False beliefs that must change to advance the world

Ugh.  I see the Washington Post has a story about tigers being farmed and eaten in Laos.

I just posted about a ridiculous caste story from India.

No need to mention radical Islam, is there?   Wannabe terrorists (and actual arsonists) were convicted in Canberra yesterday.

Let's make a list of some key false beliefs that need to change to advance the world, and who they are addressed to:

1.    Everyone:    Climate change caused by increasing CO2 and greenhouse gases is not a matter that is any serious scientific doubt.   It's not a vast conspiracy by climate scientists, weather bureaus, socialists, "cultural Marxists" or anyone else.   Scientific advice to reduce the future concentration of greenhouse gases must be followed.   

2.    Various Asians (primarily):   You do not gain particular strength or benefits according to the type or part of animal you eat.   Eating strong animals doesn't make you any stronger than eating lazier animals.     Leave wild animals alone!    Leave most animals alone!  (If you must, do something similar to what Catholics do - invite the generic animal spirit to go into something that's harmless to eat and eat that instead.  Or adopt homeopathy, so the atoms of one dead animal should be enough to make billions of litres of spirit imbued tonic. Either way - happy animal, happy placebo affected human!)

3.    Indians:   Belief in the caste system is an offence to universal human dignity and rights.   Treat all humans with respect, and make opportunity for social and material advancement open to all.   And build more toilets while you're at it.

4.    Muslims:   God does not want you to kill other humans for not believing your brand of your faith.   Respect other faiths, and non belief, if you want to be respected.  (PS - companion dogs are cool, you don't know what you're missing out on.)

5.   Everyone who's inclined to believe it:   natural formations are not sacred.  They may be very cool, awe-inspiring, lovely to look at or be in or on, and important to preserve for environmental or aesthetic reasons:  but they are not sacred.    Gods or spirits might like natural places too, but they don't  fuss about making one spot sacred and other spots not.

To balance things out, seeing 4 out of 5 complaints are about "traditional" or ancient beliefs:

6.  Atheists and modern philosophers:   it's OK to complain that theism doesn't make any sense to you - believers worry about how to make sense of the problem of evil too, amongst other things.   But stop promoting the idea that free will is an illusion and does not exist:  it's an unhealthy meme psychologically and culturally, encouraging defeatism towards the idea of self control and choosing a moral life, however you wish to define that.  (And you may not even be right, anyway - so why promote a belief that has such obvious potential for harm?)

In more "OMG India", news

From the Times of India:

Dalit groom rides horse, community faces boycott 

 If I understand it right, it was the leadership who were boycotting the Dalits who were arrested, which is something, I suppose. 

New information for the sex ed class

Why am I reading this in the Washington Post and not in the Australian media, when it's from Australian researchers?:

It may be possible to pass gonorrhea through kissing, challenging the widely accepted notion that the sexually transmitted disease is spread almost exclusively through sexual contact, a new study says.

Researchers in Australia found that kissing with tongue may be a way to transmit oropharyngeal gonorrhea, or oral gonorrhea, particularly among gay and bisexual men. Although the idea has not been well-studied, one expert says the findings, published Thursday in the journal Sexually Transmitted Infections, could be important for understanding gonorrhea as it continues to spread and become more resistant to treatment.

Not entirely sure what this means for Australian coal

Spotted in the Jakarta Post:

The Indonesian coal price reference (HBA) has continued to decline this month due to shrinking market demand to US$81.86 per ton, or a month-to-month (mtm) decrease of 7.86 percent.

Energy and Mineral Resources (ESDM) Ministry spokesperson Agung Pribadi said that East and West Asian countries, especially China and India, were currently limiting their Indonesian coal imports.

“China and India have started to reduce their coal imports from Indonesia. The countries launched a protection policy and have increased domestic coal production to fulfill [local] demands,” Agung said in a statement on Tuesday.

STEM students don't care for gun control, apparently

Slate has a report of an event that I'm guessing with thrill the American Right:  apparently, a "vigil" for the student killed in the school shooting this week turned out all strange when lots of students attending didn't like that it was a "political stunt" to talk about gun control.   (The report says they apparently weren't aware of it having been organised by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.)  

“I thought this was about us, not about politics,” one student said, according to the Washington Post. Another student argued that they were “not a statistic” and shouldn’t be cited to justify gun control: “We are people, not a statement.” 

The students held their phones’ flashlights into the air and chanted, “mental health, mental health.” They also confronted journalists, whom the Brady Center had invited to cover the event, calling them derogatory names, according to the Denver Post, and asking to see what photos they had taken.

Colorado is a swing state, apparently, and it seems Denver is more Democrat than other parts.   That makes this sort of reaction surprising, but I wonder if STEM students swing more Right wing than your average student.

Oh well, they will presumably get more shootings in future, if that's their attitude.   

She keeps the best company

I see that Helen Dale has turned up on a Youtube with Carl Benjamin, better known (apparently) as Sargon of Akkad, discussing Brexit.   The discussion, which went on far too long to keep my interest, was intelligent enough, but I was more interested in the "meta" aspects.


First, she is sounding very British these days (although that happens if you live in a country); but more oddly, if I understood her correctly, she is now in the Conservative Party and said something like she was "conservative from birth".   Which sounds a tad odd:  did I read somewhere in one of the many articles/interviews about her that she once said she helped (when very young, and perhaps with her father?) on a Greens campaign?  But she has also said her father was a con man and made many disparaging remarks about him at other times.   

In any event, I have a suspicion that we are witnessing another re-invention of herself.

More significantly, this Benjamin character is a controversial figure, who I have managed to avoid knowing anything about until now.   He's running for the pro-Brexit, anti immigration UKIP, and The Guardian notes that he was a big figure in the Gamergate controversy in 2014 (and not in a good way.)   He's also in trouble for some "joke" he made about how he wouldn't rape a certain politician, and he's not apologising for it.   He puts on an air of reasonableness in some of his material, but Buzzfeed notes his online presence is closely associated with an alt.right fanbase. 

I seriously doubt he is someone who (shall we say) reasonable people should be associating with.

Dale has also done an interview with James Delingpole - the climate change denying twit and general right wing gadfly.   Apparently, he was all gushing about her take on Roman society.   For a person who thinks libertarians should stop denying climate change, she sure doesn't mind helping the profile of one of the most prominent climate change denying writers of the last decade.

At the risk of being accused of jealousy or undue obsession with her, I say again that there has always been something about her manner in talks, interviews or writing which strikes me as a facade of intellectualism more than anything substantial.  But she wins over many on the "classic liberal" or libertarian right,  who do not perceive her this way.   

She's pretty fascinating, because I perceive her as very strange, and rather Zelig-like in many ways. 

Should I ride?

I have been curious to try a Lime scooter:  they look sort of fun, but my inherently conservative view towards my safety might mean I not go anywhere near their top speed (23kph).

However, I see a man in Brisbane, not too far off my age, has died after riding one down some stairs (unintentionally, I assume.) 

I had a look at the cost of buying one of these things - if you lived in a city with a good enough bicycle path network (I think they are allowed on them?), I thought they might be pretty appealing to youngsters as a cheap commuting device.   Not much fun in rain or storms, but on a lot of days in Brisbane in winter, I can imagine them being a pretty pleasant way to get to university, for example.

I see that Segway sells a reasonably flash looking one for about $850, with a 20km range (but a 3.5 hour charge time.)   Other companies sell much more expensive ones.

I think if I lived within 10 km of a university I was  attending, I would be tempted to buy one.

The de-evolution of Mark Latham

Mark Latham's descendent into creepy old man Right wing culture war whinger was on full display in his maiden speech to the New South Wales Parliament, where some high(?)lights included:

"Like a scene from Orwell's Animal Farm, the Green-Labor-Left has become the thing it originally opposed: elitist, would-be dictators taking away from the working-class communities the things these battlers value."

He also attacked political correctness and the "confected outrage" of the "elites".

Quoting Monty Python actor John Cleese, Mr Latham argued that telling a joke about someone does not mean you hate them.

"We love the people we joke about — the Irish, the blondes, the gays, everyone — as they've helped to bring humour and joy into our lives."

Yeah, tremendous jokes and commentary such as he gave on Sky News recently:

Discussing the new "Respect Victoria: Call It Out" advertisement in which a man leers at a woman on a train – eyes running down and up her, persisting despite her visible discomfort and distress – Latham dismissed the man’s behaviour as normal.

“If you don’t have a good look at a beautiful person of the opposite sex there’s something wrong with you,” the One Nation NSW leader said on Sky News last week.

“Was he thinking … did I used to root her at uni?”

 The rest of the summary of his speech:

The One Nation MP spoke for more than 47 minutes, calling for limits on immigration, an end to identity politics, an overhaul of the state's education system and the introduction of nuclear power and greater investment in coal-fired power.

If you want to read how much he has devolved, have a look at this 2014 piece with its moderate,  thoughtful and regretful analysis of why climate change denialism had been so successful amongst large parts of the public.

Now he belongs to a climate change denying party.  (One Nation's policy position on this looks like it was written by nutter Malcolm Roberts.)  

His culture war whinging has won him many admirers at Catallaxy - fellow man-stuck-in-the-social- zeitgeist of the 1950's, CL claims this:

It’s really disappointing to me that Latham cannot be prime minister.
He is the outstanding man in Australia’s polity right now.

It all again shows that Right wing opposition to climate change action is simply based on culture war resentment and has nothing to do with a serious consideration of science or economics.

One final question:   doesn't Latham's wife find this change of persona worrying?   It must be like living with a different man from the one she married.   And don't his sons, who must at least be teenage now, find him cringeworthy and "old before his time" as well?
 

Numb to the absurdity

While you can still find tweets and the occasional headline like this:

Trump shows he still doesn't grasp who bears the brunt of tariffs 

it's pretty incredible that we are watching a US President re-engaging in a trade war while making it abundantly clear that he still doesn't understand what he is doing (in that he doesn't understand tariffs, at all.)

How can any economist of any credibility defend a President so dumb as to not be able to absorb correction on this matter?  

The media (and much of the public) has become pretty much numb to the absurdity of the situation.

Time for out and proud atheists

This one's sure to appeal to Jason. 

Lots of good points made in Max Boot's Washington Post column about America's weirdly distrustful attitude towards atheist politicians, when disbelief (or agnosticism, at least) is actually rapidly climbing in the nation, and much of American religiosity has permanently tainted itself by supporting Trump:

It’s time for us to have an unapologetic atheist in the Oval Office

Boot indicates that even Democrat Presidential candidate Andrew Yang is not an atheist.   And he's right:  Wikipedia says he attends a small Protestant denomination:

Yang attends the Reformed Church of New Paltz with his family and has identified Mark E. Mast as their pastor.^[40][41]

Update:  well, I feel it a bit embarrassing to admit I didn't know this about Winston Churchill (I have never read a biography of him), but Boot points out he was a disbeliever with only the most nominal attachment to the Anglican Church.   A detailed article about his (lack of) religious belief can be found here.   

Shorten did fine

If anything, I wish he had been more sarcastic and ridiculing of Morrison's laughable line that the Coalition accepted climate change and the need to take action on it.  He should have mentioned Morrison's lump of coal in Parliament, although I suppose that would have led to questions about Adani that Shorten would prefer not raised.

Overall, though, people who hated Shorten before the debate will still hate him;  people like me who think Morrison is an inch deep failed advertising executive who has accidentally found himself as Prime Minister will still view him the same.

Shorten's summary of the Coalition was spot on, though:  they want you to believe that everything is fine, when most suspect we are just skating on thin ice with the global economy changing in ways no one completely understands, and the feeling of an ever present risk of another financial meltdown of some sort or another.    I like that Labor has made itself a "big target" in terms of tax reform and climate change - that's how politics should work.

Mum's the word

What an interesting day in Murdoch land.

The Daily Telegraph took a pretty bizarre decision to run as front page news that Bill Shorten didn't include in his Q&A explanation about his Mum (that she wanted to be a lawyer but to support her kids she became a teacher) enough detail about how she later did go on to study and practice law, although only for 6 years as a barrister.   Unsurprisingly, Shorten had publicly discussed his Mum's late career in law before - it's not as if it is a secret.  

So it was a ridiculous decision to try to make a mountain out of a molehill.  In fact, I'm not even sure that it's a molehill - there's nothing to show Shorten was being deceptive given his mother's career was already a matter on the public record.  

Yet the Tele's opinion editor, James Morrow, who I recently noted has always seemed to want to live up closely to the first part of his "Prick with a fork" nom de plume, turned up on twitter promoting the story.   Tim Blair also noted it on his blog with approval, and hopeless partisan hack and enriched canine admirer Chris Kenny defended the story too. 

On the other side of the Murdoch fence, though, the Herald in Melbourne decided not to run it, and Andrew Bolt has defended that decision.

The overwhelming take on the matter on Twitter that this is a real misfire and is much more likely to help Shorten than hurt him.   

Here's my take:   I wouldn't have thought it's likely to be any sort of key turning point of the campaign - it didn't exactly attack his Mum, even though the headline was ambiguous - but gee it shows what ridiculous editorial judgement pervades the Daily Telegraph.  (And the Courier Mail too, apparently.)

As a semi-gotcha, it might at most have been worth appearing as a small part of some opinion hack's mid section column - and it is the sort of useless rubbish that Tim Blair now excels at in his blog.

But when even Andrew Bolt can see that putting it as the front page lead story is wrong - well, as I say, it's a weird day in Murdoch land.

Update:  I see that Shorten has elaborated on his Mum's legal career, indicating that the late start did affect it:

Mr Shorten elaborated that while his mother had eventually studied law, she was a victim of age discrimination - despite her academic record, no law firm hired her to complete her articles and when she did join the bar, she only received about nine briefs.

"It was actually a bit dispiriting," he said.

Update 2:   since I first wrote the post, I have re-read what Shorten said on Q&A, and realised he had made it very clear she did study and practice law.   (When I first posted, I was going by memory of part of what he had said.)   I have therefore amended the post.

It just makes the Daily Telegraph's story, and all who defend it, look pretty idiotic.

Update 3:  jeez, I was right the first time - I thought I was reading transcript of the Q&A show when it was an interview or talk he gave somewhere else.  Now that I'm sure I have read the right transcript, I see that he didn't go on to say on Q&A that his Mum had gone on to study and try being a barrister in her 50's - after a career in teaching that had not been her first preference.   

Awful

What a heartbreaking visual summation of the full effects on school kids of another school shooting in the US:

It's from a Politico story on today's Denver shooting, which seems to have involved injury only, not death, by some good fortune.  But you can imagine the ongoing psychological effects...

Update:  yeah, one kid did die, by putting himself in harm's way.   And another kid turned up on TV talking about he had hid and was prepared to have a go at the shooter too:

12-year-old Nate Holley tells CNN's Brooke Baldwin that he hid in a closet during the violence at STEM School Highlands Ranch and had been prepared to fight off the shooter with a baseball bat

"I was going to go down fighting, if I was going to go down."

 As Daily Kos says:

Young children like Nate Holley should not be thinking about how they can sacrifice themselves to save their classmates in the face of another mass shooting. This is insanity. In fact, it was another student at STEM School Highlands Ranch who rushed one of the shooters. Kendrick Castillo was supposed to graduate high school this week and now his parents are planning a funeral instead of a graduation party. 

Quantum physics and time

I read this paper at arXiv recently, and despite the abstract, it was in large part relatively readable:

We discuss the implications for the determinateness and intersubjective consistency of conscious experience in two gedanken experiments from quantum mechanics (QM). In particular, we discuss Wigner's friend and the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment with a twist. These are both cases (experiments) where quantum phenomena, or at least allegedly possible quantum phenomena/experiments, and the content/efficacy of conscious experience seem to bear on one another. We discuss why these two cases raise concerns for the determinateness and intersubjective consistency of conscious experience. We outline a 4D-global constraint-based approach to explanation in general and for QM in particular that resolves any such concerns without having to invoke metaphysical quietism (as with pragmatic accounts of QM), objective collapse mechanisms or subjective collapse. In short, we provide an account of QM free from any concerns associated with either the standard formalism or relative-state formalism, an account that yields a single 4D block universe with determinate and intersubjectively consistent conscious experience for all conscious agents. Essentially, the mystery in both experiments is caused by a dynamical/causal view of QM, e.g., time-evolved states in Hilbert space, and as we show this mystery can be avoided by a spatiotemporal, constraint-based view of QM, e.g., path integral calculation of probability amplitudes using future boundary conditions. What will become clear is that rather than furiously seeking some way to make dubious deep connections between quantum physics and conscious experience, the kinds of 4D adynamical global constraints that are fundamental to both classical and quantum physics and the relationship between them, also constrain conscious experience. That is, physics properly understood, already is psychology.

 That last line is, however, more or less clickbait in my opinion.  

It's also been a couple of weeks since I read it, but if I recall correctly, at the end of the day I thought it seemed to be perhaps just a very complicated way of arguing that if you view time as something we are embedded in, rather than something we pass through, it solves a lot of what seems like quantum mystery.   

The view of time they promote would also seem to raise questions of free will and determination - about which there is more here, although I have not read it thoroughly.

Interesting.  You can download the paper here.

Why now?

Doesn't it seem very odd that no one seems to know why exactly the US is sabre rattling Iran?  As the BBC says:

Mr Pompeo cancelled a trip to Berlin to meet with Iraqi leaders during a four-hour stop in the capital Baghdad.

The visit came days after a US aircraft carrier was deployed to the region, which officials said was in response to threats to US forces and its allies from Iran.

On Tuesday it was revealed the US was sending B-52 bombers to the region.

The US has given little information about the exact nature of the reported threat, which Iran has dismissed as nonsense.

John Bolton, the US national security adviser, said only that the US was acting "in response to a number of troubling and escalatory indications and warnings" on announcing the deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln on Sunday.

Does anyone sensible trust Bolton's judgement in such matters?

Things that I wish weren't going on right now

In the context of an election campaign where the polling is closer than it should be, I do wish that we weren't seeing:

*  eggs being thrown at any Coalition politician,

*  animal rights activists invading farms (although it hasn't happened for a few weeks), or

*  the fight over Folau.

All of these issues are capable of motivating culture war sympathy to the Coalition side by undecideds, who are (in some cases), so stupid as to be considering voting for the ridiculously politically vacuous parties of Hanson and Palmer, despite their clear, terrible, history of just being in politics as self indulgent careerists and attracting nutters as candidates.

I am surprised at the ability of Palmer advertising to make unengaged people forget what a true flake he is.   Disgustingly, Morrison and the Coalition should be blasting Palmer for his corporate behaviour with both barrels, but for their political advantage, they aren't.   

John Quiggin on the cost of carbon emissions reduction

A very clear and readable explanation by John Quiggin on the matter of modelling the cost of carbon emissions reduction.

Maximum sentence please

As a class of crime, there's something particularly vicious and nasty about road rage assaults, especially when they come after pursuing someone for kilometres.  Nine times out of ten they suggest an assailant either completely off his face on some drug or other, or full of obnoxious male entitlement, or both.

This guy completely deserves a maximum sentence - and governments need to be publicising road rage punishments at cinema or where ever stupid young men might see them. 

Back to GoT

Heh:  Slate has a whole article on the coffee cup sighting.  

Fantasy land, and the Labor launch

Ha!   What a bunch of cowards.  After months/years of "the Liberals must be destroyed" because the party won't go Trump enough for them, various Catallaxy commenters are falling back into line with "with reluctance, I will be voting Liberal because a Shorten Labor government will destroy the country."   Some, I admit, are holding out, but at the end of the day most will fall into line.

And they live in a fantasy land that, if only the Coalition would go wingnut Right on climate change, the whole issue will go away.  Here's lizzie, the Facebook-iest of commenters there:

If the Libs win I hope there is enough sense in the result for them to drop the RET like a hot brick and start building some coal-fired power stations. Also drop exploding batteries, including the big one called Snowy 11. Then a Royal Commission into Climate Science would be useful to get some realism into the lives of crying (and acting) children. 

Yes, sure.  After rejecting the need for Royal Commissions on useful things, they want a totally pointless one on climate change, as if the ageing contrarians, if they live long enough, will front up and repeat arguments discredited a decade or more ago and convince the Commission that everyone else has been wrong for all this time.

On another point:   I didn't see much of the Labor launch in Brisbane, but it was a triumph of - something - that they managed to get Rudd and Gillard entering together and showing that Kevin can can even bear to make eye contact and rub shoulders with her now.   Was he drugged, or is there some other explanation?

Anyway, it was pretty heartening, really, in the interests of seeing Labor win:

Rupert's reasons

Given the rabid pro-Coalition coverage in the Murdoch press, it's interesting to remember this reported from last year:

According to reports in the ABC and The Australian Financial Review that differ in detail rather than substance, days before Turnbull was forced to walk the plank on August 31, Murdoch told fellow billionaire Kerry Stokes, the Perth-based chairman of Seven West, “Malcolm has to go.”

Stokes apparently disagreed.

"That means we get Bill Shorten and the CFMEU,” he told Murdoch in a version of the story reported by the AFR.

Not to worry, says Murdoch, according to the ABC report, "They'll only be in for three years – it won't be so bad. I did alright under Labor and the Painters and Dockers; I can make money under Shorten and the CFMEU."

I can only assume that one or more of the following factors are currently rattling around Rupert's decrepit looking head:

*  Rupert has had second thoughts about how he could make money under Shorten;

*  Rupert wants to see his "king maker" judgement vindicated at the polls;

*   Rupert really got his nose out of joint when Shorten refused to meet with him (which is something Shorten really has not received enough credit for.)

What was I saying about Poland? (Part 2, I think)

At The Guardian:

A woman has been arrested on suspicion of offending religious sentiment, after posters bearing an image of the Virgin Mary with her halo painted in the colours of the rainbow flag appeared in the city of Płock in central Poland.

The Polish interior minister, Joachim Brudziński, announced on Twitter on Monday that a person had been arrested for “carrying out a profanation of the Virgin Mary of Częstochowa”.

A Płock police spokeswoman confirmed a 51-year-old woman had been arrested over the alleged offence. The woman had been abroad, but upon her return, the police entered and searched her home, where they found several dozen images of the Virgin Mary with the rainbow-coloured halo.

The “Black Madonna of Częstochowa” is a revered Byzantine icon that resides in the monastery of Jasna Góra, a UN world heritage site and Poland’s holiest Catholic shrine.

Offending religious feeling is a crime under the Polish penal code. If convicted, the woman could face a prison sentence of up to two years.

 Update:  can someone point Andrew Bolt to this article, because I see he gets really upset with religious interference in art.  Well, sometimes, anyway:

Permafrost worry

That commentary piece that has appeared in Nature on the great uncertainties in the amount of greenhouse gas likely to come from melting permafrost is indeed a worry.    The basic message is that things are going faster in the North than anyone expected:

Current models of greenhouse-gas release and climate assume that permafrost thaws gradually from the surface downwards. Deeper layers of organic matter are exposed over decades or even centuries, and some models are beginning to track these slow changes.

But models are ignoring an even more troubling problem. Frozen soil doesn’t just lock up carbon — it physically holds the landscape together. Across the Arctic and Boreal regions, permafrost is collapsing suddenly as pockets of ice within it melt. Instead of a few centimetres of soil thawing each year, several metres of soil can become destabilized within days or weeks. The land can sink and be inundated by swelling lakes and wetlands.

Abrupt thawing of permafrost is dramatic to watch. Returning to field sites in Alaska, for example, we often find that lands that were forested a year ago are now covered with lakes². Rivers that once ran clear are thick with sediment. Hillsides can liquefy, sometimes taking sensitive scientific equipment with them.

This type of thawing is a serious problem for communities living around the Arctic (see ‘Arctic permafrost’). Roads buckle, houses become unstable. Access to traditional foods is changing, because it is becoming dangerous to travel across the land to hunt. Families cannot reach lines of game traps that have supported them for generations.

In short, permafrost is thawing much more quickly than models have predicted, with unknown consequences for greenhouse-gas release. Researchers urgently need to learn more about it. Here we outline how. 

 There current guesstimate as to how much worse it could be than that in current models:

We estimate that abrupt permafrost thawing in lowland lakes and wetlands, together with that in upland hills, could release between 60 billion and 100 billion tonnes of carbon by 2300. This is in addition to the 200 billion tonnes of carbon expected to be released in other regions that will thaw gradually. Although abrupt permafrost thawing will occur in less than 20% of frozen land, it increases permafrost carbon release projections by about 50%. Gradual thawing affects the surface of frozen ground and slowly penetrates downwards. Sudden collapse releases more carbon per square metre because it disrupts stockpiles deep in frozen layers.

Furthermore, because abrupt thawing releases more methane than gradual thawing does, the climate impacts of the two processes will be similar⁷. So, together, the impacts of thawing permafrost on Earth’s climate could be twice that expected from current models.

The rarity of a TV show that ends well

I see via Twitter that the dying episodes of Game of Thrones are continuing to upset quite a lot of long time viewers.   So someone asked "what TV series ended for you in a satisfying way", and people are nominating things I don't agree with (the ending of MASH left me cold, but I had stopped caring much about the show long before the final season) or shows I haven't seen at all (The Shield).

And it's true, so few lengthy TV series do end in a satisfactory way.   Most people were underwhelmed with Seinfeld's final episode;  even worse, it seems The X Files make a final series which everyone simply ignored after the poor quality of the penultimate come back series.   Most sitcoms go on for about 3 seasons too long, and I stop watching them long before the end anyway.

I continue an old devotion to the Mary Tyler Moore show, and I've probably mentioned before that I did think the ending of that show was funny - new management at the TV station recognise that ratings are bad, and decide that the problem isn't the ridiculous newsreader Ted, but the rest of the newsroom which promptly gets the sack. 

I'm struggling to remember another show that I did watch to the very end, and found satisfying in the last episode.

A culinary note

I'm still in long weekend mode, ok?

The culinary note: I really like the distinctive flavour of washed rind cheeses.  They should be more popular than they seem to be. 

I'm eating one from Italy as I write.   This makes me feeler wealthier than I am, and if it got here via airplane it's probably a climate change sin, but I am trying to support the fancy deli/cafe/restaurant in King Street, which seems to have so many experienced staff I fear that Brisbane isn't sophisticated  enough for it.

The Australian sparkling wine I am having with it is quite pleasing too, and carries no guilt.

The passion post

It's the Labour Day holiday in Brisbane.  Beautiful clear blue sky and 24 degrees.  May to September is just great weather here...pity the daylight hours get short.

Anyway, a boring post about this plant:

We have a yellow passionfruit vine growing out of a not very big pot, over an arch that' only about 1.5 m wide.  It is about 2 years old and has produced fruit before, but at the moment, it has gone berserk.   I reckon there are about 35 fruit coming on this  rather small area vine which we basically ignore, apart from watering in dry weather.

I have no idea what will happen if I actually fertilize it.  Or should I just let a happy plant be?

Election on track (I think)

So I've been reading Twitter and some other commentary, and watched Insiders.

Two weeks out from the election I think the view has firmed up that Labor is not in danger of losing the election after all.  Apparently, the betting market has turned in Labor's favour again; people think the social media campaign being run by the Liberals looks desperate and run by people without a clue (the Star Wars themed tweets, for example); and Josh Frydenberg looked and sounded far from confident on Insiders today, which also brought the delightful news that Tony Abbot really is looking likely to loss his seat.  

The best thing that can come from a Labor win would be that it involves not just Abbott but other conservatives losing seats and sparking the internal confrontation that the Coalition has to have in order to rid itself of climate change denialism.  It would be a real disaster if the Liberals scraped home and avoided that fate. 

On a side note, I see from a peruse of the Catallaxy threads that an old commenter DD (Daddy Dave, I think) has turned back up after what would be years of absence.   He used to be one of few moderate Righties on the site, and nearly always maintained a polite disposition.   I think he used to occasionally look in here too, but commented that he thought it a boring and would never have a big readership because it didn't really attempt to engage with readers, or some such.  C'est la vie.

I find it to believe he will continue commenting at Catallaxy for long, given the ludicrous Down Under American Right Culture War site that it has become.  But we will see...

An unromantic lead

A review of Long Shot begins:

It is a truth universally acknowledged, at least in cinematic comedies of the past decade or so, that just about every woman on-screen must be in want of Seth Rogen. From Knocked Up to Zack and Miri Make a Porno to Neighbors, Hollywood has continually presented the star as a romantic lead while marveling at the supposed ludicrousness of the concept, to the extent that his new vehicle is a rom-com called Long Shot. The premise? That Rogen, playing to type as an avuncular, bearded fellow who’s no stranger to sweatpants, gets entangled in a relationship with an impressive and a spectacularly beautiful politician played by Charlize Theron.

I could be mistaken, but isn't the defining aspect of a Seth Rogan film that they have quite a lot of pretty crude sexual humour?   As such, I have never seen one of his films, and would guess that he and his ilk are behind the death of decent romantic comedies we have witnessed over about the last 10 - 15 years.

Even I find this a weird approach to policing

I may give the impression that there isn't a government intervention into lessening illicit drug use that I don't like, but even I find it pretty amazingly intrusive that police in Sydney users sniffer dogs (and strip searches) for drugs on your average commuter crowd at places like Central Station.    I mean, even for someone like me who hates the drug taking aspect of music festivals and am dubious about policies that semi endorse it can see that random searches of commuters is just extraordinary.

The only thing I can say about this is - did Labor have any different policy before the last election?  If so, sorry people, but you got the police state you voted for...*



*  I see that Labor was saying that music festival pill testing should not be off the table, so they do sound as if they were reform minded.

Automation unfairly getting the blame

Here's the article at The Week I was looking for.  Found via Peter Whiteford's twitter feed:

How robots became a scapegoat for the destruction of the working class

The gigantic Murdoch problem

I agree with a lot of this article, particularly the way it criticises the genuine journalists working within Murdoch who put up with the editorial bias of their employer.   It's moved into outright cowardice, really.  Anyway,  this is it:

News Corp: Democracy’s greatest threat

What did we do before the internet?

I went looking at The Week for an article on robots taking jobs, and saw this great contribution to humanity there instead:

I put Pringles in the fridge and it changed my life

I still read it.  Might even try it.

Far too late

The SMH repeats the news from the Washington Post:

Facebook said on Friday it had permanently banned several far-right figures and organisations, including Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, Infowars host Alex Jones, commentator Milo Yiannopoulos, and conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer, for being "dangerous", a sign that the social network is more aggressively enforcing its hate speech policies under pressure from civil rights groups.

Helen's made a goose of herself, again

Only yesterday I mentioned Helen Dale in the context of climate change, noting that she had once at least called on libertarians to stop denying it.   

I had missed, though, that only last week she had a nasty sounding tweet about Greta Thunbergpril: 

She explains at the Spectator this was "fairly obviously" a joke.

Very few people took it that way.   Helen has apparently deleted Twitter from her phone, such was the blowback she was getting.   And given that Dale herself has claimed she probably has a degree of Aspergers, it is very hard to see her tweet as anything other than (at least) somewhat callous from a person who should know better.   (Jealousy at the attention Thunberg has received is another theory I've seen in the Twitter response.)

Now look - I don't hold any great interest in Greta Thunberg and have paid her very little attention.   I actually share Dale's view in her Spectator attempt at self-justification that under 18's should basically never be shoved into political leadership roles.   And Britain in particular is having an outbreak of idealistic climate protest founded on exaggerated slogans and claims.   (I am extremely rarely impressed by any form of protest, though.  Not a joiner that way.)   I just take the view of "at least their heart is in the right place" and don't resent that it might have some political consequences in a useful direction.

I still say, though, that it's hard not to see behind Dale's Tweet the typical libertarian ideological motivation to just ignore climate change - either deny it exists, or deny it's bad enough to do anything about, or deny we're capable of doing anything about it and put all the eggs in the techno basket of successful geo-engineering that would have to done for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. 


She belongs on a seasteading "nation" with all other libertarians.  

A diet would help

I don't know anything about the rapper/comedian/actor Adam Briggs apart from seeing him on The Weekly from time to time.  I'd put him in the category "mostly harmless".   But last night on the show, he joked, as on Twitter, that as an indigenous man he may be 32 but (in terms of much lower indigenous life expectancy), that's like 67 in "white years":

Look, the guy's from Shepparton and it seems he has lived either there or in Melbourne all his life.     As such, he has (unlike some fellow indigenous)  ready access to healthy food and all the medical services he could need.  Yet he clearly carries quite a lot of excess weight - and on his gut, which is well recognized as the worst kind of overweight to be.

He may well be the equivalent of 67 in "health" years (I am surprised he is only 32 - he could pass for much older), but it's a bit rich to even joke that it's due to just being a "Blackfulla". 

Judith not good at analogies (when it suits her)

Whenever The Australian or AFR run articles by the likes of Judith Sloan or Alan Moran on climate change economics, they should (but don't) put a large rider in bold "READERS SHOULD KNOW:  THIS ECONOMIST DOES NOT BELIEVE CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL OR NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED IN ANY MANNER AT ALL.".  Because, of course, if your analysis is springing from  that fundamental belief, there is no reason to trust its objectivity at all.

So I see today that Sloan's column in The Australian on the modelled costs of Labor's climate plan is able to be accessed.  

To be honest, much of her account of the uncertainties is pretty well aligned  with what I heard on Radio National this morning - she could have put more effort into poohing-poohing Labor's policy than she did.   Is this a sign of a crack in her noggin that is letting in light that action is going to happen and she had better start sounding like she hasn't always been a flat earth climate change denier when talking about policy responses?

But my main reason for posting about this:  she claims to be completely puzzled by Bill Shorten's "fat person eating 10 big macs" analogy.  It's not perfect, but the point is clear enough:  the fat person [Australia] can't just continue with the easy and fast fix for hunger [energy needs] by eating fast food all the time [building coal power stations], because we all know that in the long run it will hurt/kill them [climate change effects].   They  have to put the effort in to get a better diet [clean energy and reducing all emissions] even if a good meal costs more than a Big Mac [that's where the analogy starts to go off road - although if the only choice were restaurants, it might work.]

She's just being deliberately obtuse in saying she doesn't understand it.

Suicide, poison and phones

The Washington Post has an article noting the increase in girls trying suicide by poison (boys prefer guns and strangulation), but it then talks more broadly about the rise in youth suicide and the search for a plausible causes.   Some think the rise of the mobile phone is more than a coincidence:

Spiller said he and others have overlaid their findings with other data to try to identify why the rates have spiked so sharply since 2011. They studied data from the rise of opioid addiction and deaths in recent years, thinking that the sharp increase could be due to increased access to drugs or fallout from parents’ deaths or addictions. But the timing did not fit precisely — the beginnings of the opioid epidemic traces back years before the 2011 spike.

They also compared it against economic data, but much of the country’s downturn occurred in 2008 or 2009.

“Unfortunately, we can’t definitely answer the why. That’s not how the data works,” said John Ackerman, a co-author and clinical psychologist at Nationwide Children’s Hospital in Columbus, Ohio.

Ackerman and Spiller, however, suspect the sudden increase in recent years has to do with the advent of smartphones and how they have made social media much more pervasive in young people’s lives.

The iPhone 3 came out in 2008, Spiller notes, and the Android phones had come into widespread use by 2011. Adults adopted such devices first, but within a year or two, such smartphones became more common among adolescents.

For years now, across all demographic groups, the death rate from suicide has been rising broadly. Experts cannot easily explain it. There is no single factor driving the phenomenon.

Vegan health

Isn't it kind of obvious that veganism (as opposed to mere vegetarianism - especially of the variety where dairy and eggs are still eaten) isn't that great a health plan for humans when pro-vegans have to write articles about the great care that must be taken by vegan pregnant mothers to get all the nutrition they and their embryos need?

Yesterday, I saw on twitter some young women who said she was going to try eating some form of flesh again for health reasons, but she tried mussels and found them repulsive.  She also went on and on about how traumatic it had been and how the mere idea of eating flesh (even of a brainless bivalve) makes her skin crawl.   It sounded to me like some borderline form of anorexia.

I know that most people have some image of eating some forms of animal food as being repulsive - I wince at the idea of eating roasted bone marrow on My Kitchen Rules for some reason, and lamb brains are icky too -  but to have a generic revulsion for all form of animal protein, including all forms of seafood, seems pretty exceptionally broad.

Anyway, you do read of her type of health issue from time to time - did I post about the vegan Youtube woman who secretly started eating a small amount of meat again on doctor's advice?   I'm not sure how many vegans do have to give it up for health reasons, but it seems to be a not insubstantial problem...

More Shinto

Surely I can't be the only person who was surprised at the apparent simplicity of the ceremonies for the replacement of the Japanese Emperor?    But I see now that there is more Shinto stuff to come, but not til October:

As Emperor Naruhito ascended the throne on Wednesday, a key imperial succession ritual related to Shinto rekindled controversy over the separation of state and religion that is stipulated in the Constitution.

Shinto is a Japanese indigenous religion in which the emperor is venerated as a descendant of a sun goddess. In the ritual, the emperor inherited the imperial regalia, which are said to have been bestowed by the sun goddess Amaterasu Omikami as proof of his ascension to the throne.

As the Kenji to Shokei no Gi rite marking the emperor’s enthronement was staged as a state occasion financed by public funds, critics pointed to the possibility that it violated the Constitution banning the government from engaging in religious activities.

Japan’s postwar Constitution stipulates no religious organization shall receive any privileges from the state or exercise any political authority.

The regalia, called Sanshu no Jingi, consist of a sacred mirror, sword and jewel. In the ritual, the jewel and a replica of the sword were passed to the new monarch together with the state and privy seals.

Besides the regalia inheritance ceremony, the government decided in April last year to publicly fund the main Shinto-linked imperial succession rituals to be held in the fall, following the precedent set for the ceremonies of Emperor Emeritus Akihito’s enthronement in 1990.

The upcoming key rituals are Sokuirei Seiden no Gi on Oct. 22 to proclaim the enthronement of the emperor and the Daijosai grand thanksgiving rite in November, in which the emperor will make offerings to ancestral deities and pray for the peace and prosperity of Japan and its people.

 Interested readers in what goes on in Shinto ceremonies for an ascending Emperor might like to read this previous post from 2017.

Seasteading enthusiasm dwindles

According to Slate, the libertarian dreams of seasteading seem to be fading.  Peter Thiel, apparently, seems less enthusiastic these days.

I kind of wish it would work, so that a few score of the most dangerous libertarians (Kochs, Thiel, Stark*, etc) - those who either deny climate change or think you just watch the world burn and then work out if you can science your way out of the extremes - could be set adrift in the Pacific Ocean and lose all influence in the rest of the world.

*  Oh wait, he's taken care of.

Not exactly the law and order country

India seems to have a very real problem with mob justice.   It sounds like a rather lawless and dangerous place (if not for visitors, then at least for residents!)   Some examples from today's perusal of the Times of India:

Some peculiar artwork decision with this sad story, too:

Bear in the mind the undue influence that WhatsApp has for spreading false rumour there too, and the number of deaths it has caused, I'm adding it to my list of "no hurry to visit" countries.

Negative interest

Aren't conservatives going on and on about the Folau matter to a ridiculous degree?   Yeah, sure: climate change is a crock of no interest but the really important thing is whether a rugby player will get booted or not.

My interest level in this is already in negative territory.   I could only be less interested if it were a racing horse up for a Code of Conduct hearing for tweeting offensive stuff about jockeys.

Product endorsement - curry chips

Maybe it's because I usually only buy them when especially hungry due to missing out on lunch, but I find that the "curry night Korma" flavoured chips by Tyrells are especially delicious:

This easily remains my preferred chip brand.  Not oily (Smiths are the worst at that) and flavours that are not too overpowering. 

Libertarians clinging to climate change denial

I see that the annual "We Hate Tax" conference, run by some libertarian mob together with some other/associated "we hate tax!" group, has the following guests (with my added commentary in brackets):

Local speakers including former Finance Minister Nick Minchin [well known climate change denying politician], Tom Switzer from the Centre for Independent Studies [dunno], John Roskam [runs Rinehart funded pro-actively climate change denying IPA] ..., LNP Senator Amanda Stoker [can't find direct climate position - but seems to love coal] , climate blogger Jo Nova [most prominent solo climate change denying blogger of Australia, also a goldbug with a husband very suspicious about the great banking families of Europe - nudge, nudge, wink, wink], and Professor Sinclair Davidson [runs persistently climate change denying Catallaxy, almost certainly a "I don't deny, I'm just not convinced" disingenuous type - he won't actually tell us anymore if he personally believes that AGW is real and worth addressing]  and Dr Chris Berg from RMIT University [the more affable face of IPA who also stays silent on climate change, and deserves derision for giving moral support to deniers even if he isn't one himself].

This reminds me: in 2014, I gave rare praise to Helen Dale for at least having stated this in 2013:

5. Libertarians in particular need to drop their widespread refusal to accept the reality of climate change. It makes us look like wingnuts and diverts attention from the larger number of greenies who spew pseudoscience on a daily basis.

Sorry Helen:  they're not listening to you.   (And anyway, your willingness to work for denier - or "I'm not convinced" twit - Leyonhjelm shows you didn't really treat it as an important issue yourself.)

What Emperors do in retirement

It's hard not to be impressed with the apparent gentleness and humility of the retiring Japanese emperor and empress:

The imperial couple will move to a temporary residence in Tokyo before settling at Togu Palace in the Akasaka Estate, currently home to the incoming emperor — Crown Prince Naruhito — and his family, once renovation work is completed.

Togu Palace will be renamed Sento Imperial Palace, which translates as “the place where the retired imperial couple live.”

Their temporary residence is the Takanawa Imperial Residence in Minato Ward, formerly home to Prince and Princess Takamatsu which has been empty since the princess — aunt of Emperor Akihito — died in 2004.

The couple has fond memories of their final home, the place they brought up their children when the emperor was crown prince.

The emperor will hand off all public duties to the new emperor immediately. The couple will pray for the country and its people after they move, and spend more time with friends, listening to music and reading, according to Imperial Household Agency officials.

A keen marine biologist, the retired emperor will periodically visit the Imperial Palace to continue his research on gobies, they said.

“I am looking forward to being able to take my time to read every book that I have yet to read,” Empress Michiko said in a statement to the press last October.

Trump and oversight

An article at New Repbulic argues that Trump is ironically building the case for impeachment by being so obstructionist about Congressional oversight.  It ends as follows:

In the aggregate, however, the White House’s obstinacy suggests a deeper problem. Presidents are supposed to accept the principle that Congress can act as a meaningful check on their power. Trump does not. His resistance to scrutiny isn’t limited to Congress, of course. The president habitually complains that mainstream news outlets don’t show him the deference he thinks he deserves. “In the ‘old days’ if you were president and you had a good economy, you were basically immune from criticism,” he fumed on Twitter earlier this week. Trump’s hunger for a fawning press was already bad; his authoritarian craving for the same treatment from Congress is worse.

It’s possible that this all-or-nothing approach could eventually backfire on Trump in court. It was already hard to argue that his resistance sprung from a good-faith attempt to preserve the executive branch’s powers. If anything, his categorical public refusal to cooperate with Congress only makes explicit what was already implicit. Then again, the Supreme Court still might not care. Even when faced with clear evidence of the Trump administration’s bad faith, the court’s conservative justices have chosen to pretend that nothing is amiss.

There’s a certain irony to the timing of these all-out efforts to block congressional oversight. Democrats have spent the past two years arguing that Trump’s authoritarian tendencies and disinterest in the rule of law would endanger American democracy. The president doesn’t seem interested in disputing the Democrats’ portrayal of him beyond soundbites like “No obstruction!” If anything, he seems almost eager to prove them right.

David Brooks and the mountains

I've never read David Brooks much, but he seems a very gentle character for a quasi-conservative (he's fallen out with most of his former buddies over Trump - so that's a good sign.)

I saw him recently on PBS Newshour talking about his increasing interest in matters spiritual, and his book on the matter, and it sounded somewhat interesting.

This review of the book at the New Yorker gives me a lot more biographical information on him, and the book, and he is indeed an interesting guy.

I would say his current position seems to be one you could classify as close to Unitarian Universalism - someone who is interested in seeing if there be some sort of common agreement between everyone, whether of a religious faith or not, as to the sort of principles that are involved in living a good and moral life.

Psychiatry's problems, noted again

I posted about another review of this book last month, but this review from Nature contains other highlights of the failures of psychiatry that I hadn't thought about for a long time:

In January 1973, Science published an article called ‘On being sane in insane places’. The author, psychologist David Rosenhan, described how he and seven other healthy people had reported themselves to a dozen psychiatric hospitals, claiming to hear voices uttering odd words such as ‘thud’ or ‘hollow’ — a symptom never reported in the clinical literature. Each person was diagnosed with either schizophrenia or manic-depressive psychosis, and admitted; once inside, they stopped the performance. They were released after an average of 19 days with diagnoses of ‘schizophrenia in remission’ (D. L. Rosenhan Science 179, 250–258; 1973).

One research and teaching hospital, hearing about the study, declared that its own staff could never be so deceived. It challenged Rosenhan to send it pseudopatients. He agreed, but never did. Nonetheless, the hospital claimed to have identified 41 of them.

Psychiatric hospitals, it seemed, could recognize neither healthy people nor those with mental illnesses. Rosenhan’s study exemplifies much of what went wrong in twentieth-century psychiatry, as biologists, psychoanalysts and sociologists struggled for supremacy. Science historian Anne Harrington takes us through the painful history of that struggle in the enthralling Mind Fixers, which focuses particularly on the United States.  

Something new I hadn't known:  it took this long to identify syphilis as eventually caused dementia?:

Certain discoveries, such as the findings in 1897 and 1913 confirming that syphilis causes late-onset psychosis, bolstered biologists’ view that mental disorders were brain-based. 

I also did not realise that psychoanalytic approaches had the sort of revival related here, even though of course I knew the 70's were the heyday of - gee, who was the guy who seemed to blame most  psychosis on families and pressure they put their kids under?*:  

As Harrington relates, the horrors of two world wars generated hundreds of thousands of cases of what we now call post-traumatic stress disorder, indicating a clear role for environmental triggers for some mental illnesses. By the 1970s, the Nazi eugenics atrocities had led most US psychoanalysts to disdain biological approaches even more vehemently, but their reasoning caused its own distress. They extended Freud’s view that mental disorders were rooted in early sexual fantasies to encompass all causes of early childhood anxieties. The idea that families, particularly mothers, were to blame for unexplained mental conditions such as psychoses became mainstream. By the 1950s, psychoanalysts dominated US psychiatry teaching.

Around this time, notes Harrington, social scientists emerged as the third influential force, aligning with psychoanalysts on the purported role of ‘toxic’ families in causing psychiatric disease. Yet within a decade, US psychiatrists experienced a backlash — both from patients’ families, fed up with being vilified, and from the professional ranks. What’s more, a 1962 study showed that two psychiatrists disagreed on the diagnosis of the same person 70% of the time (A. T. Beck Am. J. Psychiatry 119, 210–216; 1962).

*  RD Laing.  Haven't thought about him for a long time, too.

Dumb, populist, flakey perpetual politician who never achieves anything can't understand why she attracts dumb, populist, flakey wannabe politicians

My heart breaks for Pauline Hanson, who's decided to take on the mantle of martyr instead of looking in the mirror to understand why she attracts self-serving idiots to her party.   Like attracts like, Pauline...

Update:  Re-reading this, I think it uses harsher rhetoric than usual, but I did give her some praise yesterday, so it all balances in the end.

Yeah, thanks, Netflix

Seems fairly likely that what some people feared would happen with the release of teen suicide story "13 Reasons Why" did:

The Netflix show "13 Reasons Why" was associated with a 28.9% increase in suicide rates among U.S. youth ages 10-17 in the month (April 2017) following the shows release, after accounting for ongoing trends in suicide rates, according to a study published today in Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. The findings highlight the necessity of using best practices when portraying suicide in popular entertainment and in the media. The study was conducted by researchers at several universities, hospitals, and the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), part of the National Institutes of Health. NIMH also funded the study.

The number of deaths by suicide recorded in April 2017 was greater than the number seen in any single month during the five-year period examined by the researchers. When researchers analyzed the data by sex, they found the increase in the suicide rate was primarily driven by significant increases in suicide in young males. While suicide rates for females increased after the show's release, the increase was not statistically significant.

"The results of this study should raise awareness that young people are particularly vulnerable to the media," said study author Lisa Horowitz, Ph.D., M.P.H., a clinical scientist in the NIMH Intramural Research Program. "All disciplines, including the media, need to take good care to be constructive and thoughtful about topics that intersect with public health crises."

I have to say, though, that I would have expected it would be a show watched by more girls than guys, so the increase in male teen suicide is a surprise.  I hope they looked for any other possible media event that might have been related.

Pauline does the right thing

Gawd, what's coming over me?   When I heard Pauline Hanson's comments on her horrible* candidate Steve Dickson's resignation for the video of him carrying on like an absolute yobbo at a strip club, I thought she put it very well.   The Guardian reports it as follows:

Speaking at an early morning media conference, an angry Hanson said the footage “cannot be ignored or condoned” and she had accepted Dickson’s offer to resign. She said she would not tolerate her children behaving that way towards women, and would not condone her candidate’s “dealing with women in this fashion” either.

“Steve’s language and behaviour was unacceptable and does not meet my expectations nor the greater public’s expectation of a person who is standing for public office,” the One Nation party leader said.

“Steve Dickson yesterday offered his resignation from all positions within the party, which I have accepted.”

It was actually better than that - she referenced being the mother of 3 boys, and that she would find their similar behaviour unacceptable.

I offer, probably for the one and only time in my life, congratulations to her for not mincing words and saying that expects men (whether politicians or not) to behave better towards women.



*  I had previously noted in two posts his appalling smarmy hypocrisy when dealing with the NRA and the Christian element in their ranks.

Poets and depression

As I don't care for poetry, I didn't know much about the late Les Murray, but heard on the radio this morning that he had suffered from depression for a long time as a younger man. Which made me think:  are my less-than-positive feelings about this art form because it seems to be the preferred artistic outlet  of angsty teens and (later) adults with depression? 

I don't know that I have really thought about this much before, but I see that the matter has been studied, particularly in relation to female poets.  From the Wikipedia entry on "The Sylvia Plath effect":

The Sylvia Plath effect is the phenomenon that poets are more susceptible to mental illness than other creative writers. The term was coined in 2001 by psychologist James C. Kaufman. This early finding has been dubbed "the Sylvia Plath effect", and implications and possibilities for future research are discussed...

In one study, 1,629 writers were analyzed for signs of mental illness. Female poets were found to be significantly more likely to experience mental illness than female fiction writers or male writers of any type. Another study extended the analysis to 520 eminent women (poets, fiction writers, non-fiction writers, visual artists, politicians, and actresses), and again found the poets to be significantly more likely to experience mental illness.^[1]
 
In another study performed by the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Kentucky Medical Center, female writers were found to be more likely to suffer not only from mood disorders, but also from panic attacks, general anxiety, drug abuse, and eating disorders. The rates of multiple mental disorders were also higher among these writers. Although it was not explored in depth, abuse during childhood (physical or sexual) also loomed as a possible contributor to psychological issues in adulthood. The cumulative psychopathology scores of subjects, their reported exposure to abuse during childhood, mental difficulties in their mothers, and the combined creativity scores of their parents represented significant predictors of their illnesses. The high rates of certain emotional disorders in female writers suggested a direct relationship between creativity and psychopathology, but the relationships were not clear-cut. As the results of the predictive analysis indicated, familial and environmental factors also appeared to play a role.^[5]

I see at Quora someone asks:

Do poets get depression or do depressed people write poetry?

Anyway,  Tim, you seem a jolly enough fellow whose poetry is not a downer.  But has anyone done a study on how much published poetry could be categorised as "cheerful" as opposed to "deals with a depressing subject" or at best "melancholic"?  

Drug problem in Bangladesh

A detailed article here from the BBC about a large drug problem in Bangladesh with something called Yaba:

Hundreds of thousands of people in Bangladesh have become hooked on yaba - a mixture of methamphetamine and caffeine sold as cheap red or pink pills. The official response has been harsh, with hundreds of people killed in alleged incidents of "crossfire"....

"In the early stages of using yaba it has a lot of positive effects. Everything is enhanced with yaba," says Dr Ashique Selim, a consultant psychiatrist specialising in addiction.

"You become more sociable… You enjoy music, cigarettes and sex more. In Bangladesh there's a very unhealthy association between yaba and sex - you're awake longer, you've got more energy, you feel more confident. If you stop using yaba, there are no withdrawal symptoms, it's not like alcohol or heroin. But it's the effects of yaba that are really addictive. It's a very, very dangerous drug."

Yaba first appeared in Bangladesh in 2002 and its use, and abuse, has steadily risen since then. Manufactured illicitly in industrial quantities in Myanmar, it is smuggled into Bangladesh in the far south-east of the country, where the border partly follows the River Naf.

It was across this river that hundreds of thousands of desperate Rohingya refugees fled into Bangladesh in 2017, to escape from the Burmese military. Now nearly a million destitute refugees live in makeshift camps in the region and dealers have succeeded in turning some of them into mules - often women, who smuggle packages of pills inside their vaginas.

Experts believe the dealers see an unmissable business opportunity. At a time of rapid growth - Bangladesh has one of the world's fastest growing economies - traffickers are dumping huge quantities of yaba, and selling it cheaply to create a captive market. Anecdotally, it seems its use is becoming more prevalent among go-getters riding the economic boom.

As usual, the story behind how certain types of drugs get a hold in different countries and societies is often interesting, and a bit surprising.

Am I a bad person...

...for being somewhat amused that it seems quite a lot of people, after having devoted so many hours for so many years to Game of Thrones, found that (what I gather was) the climatic battle of the entire series was so poorly lit that they often couldn't tell what was going on?

Or perhaps I should instead feel a little sorry for them, but happy for myself that I was didn't suffer the same fate.

Update:   I have noticed comments about the too fast editing too - something that drives me nuts, but many people these days have become acclimatised to.  I can safely predict I would have hated this episode.  I mean, even though it seems this BBC reviewer overall thought it was good, he freely admits to a lot of negatives:

The direction and cutting makes events frenzied, scrappy and yes, due to the lack of lighting, difficult to follow – a clever visual articulation of how this fight would really feel. This is an admirable artistic choice in theory, but after a while it starts to translate as tiresome, incomprehensible noise. In interviews leading up to the episode, Sapochnik cited The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers’ Battle of Helm’s Deep as his main inspiration. But The Battle of Winterfell never quite achieves the elegance or clarity of Peter Jackson’s sequence – nor matches its remarkable balance of character and action. This is not to say that The Battle of Winterfell is bad. It is not. But based on first viewing, it is perhaps not impressive enough to live up to its own hype.

 Update 2:  continuing to sound like a Redditor, I will assert my unpopular opinion that the only decent cinematic fantasy character based battles that took place on a field were those in the first two Narnia movies.   They were well directed, not overly choppy editting, and were thrilling without obvious blood letting.   (Marvel also does it without blood, but the editing often leaves a lot to be desired.)

Unpopular opinion No 2:   the climatic battle in Avengers: Endgame was a little too reminiscent of that in Reader Player One.

Unpopular opinion No 3:   Dr Strange is the most important Marvel Universe character, and deserves at least two more movies.   (Although it seems I often do not care much for the follow up movie for a Marvel movie that I liked.)

Some sordid history

Today I learned that Tolkien's eldest son became a Catholic priest who was accused of sexually molesting boys in at least the 1950's.   Said son died in 2003, but claimed in 1994 that he had been sexually assaulted by more than one of Dad's Oxford academic friends, who would sometimes sleep over in the son's bed.  Given that they probably all stank of pipe tobacco (but then again, I bet the whole house did), this was likely an unpleasant experience for a child even without the sexual assault.   

Poor old CS Lewis gets a mention as one of Tolkien's friends, but I think he was likely too busy having an affair with his deceased mate's mother (and later, his wife to be) to be interested in molesting boys.   I sure hope so, anyway.  

Australian politics

Here's my current gut feeling:

*   I have read on Twitter some analysis showing that today's Newspoll showing TPP at 51/49 in favour of Labor (but with a worrying small swing towards the Coalition) is a specific result of a change in how they were handling Clive Palmer's dumbass support.   In other words, if they had left him grouped with "other", it would still have been 52/48.   Sounds plausible to me.

*  Perceived campaign performance is such a fickle thing, isn't it?   It's so much a question of "the vibe" over content, and looking positive and cheerful is simply enough to sway some, regardless of being an inch deep on actual policy.   This is why I think both Morrison (groan)  and Palmer (rending of shirt sound at the goldfish like memory of the Australian - especially Queensland - electorate) have had better than expected campaigns, and Shorten has been the victim of some momentary crankiness that has to be avoided at all costs in the next two weeks.

*  I don't think the Labor TV ads have been very good either.   Isn't the public a bit skeptical of statements about how much money has been taken from health, and schools, etc, unless it has happened really recently and had an obvious, direct effect on services?   I don't think the advertising agency they are using is doing a great job.

*  I think everyone expects that seat by seat plays are going to be unusually important this time,  and not in favour of the Coalition, what with so many Liberals having jumped ship before the election.  I therefore remain relatively confident of a substantial enough majority government for Labor.

* It's good to see One Nation support down, and if history is any guide, any Senate wins by Palmer will just mean we have more independents soon enough, and they didn't work out too bad last time.   But is he attracting a nuttier group of candidates this time around?   I mean, the advertising about the Chinese airstrip in WA indicates that he is, so perhaps we'll end up with nutty independents of the ex-One Nation kind.   I just hope he gets none up.