus. But the fervor with which some people embrace skepticism — or maybe more accurately angry cynicism — has never sat well with me. I think agnosticism and atheism are defensible positions, but some people approach them like True Believers and dismiss all other arguments out of hand. Which, it seems to me, is usually what they accuse the other side of doing.

  • Tomorrow morning, beginning at at 9 AM EST (and for the next 24 hours), Netflix will be streaming The Wizard of Oz for free to anyone (with or without a subscription), in honor of the film’s 70th anniversary. I’m not sure why 70 years is a particularly significant milestone, but the film holds up remarkably well, I think. [via]

  • Barack Obama has one amazingly consistent smile.

  • What do you buy for the Elder God who has everything? Why not Cthulhu Cologne, “Scents inspired by the works of H.P. Lovecraft and the Cthulhu Mythos”? [via]

  • A finally, thinking about printing the internet? Um, don’t. [via]

Monday various

  • Rats. Terry Jones, of Monty Python fame will be teaching a one-day comedy writing seminar in Manhattan next month. Noted Python biographer Kim “Howard” Johnson will also be on hand to interview him. But it’s the day after my sister’s wedding, and I of course already have plans. I did get to see Michael Palin several years ago, but this sounded like an interesting (if considerably more expensive) event. Even if I must admit I’ve not always been the biggest fan of Mr. Jones’ solo work. [via]

  • On the lie that is CSI: The Shaky Science Behind Forensics:

    Forensic science was not developed by scientists. It was mostly created by cops, who were guided by little more than common sense. And as hundreds of criminal cases begin to unravel, many established forensic practices are coming under fire.

    Eye-opening and more than a little frightening. [via]

  • Vogue model Liskula Cohen wins right to unmask offensive blogger. I have to agree with Bookninja that his sets a potentially troubling precedent — not least of all because the defamation seems to have been relatively very minor. I don’t know the exact particulars of the offending blog, but…well, obviously nobody wants to be called a skank, and it is offensive, but for someone in the public eye, it would seem to come with the territory. Perhaps the vitriol aimed at Cohen went beyond that, but there is a significant difference between name-calling and character assassination, between being mean to someone and spreading lies that defame their character and impede their livelihood. And Cohen apparently isn’t even going to bring a defamation suit against the unmasked blogger. Now that she knows who it is, she’s perfectly willing to let bygones be bygones. Which I guess is big of her, but why couldn’t she have done that when it was just anonymous dickhead making fun of her? Why couldn’t she have sued (or, better, just politely asked) Google to remove the offending material? And, unless I’m missing something, can’t you easily sign up for Blogger anonymously? It’s a free service, so if you give Google a fake name and contact information, what good does unmasking do?

  • Or maybe not. Ever wonder What the Internet Knows About You? [via]

  • And finally, Mark Evanier on health care:

    I have nothing against corporate profits. The heart of this nation’s economy depends on businesses being able to amass moola. But when human lives are concerned, couldn’t that be close to an equal consideration? It doesn’t even have to be more vital than making sure some corporations have their best year ever. Couldn’t it just be, you know, almost as important?

Monday various

  • Michael Chabon’s essay on the Wilderness of Childhood got a lot of attention when it was first posted, back in July. (It’s been sitting in my saved links since then.) I think Chabon made some interesting points, but I also think Sergei Lobanov-Rostovsky’s response is worth repeating [via]:

    I’m not really arguing with Chabon here: he may be right that all children are instinctively adventurers, and he’s certainly right that limiting their exploration of the world in the name of safety threatens their creative imagination. But let’s be clear: the maps we draw for our children are not the maps that guide their lives. They draw their own maps, but it’s a mistake to confuse them with the nostalgic – or anguished — images produced by adult memory. Childhood is a foreign country to us. We once knew its landmarks, but they’ve grown wild in our imaginations, so that the “adventures” we remember are now just stories we tell. Adventure is what we call it when we show the slides. The natives just call it life.

  • Leaving aside the silliness of a religion based on Star Wars, or the questions that are maybe raised about established religions when you ask why this one is silly and they’re not — or even Tesco’s valid point that plenty of Jedi(s?) in the movies don’t walk around in public in their hoods — why can’t you wear a hood in their store? [via]

  • Well, at least he wasn’t wearing this flip-top zombie shirt… [via]

  • Permanent Bedtime, which plays a complete recording from BBC Radio’s late-night Shipping Forecast. Warren Ellis describes it as such:

    • The latenight edition of the Shipping Forecast has long been praised by the British as a gentle aid to restful sleep. And dream-filled sleep, too, because the Forecast is famous for listing “places” that are entirely notional, a virtual geography inhabited only by ships and the wondering minds of people drifting off into sleep. Sleep districts of the British imagination: Fastnet, Rockall, Dogger, Cromarty, Viking…

    It’s quite interesting to take an afternoon nap with that playing in the background.

  • And finally, I’ve only watched a couple of episodes, but I quite like NASA’s IRrelevant Astronomy video podcast, particularly the Robot Astronomy Talk Show. [via]

    • I quite liked the most recent episode with Linda Hamilton and Dean Stockwell, super genius:

Wednesday various

Tuesday various

  • The drugs! They do nothink! The placebo effect appears to be getting stronger. It’s an interesting article, and the whole thing has some pretty far-ranging implications, but I was especially intrigued by this aside:

    One recent afternoon in his lab, a young soccer player grimaced with exertion while doing leg curls on a weight machine. Benedetti and his colleagues were exploring the potential of using Pavlovian conditioning to give athletes a competitive edge undetectable by anti-doping authorities. A player would receive doses of a performance-enhancing drug for weeks and then a jolt of placebo just before competition.

    Using the placebo response to cheat at sports? Hmm. [via]

  • Meanwhile, in other medical news, depression may be good for you [via]
  • Missing Link found in church: both more and less than the headline suggests. [via]
  • Have I mentioned recently how much I dislike Antonin Scalia?

    As a constitutional matter, Scalia is not wrong. The court has never found a constitutional right for the actually innocent to be free from execution. When the court flirted with the question in 1993, a majority ruled against the accused, but Chief Justice William Rehnquist left open the possibility that it may be unconstitutional to execute someone with a “truly persuasive demonstration” of innocence. Oddly enough, for at least some members of the current court that question is now seemingly irrelevant: In Scalia’s America, the Cameron Todd Willingham whose very existence was once in doubt is today constitutionally immaterial. Having waited decades for an innocent victim of capital punishment, the fact that we have finally found one won’t matter at all. In this new America we can execute a man for an accidental house fire, while the constitution stands silently by.

    I think there are several strong arguments against the death penalty, but for me the most convincing has always been that it demonstrably sends innocent people to their death. [via]

  • Maybe I should cast Scalia in this interesting class assignment from Jeffrey Ford:

    In one of my classes this semester, we are reading Dante’s Inferno….Our reading will lead to a number of assignments, but one of them will be a written canto that will deal with the students choosing one of their most despised political, religious, or cultural figures and developing a circle of Hell for that individual, the tortures of which somehow metaphorically fit the perceived sin of the offender. They must also choose some political, religious, literary, or cultural icon to be their Virgil. I put this out to ditch readers who are up to the challenge and ask — Who would be your guide? Who would be the sinner? What would the bole of Hell be like that the sinner is trapped in for eternity?

    Hmm.