Some interesting questions for both sides of the debate.
I’m told that a denialist is someone who espouses a view that flies in the face of a recognized scientific consensus. First question: Why do I need to espouse my denial to qualify? Answer: Because denialism is now being cited as a hate crime. The mere having of the view that, for example, anyone with haggis on her breath should be killed, is only a thought crime. But as long as I keep my thoughts to myself, celebrants of Robbie Burns Day are in no danger. No danger no harm. No harm no foul.
Second question: A consensus recognized by whom? It can’t be those who subscribe to that consensus, because then anyone who denies what the Creation Scientists are telling us would count as a denialist. After all, they too see eye to eye with each other.
Third question: 97% of which scientists?
And fourth: Have they confirmed AGW themselves and independently, or do they merely believe it via the same means the rest of us do? After all, a computer scientist is a scientist, but what does she know about climatology? And if one climatologist is ratifying the findings of a colleague because the first has no reason not to trust the second, then a 97% consensus has no more probative force than would a minority report.Climate, etc.
Here is what I posted on the Volokh Conspiracy on the 10th Anniversary of 9/11: On this tenth anniversary of 9/11, I am in New York, staying at a hotel in Time Square. On the train to the City, dogs swept the train in Philly, and another K-9 team boarded in Newark to ride to Penn Station.
Source: “Saved by the Militia”
Back in March, the Washington Post published a piece by three Texas A&M professors who had produced a paper titled “The Trump Effect: How 2016 Campaign Rallies Explain Spikes in Hate .” The paper, which hadn’t been published or peer-reviewed, claimed there was a 226 percent jump in hate crimes in counties that hosted a Trump rally.
Source: Analysis: Trump rallies did not lead to an increase in hate crimes
Notice what seems to be the norm on Facebook and other social media…
My latest essay begins, I will describe two modes of political discourse, which I call persuasion mode and demonization mode. In persuasion mode, we treat people on the other side with respect, we listen to their logical and factual presentations, and we respond with logical and factual presentations of our own.
Source: Persuasion vs. Demonization
IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE A BAD LAW, ENFORCE IT RIGOROUSLY AND EVENHANDEDLY: Breitbart Claims A Progressive Scalp and Reason, Predictably, Draws the Wrongest Possible Conclusion.
Source: IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE A BAD LAW, ENFORCE IT RIGOROUSLY AND EVENHANDEDLY: Breitbart Claims A Progres…
“Hit back twice as hard.”
CATHY YOUNG: (Almost) Everything You Know About GamerGate is Wrong — Harassment campaign? Misogynist hate mob? Alt-right test run? It’s much more complicated: If not Trump, what is GamerGate’s legacy? It did change the cultural landscape, for better and worse.
Source: CATHY YOUNG: (Almost) Everything You Know About GamerGate is Wrong — Harassment campaign? Misogynis…
Stanford law professor John Donohue claims to have discovered evidence that the 1994 federal ban on so-called assault weapons “really did work,” because mass shootings and the deaths caused by them declined while the law was in effect, then rose afterward.
Source: A Suspiciously Selective, Logically Shaky Analysis of Mass Shooting Data Claims the Federal ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban ‘Really Did Work’
(Paul Mirengoff) Recent mass shootings have prompted calls for new gun control legislation aimed primarily at rifles. However, most murders are not the product of mass shootings by people who want to make a statement, political or otherwise.
Source: A conservative plan to reduce shootings (and other homicides)
t Conservative Review, Daniel Horowitz presents a seven-step plan to reduce homicides. I have distilled his seven steps to six, which are set forth below, along with some of Horowitz’s commentary:
Increase mandatory sentencing for gun felons
Increase mandatory sentencing for gun felons
Fix court loophole allowing violent felons back on the streets
Allow good guys to carry everywhere
Fast-track death penalty for mass murderers
Declare war on sanctuary cities
Horowitz proposes his seven-step plan as a counter to gun control legislation. In theory, one could enact new gun control legislation and Horowitz’s entire plan.
Great news, thanks to Freedom To Travel: We are extremely pleased to report that Plaintiffs prevailed in Pellegrino and Waldman v. TSA: TSA screeners are not shielded from lawsuits in cases of fabricated allegations, false imprisonment and other egregious and unlawful acts.
Source: “Security” Workers In The Fake Cop Suits, AKA TSA Workers, Lose Their Immunity