Zeta Snarks About Shoes

Zeta is me. That's why I'm taking this post on.

I go to the club and hear the retired guys, state highway, school teachers, tell me why the Governor isn't Presidential. I kinda like the idea that they are threatened by her uterus. They don't have the balls to admit she's got the uterus.

I don't have a problem with smart women. What I have a problem with is a system that allows "brighter" women to assume roles of authority they are clearly not ready for. Because they are women.

This woman has the uterus for the job.

Get over it.

Why Try To Change Me Now?

Merchant of Hate, With An "Oh, Gosh" Smile

I'm an old guy, so I remember stuff that is slowly being expunged from the public narrative. Things like religion requires one to adhere to certain doctrinal beliefs. That these doctrinal beliefs cannot be forced upon others. That the purpose of government is to protect the rights of the individual in the face of claims that the individual should be subordinate to the authority of those who surround him.

Reading Governor Palin's book, "Going Rogue," has been a delightful experience. And I mention religion in the above paragraph because of my reaction to the Governor's words as she relates how her religious views were dealt with during her interview with Senator McCain in the lead-up to her selection as Senator McCain's running mate.

I think it's worthwhile to reflect a bit on what religious views and beliefs are, and how they exist in our 21st century America.

My religious views fit my world. As I see it. And the fundamental belief in my religious experience is that I am too limited to know much. I am totally unable to comprehend the meaning of "an infinite universe." Conversely, if the universe isn't infinite, then what is it that would present as the definition for the limit of that universe; a Sartrian reduction of knowing a thing as what it isn't. And then the question is begged, of what is it which isn't a part of the universe, and what would be the limits of this "something else"?

Far above my paygrade.

But I choose another path than succumbing to nihilism. I'm an optimist. And while there may be questions for which I lack an answer, that doesn't mean that that answer would either make me richer or poorer for the knowing. I would still be able to pay the bills, laugh with friends and love.

How you and I choose to relate to our existence presents certain intellectual difficulties not known to infect the animal or plant kingdoms. Or the world of minerals. And yet, one could express a tautology that each of these, Man, animal, plant and mineral, are equally affected in our present condition as the result of something prior that occured that had made these divisions reality.

There is a huge degree of uncertainty in addressing the problem of "existance." There are still those who believe that the world exists on the back of a turtle, wending its was through the heavens. And given my prior reduction, how would such an answer differ in the way I pay the bills, laugh with friends and love? How would greater certainty, or greater uncertainty, affect my nature? That is to say, what is the difference between your view of the World, Existence and Creation and what are the effects that view has on the way you pay your bills, laugh with friends and love? Maybe there are simple distinctions, rather than differences. Would the Seventh Day Adventist pay his bills on Saturday? And how would that affect his bill paying preferences on the remaining six?

There is a huge chasm that exists between the knowable and the unknowable. The distinction in many ways is simply an understanding that there is a huge chasm between sufficiency and necessity. (Kinda cries out Matthew 6:34.)

So, what is preferrable? Having strong religious beliefs or having weak--or, to attempt non-existent--religious beliefs? Does a Quaker make a better farmer than a Baptist? Would you rather have a Jew or a Mormon behind the wheel of the truck that delivers your crushed rock? Did you ask your dentist or doctor his views on Creation before your appointment? Enjoy this address from Governor Palin.

h/t Gateway Pundit.

Like Bizarro World

Reading the following press release from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was like entering Bizarro World.

"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes that human-caused global climate change is occurring..."

"The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration generated projections for surface temperatures for 20-year periods and centered on the years 2025, 2050, and 2100."

Those of us who are aware of the on-going investigation into Penn State's Mann and the CRU, the recent call by the Greenpeace guys to replace the current head of the IPCC, and I haven't even mentioned the admission of faulty work in the released CRU e-mails, one is struck by the naiveté of this work. The press release in its entirety is below. And remember, as Lord Monckton explains, the purpose of Man Made Global Warming isn't really science.




NEWS RELEASE
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Mountain-Prairie Region
134 Union Boulevard
Lakewood, Colorado 80228

For Release on:
February 5, 2010 Contacts:
Larry Crist 801-975-3330 ext 126
Diane Katzenberger 303-236-4578

Endangered Species Act Protection for the American Pika
Is Not Warranted

Although the American pika is potentially vulnerable to the impacts of climate change in portions of its range, the best available scientific information indicates that pikas will be able to survive despite higher temperatures. Pikas will have enough suitable high elevation habitat to prevent them from becoming threatened or endangered. As a result, the pika does not meet the criteria for protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced today after completing a thorough review of the species’ status and evaluating current and future threats to the species.

“We have completed an exhaustive review of the scientific information currently available regarding the status of the American pika and have analyzed the potential threats to the species,” said Steve Guertin, the Service’s Director of the Mountain-Prairie Region. “Based on this information, we have determined that the species as a whole will be able to survive despite increased temperatures in a majority of its range and is not in danger of extinction in the foreseeable future.”

The American pika is a small mountain-dwelling mammal that inhabits loose rock areas in alpine and subalpine mountain areas extending south from central British Columbia and Alberta into the Rocky Mountains of New Mexico and the Sierra Nevada Mountains of California. The historical range of the species includes California, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and New Mexico.

A key characteristic of the American pika is its temperature sensitivity. Pikas cannot tolerate much higher body temperatures than their norm of 104 degrees Fahrenheit. Therefore, the species is found at progressively higher elevations, where cooler temperatures are found, as one moves south through the range of the species. In Canada, populations occur from sea level to 9,842 feet, but in New Mexico, Nevada, and southern California, populations rarely exist below 8,202 feet.

Based on the most recent information, the five subspecies of American pika are classified as: the Northern Rockies (Ochotona princeps princeps); the Southern Rockies (O.p. saxatilis); the Coastal Mountains and Cascade Range (O.p. fenisex); the Sierra Nevada and Great Basin (O.p. schisticeps); and the Uinta Mountains and Wasatch Range of Central Utah (O.p. uinta).

The Service analyzed potential factors that may affect the habitat or range of the American pika including climate change, livestock grazing, invasive plant species and fire suppression. Climate change was identified as the only potential threat to the species.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes that human-caused global climate change is occurring and has published research that represents the best available science on the subject. Because most of the IPCC climate change models apply to large, general scales, the Service worked with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to model historic and future temperatures at a more local scale within the range of the American pika. The models indicate summer temperatures were likely to increase an average of 5.4 degrees Farenheit in pika habitat.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration generated projections for surface temperatures for 20-year periods and centered on the years 2025, 2050, and 2100. However, the agency stated that because increases in greenhouse gas emissions can be interpreted with greater confidence until approximately mid-century, model projections for the next 30 to 50 years centered on 2050 have greater credibility than results projected further into the future. Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, the Service centered its foreseeable future projections on the year 2050.

Several climate change variables can affect pika populations, including extremely hot or cold days, average summer temperatures, and duration of snow cover. In general, pika biologists agree that temperatures below the habitat surface, such as in loose rock area crevices, better approximate the conditions experienced by pikas because they rely on subsurface habitat to escape hotter summer daytime temperatures and obtain insulation during the colder winter months. Therefore, surface temperatures may not be as useful as subsurface temperatures for predicting the effects of climate change on pika populations.

Current information indicates that the Northern Rockies, Southern Rockies, Coastal Mountain/Cascade, and Uinta Mountains populations will not be adversely affected by climate change because the majority of pika populations occur at high elevations with correspondingly lower mean temperatures. We have determined that pikas will be able to survive the predicted temperature increases that will occur at these high elevations. Our analysis indicates that predicted temperature increases will not exceed the tolerance of the species or harm its habitat throughout the majority of its range.

The Great Basin population could be affected by climate change along with some lower elevation American pika populations outside of the Great Basin. These populations could be affected because they represent lower elevation sites that will have correspondingly higher mean temperatures by mid-century. Therefore, we expect to continue to see pikas disappear from some low-elevation habitats. However, these losses will not be on the scale that would cause any species, subspecies or distinct population segments of pika to become endangered in the foreseeable future.

Despite the trends of increasing American pika declines in the Great Basin due to increasing temperatures, there is ample evidence that the species can survive and thrive in some habitats with relatively hot surface temperatures. American pika populations thrive at a lower elevation site in the mountains near Bodie, California and in the hot climates of Craters of the Moon (Idaho) and Lava Beds National Monuments (California). Pika persist at these sites because they reduce activity during hot mid-day temperatures by retreating to significantly cooler conditions under the loose rock areas and perform daily activities during the cooler morning and evening periods. Despite altering their behavior in response to high temperatures, pikas can maintain high birth and low mortality rates.

Based on the current information available, the Service finds that the magnitude and imminence of threats do not indicate the American pika is in danger of extinction or likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

The public is encouraged to submit any new information that becomes available concerning the potential threats to the American pika or its habitat. Please submit your comments to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Utah Ecological Field Office, 2369 W. Orton Circle, Suite 50, West Valley City, Utah 84119.

In October 2007, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) petitioned the Service to list the American pika and conduct a status review of each of the recognized subspecies of American pika. The Service advised CBD that the petition could not be addressed at that time because existing court orders and settlement agreements for other listing actions required nearly all of the listing funding. Subsequently, the CBD filed a notice of intent to sue over the Service’s failure to publish a petition finding. The Service then entered into a settlement agreement requiring the Service to submit a petition finding to the Federal Register by May 1, 2009, and to submit a status review finding to the Federal Register by February 1, 2010.

For more information regarding the American pika, please visit our web site at

http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/americanpika

The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with others to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. We are both a leader and trusted partner in fish and wildlife conservation, known for our scientific excellence, stewardship of lands and natural resources, dedicated professionals and commitment to public service. For more information on our work and the people who make it happen, visit http://www.fws.gov/.

-FWS-

At Least Five

You've seen the numbers coming out from the state on unemployment.

Here's an advance.

Today, I learned of five businesses located in Clatsop county that let at least one employee go.

We're not a big county.

I'm just saying, this isn't anecdotal. This is a trend.

Read Today

This interchange.

"The liberal mind simply expects business to exist for the purpose of feeding tax dollars to the bureaucracy. It's a parasitic relationship with the increasing appetite of the the government bureaucracy gorging upon and ultimately sapping the host business, resulting in the destruction of both."

...

"The tightie righties continually wishing for bad things to happen to the Oregon and national economy simply to score political points may come back to bite them."

Such is our debate.

News You Won't Read In An Oregon Newspaper

(h/t Doug Ross.)

The Beavers signed Fred Thompson. The Ducks signed Bryan Bennett.

In the meantime, "...Governor Ted Kulongoski will join U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Shaun Donovan to unveil the new HUD office of Sustainable Housing and Communities. The office will spearhead HUD’s efforts to reduce energy costs and foster stronger, more resilient communities that offer more choices for jobs, family and transportation."

Want to reduce energy costs? There are a couple of dozen dandy engineers over at PP & L and PGE who could outline an easy way to cut energy costs without spending a dime of government money. But the Governor really doesn't want to cut energy costs. To do so would require a common sense approach to energy production in this state. You know, where you build power plants and generate electricity.

Or, let's take the idea of utilizing our current natural resources. Or not, if you are Brad Witt or Debbie Boone. They've introduced a bill to outlaw "leasing for purposes of exploration, development or production of oil, gas or sulfur in territorial sea."

Who would want to put people put to work, here in Oregon, in exploration, development and production of oil, gas or sulfur? Not Democrats. Don't have a job? Sorry, that's the price you must pay if you wish to remain here. Not our problem.

You know, we had too many men working in the woods. Thanks to the marbled murrelet and the spotted owl, we no longer have to experience burly men in pick-up trucks driving into our forest shrines. Thanks to Democrats, we won't have to worry about burly men in pick-up trucks driving out to a pier--somewhere near you--as they head out to the rig.

In the meantime, the Oregon Roundtable on Sustainable Forests meets on February 8th. "The Roundtable creates the opportunity to promote forest resource management in a manner that integrates environmental, economic, and social considerations, using the goals and objectives of the Forestry Program for Oregon and the Oregon Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management as common state frameworks."

Yeah. In the past, we cut trees and planted trees. Simple. Now we create forestry architecture. It requires a great deal more planning and regulation. And that means more government jobs. And as we regulate ourselves into oblivion, fewer greedy corporations are raping Mother Earth.

Oh. And we're raising your taxes. Be a good little boy and run out and hire someone.

In The Mailbag

From a transplanted Oregon guy comes this e-mail:

I visited Washington D.C. recently and ended up on Sen. Lamar Alexander’s mailing list. Much of what I receive is propaganda-ish, but the essay below makes sense to me.

“Launch a big project and you will ... [create] ... many things you did not intend to create.”

“Going step-by-step in the right direction ... [is a better way to re-earn] ... the trust of the American people.”

Here's the link. Hopefully, I can talk this Milwaukie transplant to join me here.

Learning Stupid:The Test Answers

Recently, I posted a math quiz, intended simply to allow the professor of a college class to determine at what level it was possible to teach his students.

"...at what level..."

What a disturbing thought.

The math test given and answered is the product of Cliff Mass, a Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at University of Washington. (Go Beavs!)

From Professor Mass' website:

"As many of you know, I have a strong interest in K-12 math education, motivated by the declining math skills of entering UW freshmen and the poor math educations given to my own children. Last quarter I taught Atmospheric Sciences 101, a large lecture class with a mix of students, and gave them a math diagnostic test as I have done in the past.

"The results were stunning, in a very depressing way. This was an easy test, including elementary and middle school math problems. And these are students attending a science class at the State's flagship university--these should be the creme of the crop of our high school graduates with high GPAs. And yet most of them can't do essential basic math--operations needed for even the most essential problem solving."

Even "if" your children have been accepted into "Advanced" or AP classes, you need to know that your children aren't being served. There isn't an emphasis upon mathematics, nor on constructive logic, in any of your childrens' classes. Indoctrination? Yes. And the most advanced indoctrination that your school system can create.

The battle to create schools that educate may still be decades away.

But, unless you get involved in telling your locally elected school board members, the adminstrators of your childrens' schools, and you child's teachers that you want your kid to learn math, logic, and American history, you're not going to be a part of their PTA socials, their parents' groups or their booster club, and that you're telling your friends to do the same thing, there won't be any changes.

When I posted "Least-Squares", it was for a simple purpose.

People aren't "smarter" than you. Some will tell you that there are smarter people than you. (And, of course, impute that they are a part of that set.)

The likelyhood that you are as smart as anyone you meet is a pretty good bet.

Let's take a quick look.

When I posted "Least-Squares," my intention was to let you see how easy it is to perform the basics of statistical analysis. "Statistics" isn't a foreign based math set. It's done in American English, too.

There are some terms related to statistics that are off-putting. Jargon is jargon in order to save steps for the soucient. (See, I flip a French word in there? Off-putting, innit?)

It's the same thing for the kind of words that statisticians use in order to talk with others of their ilk. They clearly define the meaning of the words they use in order to advance the conversation. And one of the terms I used in the "Least-Squares" post was "standard deviation."

And I defined standard deviation.

So when I way it is important for you to know that the chances are that you are as at least as smart as anyone else you have ever known or met, there is a good statistical reason for that belief.

In statistics, the goal is to create an understanding of expected outcomes. (Read the whole thing. It won't kill you. Promise.)

In "Least-Squares" I gave you the value for bean lengths. Given the values of bean length, you could intuitively determine that the average value for bean length wouldn't be the shortest, nor would it be the longest. It would be somewhere in between.

When we take a look at human intelligence, we look at the curve above and see that 68 percent of any normally distributed population will lie under that part of the curve that is described as falling under the First Standard Deviation of the normal Bell Curve.

That, my friend, is most of us. And, what is left?

There is that part that lies below the 1st sd. 100 percent minus 68 percent is 32 percent. So, 16 percent of folks out there are below the 1st sd when in comes to human intelligence. And here is my pitch for political rights and human freedom.

Eighty-four percent of people are at, or below, the first standard deviation for human intelligence. If any political campaign was run, and the vote came in at 84%, you would have to be an idiot to suggest that the campaign failed to meet the test of voter approval. If the question was "Should we breath?", chances are that at least 84 percent of the electorate would vote in the affirmative. (No, I don't know this. But I'm willing to test it!)

If you are interested in learning more about statistics and statistical analysis, I ask you to join me in my following Professor Briggs' exigesis, "R Lectures." I've started, and am finding it an amusing journey. Must you be a math genius to follow along? Of course not. Just a little bit of intellectual curiosity and the willingness to follow instructions. It's simple, really.