A documentary getting strong reviews

De Palma Reviews - Metacritic

I guess it'll be on SBS soon enough.

I like quite a few De Palma films, but his peak must surely be The Untouchables.   (And, hey, I just Googled the movie, and up came a link to a 3/5 star review by Ebert, who apparently complained about de Palma's "curiously lead-footed direction" (!!)   I knew there was a reason I never could trust Ebert's reviews - he was sometimes right, but at other times so off the mark I didn't really bother regularly following him.)

Sequel-itis discussed

Hollywood Has a Big Millennial Problem - The Atlantic

Not sure I've learnt much new from this article, but sure, everyone recognises there is too much money going into too many sequels.  Even if I did like the Star Wars, Bond, Mission Impossible and Jurassic movies of last year.  Sorry...

Republicans on the nose

Just How Bad an Election Night Was It for California Republicans? - The New York Times

The political problem of climate change

It would be funny if it were not worrying, but this post at Real Climate shows how the American Right (and a large slab of ours) likes to "double down" when their beliefs on climate change are challenged:

My study asked the question: “how do Republican individuals perceive persuasive information on climate change action, and what types of information are more or less effective?” To answer this question, I conducted a survey experiment wherein respondents in the treatment conditions were asked to read a paragraph about climate change. Each paragraph linked climate change to a prominent concept in American politics (either free markets, national security, poverty alleviation, or natural disaster preparation), attributed the message to a fictional but realistic-sounding source (either a Republican former Congressman or Democrat), and ended with a call for public action on the issue. These passages were rigorously pretested to ensure realism and impact.

The experiment, conducted in March 2014, used a nationally representative sample of 478 Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, who were randomly sorted into one of the eight treatment groups or the control group, where respondents were asked in a single sentence to consider climate change as a political issue. Afterwards, all respondents were asked a series of questions to assess their support for or opposition to governmental action against climate change, their likelihood of taking personal action on the issue, and how sure they felt about their climate change opinions.

What I found was that every single treatment condition failed to convince respondents. In fact, treating Republicans with persuasive information made them more resistant to climate action regardless of the content or sourcing of that information. Overall, simply being exposed to pro-climate action communication appeared to polarize Republicans even further; they became more opposed to governmental action and less likely to take personal action compared to the control group. They also became more certain of their negative opinions on the issue, displaying significantly lower attitudinal ambivalence compared to the control group. What’s more, all of these treatment effects doubled to tripled in size for respondents who reported high personal interest in politics, all statistically significant outcomes. These highly politically interested individuals make up roughly one-third of Republicans in the sample and in the United States.

 If you ask me, a large part of the problem is due to Republican leadership:   if you had the leaders of the party actually prepared to tell their supporters that, sorry, they are wrong on this, in the same way that anti-vaxxers are wrong and hold beliefs supported by only a handful of contrarians whose policy views are against the public interest, you may start to get some marginalisation of the denialists at least underway.  Who is going to be the first high profile Republican leader to take such a position?

It's the current leadership, pandering to their nutty support base, that prevents any movement.  But why should I expect any different?   It is a party full of people ideologically devoted to cutting taxes, no matter what the circumstances, as the economic cure all, listening to just one set of evidence resistant economists. 

When will the Party come back to its senses?

Kristina arguing reasonably

Labor has not backflipped on corporate tax cuts. Here are the facts | Kristina Keneally | Opinion | The Guardian

I suspect she is right - the benefits of corporate tax cuts are being oversold by many economists, particularly in the context of the Federal government's current need to not be giving away revenue.  Small government fans, of course, think it's a great idea, because lower revenue is never a problem for them - it means smaller government.

Yet another cleverer than we thought animal

Fish can recognize human faces, new study shows

Trump secures the Australian comb-over vote

That's Maurice Newman, of course.  Completely un-expected - not.

Look at meeeeeeeee

Just a minor observation, but for a person such as Tim "Freedomboy" Wilson, who has always self promoted (and posted selfies) with an intensity that suggests a mental teenager,  becoming the Liberal candidate for a safe seat has been like entering Seventh Heaven.    It's his perfect excuse for a zillion photos of his beaming face to be printed.  Some examples from his twitter feed:

That last one features another young person who always strikes me as a bit of a self promoting right wing lightweight - Grace Collier.

And how much of a swing would be needed for Labor to unseat the Coalition?   According to Wikipedia - 11%.

Tim, you can ease up a bit now.  No, seriously.  Your over-promotion is probably doing you more harm than good.  On second thoughts - just keep it up:  there's no way an electorate could ever get sick of seeing your face and start thinking you're a vain try hard.   Have you tried sky-writing yet?  

Tuesday links

Work's still distracting me from the important job of blogging, but here are a few recent links of note:

*  anyone who was taking Dilbert writer Scott Adams even half seriously on his "Trump as Master Persuader" meme should perhaps read his latest post in which he endorses Hilary Clinton for the obvious reason [/sarc] that she's now sounding persuasive and may well trigger a race war in which he [Adams] would be a target for assassination.  

I wouldn't be surprised if he later reveals that anyone who believed him is a victim of his own persuasive powers.   The guy's just a tad nutty, and an attention seeker.

*  The Boston Globe has set up a very good looking site called STAT - Reporting from the Frontiers of Health and Medicine.  (I don't think it's a great name though - Googling it comes up with lots of alternatives.)  And it's from there that you find an article that raises a good point relevant to recent transplant news:  How do you ask grieving parents to donate their son's penis.

*  The Conversation looks at the question of whether East Coast lows that caused much flooding and wave damage the last few days are expected to become less or more frequent under global warming.  The answer:  modelling suggests they may become fewer, but those that do come could be stronger.  I don't think that's an encouraging answer.  Here's a screen shot from The Guardian yesterday of the before and after situation at that Sydney beach:


Update:   I think Slate is probably taking the right mocking tone in its Trump Apocalypse Watch, and this entry about his ridiculous comments on judges is good.

It's annoying, but I have to keep re-assuring my kids that Trump is not going to become President. 

Wait (oh OK, I'm bringing up racism)

I've got a lot of work on my plate at the moment.  As much as I enjoy not getting to it by posting here instead, I'm not going to do that today.  Well, at least not until this evening.

OK, wait.  From the weekend:  I really hate Andrew Bolt's posts when a migrant/s is/are caught in a crime, and he says "who let them in?"   Yeah, Andrew:  the government hasn't yet got a Precognition Unit up and running, so instead I suppose we just should go with "don't let in blacks or Muslims" hey?   The guys in the video you're complaining about (and of course their behaviour was bad) don't even look to be adults.   How the hell are governments supposed to be able to tell which children/teenagers coming with their families will get into trouble, and which won't?

It really is pretty disgusting race-baiting to the Pauline Hanson level voter.  Up there with Trump bringing on stage victims of Mexicans.   And what about Steve Kates and the subtle racism that goes over a treat at Catallaxy?  Hey wait a minute....A couple of days ago Kates published one of his "Obama is the worst most disgusting Presidents eva!" posts and the first paragraph is now shown as this:

Sure it’s funny in a pathetic kind of way. Sure the president of the United States has been elected because he can read a teleprompter. Sure we know he pretended to have written two books when we know the first one was written by the communist Bill Ayres and the second was just a gaggle of campaign rhetoric written by no one in particular. The only people who will find the video truly funny are our enemies, the enemies of the United States, the enlightenment and Western civilisation. They laugh at us because so many across the US are simpletons and fools, and their president is all the proof they need.

I am sure that's been editted.  The post originally read - I would say with about 95% certainty (anyone please correct me if I am wrong):   "sure the president of the United States has been elected because he is black and can read a teleprompter."

I very nearly posted about it when I read it, but didn't.   Can any of my readers confirm my recollection?

If it was pressure from Sinclair that led to the change, good.  But he's left so much slide on this blog, I have my doubts.  

Blogroll clean up time

It's hard keeping a blogroll current, isn't it?   Links change and hide in other locations (if not disappearing forever); I keep on wondering for how long I can possibly keep the few formerly respectable, now so utterly partisan and driven insane by the Obama Presidency that they're rarely worth a look, right wing sites still on the list.   (Well, Hot Air I'll keep, but the "columnists" at PJ Media just haven't been worth reading for years.) 

I've also got to try to remember any blogs/sites that I have been meaning to add but not got around to yet.  NPR was probably the most recent one.  The Barfblog is surely the world's best and most active blog on food poisoning, and deserves a place.

As I think I have lamented before, there are actually few good, active sites or blogs on things I've always been interested in - the paranormal and even UFOs.   (By the way, my shower thought of the other night - is it possible that the now highly debris cluttered region of low earth orbit be part of the reason we don't see many alien visitors in the last couple of decades?  I thought there was one or two pretty well testified sightings from the 60's or 70's of what looked like satellites that suddenly took paths that could not possibly be followed by Earth launched ones, but I haven't heard of anything like that for a long time.  Perhaps because it has become too dangerous for them to hang around there.)

Somewhere on twitter I noticed recently a list of science fiction authors who tweet/blog.  Not that I really read any of them lately, but one or two might be worthwhile.  Jerry Pournelle is increasingly frail, and he's a bit of a climate change skeptic, further confirming the rule that denialism is a club for old, white men, and silly (usually rich) but slightly younger libertarians.

Speaking of aging climate change denialists, it was funny to read that Mark Steyn  is asking the court to hurry up with his defamation case because his expert witnesses are mostly old and at risk of dying before they can give evidence at this trial.  (He noted that one had died already - I'm betting it was Bob Carter.)   As far as I can make out, Steyn has taken the too-cute-by-half technique of doubling down on over-the-top criticism of Mann and climate science generally since this action started, all as a way of being able to argue at trial  "come on, look how I exaggerate and carry on all the time - no one can really take it seriously, and nor should Michael Mann."   It's a pretty shameful thing to do, and it's no wonder no lawyer is involved.

Anyway, blogroll clean up later tonight.  Or tomorrow.

  

LDP games

Election 2016: Cash for candidacy: Leaked documents show $500,000 offer to become Liberal Democratic senate candidate

Senator Blofeld Leyonhjelm seems to be having some serious leakage issues lately.

All rather interesting;  and all confirming what a joke his little dog and pony party is.

Not very clever

I watched some of the much promoted ABC aboriginal superhero TV series Cleverman last night.

A few comments:

*  is it just me, or does the body hair on the "hairies" look really, really fake;
*  just before the daughter hairy was shot, I think her Mum was clipping her nail, which I could swear wobbled like it was a not-properly-glued on fake nail;
*  the newspaper/media owner baddie was terribly arch acting.  They should have put a moustache for him to twirl and be done with;
*  the whole thing suffers from the over-ernestness that seems typical of TV or movies which try aboriginal quasi mysticism.  (I'm thinking the fire sparks sequence in The Right Stuff as another example, but I'm sure there are others not coming to mind.)

I doubt it is worth re-visiting.

Good to see

Hillary Clinton Warns Donald Trump’s ‘Thin Skin’ Would Set Off War or Economic Crisis - The New York Times

Friday history snippet

An email from Literary Review contains this bit of information which I had not heard before:

Over the course of the 20th century, British prime ministers reacted to the intelligence services in various ways. Neville Chamberlain turned a blind eye to reports that appeasement only made Hitler more aggressive, even after the foreign secretary had drawn his attention to the fact that the Führer had called him an Arschloch (‘arsehole’) by underlining the word;

Good PR for rats

Rats in the ranks? Tanya Plibersek left cradling a rat in new Chaser stunt

Yes, it is odd that pet rats are featuring heavily in this election campaign.

Of course, my opinion of Tanya Plibersek is only enhanced by her natural rat handling manner, indicating that she is reasonably fond of them, as all the nicest people are....

Not interested

Wow.  Henry Miller's work, and personal attitudes, do sound pretty repulsive in this article.  Yet, as it notes, he had some big-names-in-literature endorsements at the time.

A proposition with which I have complete sympathy

Running a marathon is a dangerous, expensive, stupid, meaningless task. Don’t do it.

Here's a key section (not sure if I was writing it that I would bother including figures for "chafing", though):

Indeed a vast, disturbing literature has now accumulated on the ill effects of running marathons. Studies find that up to 1 in 12 participants end up seeking medical help during the race. (At
hot-weather events, runners can end up “dropping like flies.”) As many as four-fifths report having gastrointestinal problems such as bloating, cramps, vomiting, diarrhea, and fecal incontinence while on the course. Some runners suffer from blood poisoning. Others must endure a blitz of dermatological conditions: sore nipples (affecting up to 1 in 6 on race day); chafing (another 1 in 6); blisters (1 in 3); and jogger’s toe (1 in 40). Given all the risks, it’s no wonder that some marathon organizers have asked doctors to embed as race participants so they can quickly tend to runners who collapse.

When researchers consider all the injuries that accrue during the period of training—and not just on the day of the marathon itself—they find even greater cause for alarm. One study looked at 255 participants in an extended, 32-week marathon training program and found that 90 of them—that’s 35 percent—experienced “overuse” injuries. (Among the most common training ailments are anterior knee pain, Achilles tendinitis, shin splints, and stress fractures.) Another research group surveyed 725 men who raced in the 2005 Rotterdam Marathon, and found that more than half of them had sustained a running injury over the course of the year. Among those who sustained a new injury during the month leading up to the race, one-quarter were still suffering, to some extent, three months later.

Cultural notes

*  The BBC has a story about the odd, and secretive, ways that Indians go about having a drink.

*  An American survey (and not one of the silly ones done by a condom manufacturer for publicity) seems to show an apparent rise in sexual experimentation of the same-sex variety (or at least, preparedness to admit to it).  Up to about 8 percent now, and the differences between the genders is interesting.  It's a bit funny to read the "lesbian before graduation" term being used in the reports - I remember I first heard it used by Libbie Gore on one of her shows on the ABC many, many years ago - and I imagine it probably really annoys some lesbians.

*  In other survey news, I stumbled across this one when looking at the Gallop website for other reasons:

1% of russians approve of u.s. leadership, the lowest approval in the world in 2015 and the lowest approval gallup has ever recorded.

Russians are a bit of a worry, to put it mildly.

[And I reckon if you did the "have you ever had a sexual experience with a member of the same sex" survey in that country, the number would probably be "- 8%".  At least if Putin had anything to do with it.]

Fun while it lasted, I suppose

Police make first arrests over Y1.4 bil theft from ATMs ‹ Japan Today: Japan News and Discussion

This crime - stealing $12 million or so from Japanese ATMs - was the sort of one you would expect to see in a movie, committed by likeable rogues. But there were always too many people involved for it to have any hope of long term success.