Don't Count Me In

The Catholic League is calling for an extended boycott of Miller Brewing Co. because of its sponsorship of the (graphic) depravity that is the Folsom Street Fair. As a prudential matter, as nearly all boycotts are, Miller's sponsorship of the event did not seem to have been provided expressly to support the behavior featured on display, making the proximate relationship to evil of a purchase of Miller products second-order at best, assuming it is also not intended to support the event.

Another thing is there is really little choice if you are craving mass-produced light pilsner, which, yes, I do on occasion. A friend of The Clan's has been boycotting Anheuser-Busch for several years because of their sponsorship of similar events, though not quite as over-the-top as this one, in other cities.

In fact, these kinds of things (boycotts) can only have a snowball's chance unless they somehow affect the unholy alliance between professional sports and the alcohol industry.

That said, I'm certainly not going out of my way to buy Miller, but neither will I be pouring any down the drain.

(HHT: Scott Carson)

Sen. Clinton Proposes Grants for Individual Education Accounts

Memorial of St. Wenceslaus
Memorial of Lawrence Ruiz and Companions

Although she doesn't quite call them that. At a forum hosted by the Congressional Black Caucus, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's proposal today that every one of the estimated 4 million children per year born in the United States should receive a $5,000 "baby bond" from the government to help pay for future costs of college, or buying a first home, was met with enthusiastic applause. Ostensibly, this program, in addition to helping young adults, would strengthen the economby by promoting the lost art of saving in the middle and lower classes.

Riddle me this. Set aside the subsidiarity concerns that arise despite its clear intentions for solidarity. Set aside the obvious questions about how to fund another $20 billion per year program, how dubious the benefit claims to the economy are, or whether this would exacerbate the illegal immigration/border security issue. It is not clear how this differs materially from a combination of two ideas for social security reform that have not gained any traction (particularly with the left) in the last decade, individual retirement accounts and the (notorious) lock box. If we are to presume this is a good idea for early adult life, then why should it be a bad approach for retirement?

[submitted by e-mail]

Chicago Installing Smart Video

Memorial of St. Vincent de Paul

 

Once the World's Hog Butcher, the city of Chicago, as is its way and in hopes of attracting the Olympics, is proudly reinventing itself into the City that looks over its Big Shoulders 24/7. The city and IBM have kicked off an effort to create the country's most advanced video security network. Like many large cities, Chicago has thousands of security cameras being used by businesses and police. The new system would build on some advanced features like turning cameras toward gun shots and dialing 911 to let cameras analyze images in real time. Potential use cases include programming the system to:

Alert the city's emergency center whenever a camera spots a vehicle, or license plate, matching the description of one being sought by authorities.

Alert emergency officials of suspicious activity like the same vehicle passing a landmark several times, or abandoning a back pack in a public place.

The potential manpower advantages of such a system are obvious. So too are concerns with invasions of privacy and other abuses. These, however, are not the cause of some spirited debates on occasion at some of the Troglodytrix' family's functions. My father-in-law and one of my brothers-in-law, a police officer, see such things as progress. My other two brothers-in-law on that side of the family and I have all viscerally disagreed and for the same reason; it abridges a fundamental right in a manner once anticipated by Star Trek:

[N]ow... I have something HUMAN to talk about! Rights, sir--HUMAN rights! The Bible. The Code of Hammurabi. And of Justinian. The Magna Carta. The Constitution of the United States. The Fundamental Declarations of the Martian Colonies. The Statutes of Alpha III. Gentlemen, these documents all speak of RIGHTS! Rights of the accused to a trial by his peers, to be represented by counsel, the rights of cross-examination, but most importantly, the right to be confronted by the witnesses against him--a right to which my client has been denied!

...

The most devastating witness against my client is not a human being. It's a machine, an information system. The computer log of the Enterprise.

...

And I repeat, I speak of rights! A machine has none. A man must. My client has the right to face his accuser, and if you do not grant him that right, you have brought us down to the level of the machine! Indeed, you have elevated that machine above us! I ask that my motion [to reconvene aboard the Enterprise] be granted. And more than that, gentlemen. In the name of humanity, fading in the shadow of the machine, I demand it.

I DEMAND IT!!!

[submitted by e-mail]

John Paul the Great on the Sanctity of Life #3

Memorial of St. Vincent de Paul

Respect for life and for the dignity of the human person extends also to the rest of creation, which is called upon to join man in praising God.

"The Ecological Crisis," 1990

Please Pardon the Dust

A redesign of this site is in process, with remodeling to follow. There is not a specific timetable for completion, but it is expected to last up to a few weeks. This may also affect blog output.

Our Catholic Mission

Memorial of Ss. Cosmas and Damian

We're on a mission from God.

-- John Belushi as Jake Blues in The Blues Brothers

Last week, in a conference address to Legatus, an organization of Catholic business leaders, Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver threw down a challenge to reclaim the Catholic Mission. Here is but one truffle quote:

To be a Catholic is to be very unique among the world’s believers. To be a Catholic means believing that you are a part of a vast historical project. And it’s not our project. It’s God’s. Being Catholic means believing that since the beginning of time God has been working out his own hidden purposes in the history of nations and in the biography of every person. He’s still unfolding his purposes today, and each of us has a part to play in his divine plan.

He chose us before the foundation of the world, to be holy. In love, he destined us for adoption to himself through Jesus Christ.

(HHT: Catholic Report)

#756 to be Branded with Asterisk

Marc Ecko announced today that the ball Barry Bonds hit for his record-breaking 756th home run will be branded with an asterisk and sent to the Baseball Hall of Fame. And that's just fine with Hall of Fame president, Dave Petroskey:

We're happy to get it. We're a nonprofit history museum, so this ball wouldn't be coming to Cooperstown without Marc Ecko buying it from the fan who caught it.

Catholic Carnival 138 is Up

At Domestic Vocation. This week's torchlight post is “Catholics are enjoined to pursue all means to prolong life" by Cathy Weidel at Kicking Over My Traces. I had planned to blog this story, particularly following the Vatican's affirmation of Catholic teaching on end of life treatment and the clarification of food and water being considered ordinary treatment even when they are administered by artificial means.

This is a very emotional topic for the extended Clan based on how my father's doctors tried (and failed) eight years ago to press us into robbing him of his true dignity in his last days by denying him not only treatment that they admitted was not extraordinary, but withdrawing food and water.

German Scientists Criticize Recent Adult Stem Cell Claims

From The Scientist:

Bodo-Eckehard Strauer, director of cardiology at the University of Düsseldorf, told the daily Rheinische Post (german) that his team had saved the life of a 64-year-old man who suffered from cardiogenic shock by transplanting adult autologous bone marrow-derived stem cells into a damaged artery. Strauer described the treatment as a "global innovation" and called for increased funding for adult stem cell research. Strauer has performed the procedure in over 300 patients since 2001, but the case was the first in an acute patient.

But some researchers say his claims go too far. Andreas Zeiher, director of cardiology at the University of Frankfurt and also a bone marrow transplant specialist, noted that patients suffering cardiogenic shock normally have a survival rate of 50 percent, placing into doubt the lifesaving role of Strauer's treatment. "Science is not [done by] reporting a single case," he told The Scientist. "What Strauer has done is to give a patient report, not a scientific study."

I have warned previously about ASCR falling into the same hype trap as ESCR, and so caution in these cases is merited. But regarding the critic, Dr. Zeiher, in this case, consider he thinks embyronic stem cell research "is the only way to advance science." (emphasis added)

It's Stewardship Season

And that includes for a couple of Catholic new media outlets who are in a pinch: Catholic Culture and Catholic Answers. If you've got the means, please consider helping them out.

Stories Scientists Tell

A new study, published on-line this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, reveals that humans today are geared toward paying attention to other people and animals, much more so than inanimate objects. This despite the latter being the more likely source of modern hazards. In the study, groups of undergraduate students from the University of California-Santa Barbara, watched alternating pairs of flashing photographs of various outdoor scenes displayed on computer monitors. The first image of the pair showed one scene, while the second image showed the same scene with one change. The subjects indicated each time they detected a change between the scenes.

The images included animate objects (people and animals) and different types of inanimate objects, including plants, tools, vehicles, and buildings. Almost 9 out of every 10 test subjects correctly detected the changes involving people, or animals, compared to nearly two-thirds for inanimate objects. The time to recognize changes was also shorter, in general, for the animate objects.

The research team goes on to assert that this finding supports the idea that natural selection specialized the brains of earlier humans to monitor the visual details of other humans and animals, a feature which has been passed to us. That we possess this feature is attributed to natural selection inherently requiring long periods of time to taking a long time to create anything distinct. Of course, I would expect that if it were exactly the opposite, there would be a natural selection reason attributed to that, as well.

And then there's a chuckler from one team member that these results have implications for phobias and other behaviors that involve focus toward specific categories of objects over others:

People develop phobias for spiders and snakes and things that were ancestral threats. It's very infrequent to have somebody afraid of cars or electrical outlets. Those statistically pose much more of a threat to us than a tiger. That makes it an interesting test case as to why do tigers still capture attention.

Why tigers may capture more attention is interesting. That this gives insight to the development of phobias is nonsense. Yes, cars and outlets cause more incidents of harm to Americans (extrapolating beyond urban Americans is dubious given the make-up of the study group). Consider, however, that it is not unusual, in particular for those in an urban setting, to be exposed to dozens of nearly identical outlets and hundreds of similar cars on any given day. Compare that to how long it would take to come in contact with comparable numbers of spiders, snakes, or tigers. Also, consider that the images were of outdoor scenes, where people spend a minority of their time.

When they try to describe what it all means, the study team appears to be ignoring how the familiarity of objects and the topical constraints of the study could obviously play a role in the results. What we have from this study is an interesting bit of how human visual pattern recognition functions. Of course, that isn't very sexy, and may not rate a link picked up on the Yahoo! home page. It would also violate a development that has seemingly increased (at least in profile) since the whole intelligent design dust-up began a few years ago: Popular scientific news stories about human development must trumpet The Agenda.

"Seemingly" because the evidence for this "development" admittedly is anecdotal. But when you see stories of how drug companies may be influencing medical research, and the likes of George Soros are actively politicizing science (HHT: Powerline), it becomes reasonable to wonder... (Throwing the baby out with the bath water is now something to keep in check, as well.)

Regardless, what is pushed instead of an interesting tidbit is a speculative narrative tailored to be consistent with current evolutionary theory; a tale of hunter-gatherers creeping through the jungle and witless suburbanites oblivious to stalking SUVs . Alas, the neo-Darwinist context is king, and these scientists are its subjects.

[submitted by e-mail]

Columbia Got Played

I'm not going to dwell on it; there are other places for that. I must admit for brief time I thought I could appreceiate those on the other side of the fence about whether Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should be offered a microphone. I think there is a profound difference between allowing someone to speak and inviting someone to speak, but I am sympathetic to the idea of authentic "intellectual diversity," which is a little different from what passes for it in the modern halls of academe. After all, as "deeply troubling" as his actions and rhetoric are, he is not Hitler (Separate query: When will we let Hitler be Hitler?).

And then I saw this, compiled at The Corner, from WFB on the prospect of the American Communist leader, Gus Hall, being invited to Yale to speak:

The Communist has of course renounced our institutions, which is perhaps all right, but has done something very much more; he has renounced the bond — whatever it is: but fragile though it is, it is there, make no mistake about it — that holds together Republicans and Democrats, socialists and Manchesterians, syndicalists and elitists...the Communist has renounced the bond explicitly and intentionally — renunciation in the first degree — and for the duration of that renunciation we cannot speak to him, because however deep we reach we cannot find a common vocabulary; we can no more collaborate with him to further the common understanding than Anne Frank could have collaborated with Goebbels in a dialogue on race relations. ... We all abuse the instruments of discourse, but we seek, under the massive roccoco superstructure of point and counterpoint, to say things to each other that come truly out of our minds and our hearts, because we feel that in deeply significant ways, we are related by that highly elastic, but not infinitely elastic, bond, that binds us to each other.

Such a man, then, whose explicit message we know beforehand, which message he must deliver undeviatingly, cannot communicate to us orally anything of political interest, the subject with which the Political Union properly interests itself. He is a fit object of curiosity for students of certain other subjects than politics. ... The court room at Tel Aviv was crowded with professors of the specialized social sciences: but they were not men who would have invited Adolf Eichmann to their college to defend the regime of Adolf Hitler.

...

What will you do when Gus Hall, the human being, comes here to defend the cause of what you know ahead of time to be the cause of organized inhumanity? Will you show that "shudder of polite disgust"? ... Is it not likely that among those of you who applaud there will be those who are in fact applauding their own courage in applauding a real live apologist for human atrocity? ... Fight him, fight the tyrants everywhere; but do not ask them to your quarters, merely to spit upon them: and do not ask them to your quarters if you cannot spit upon them: to do the one is to ambush a human being as one might a rabid dog; to do the other is to ambush oneself, to force oneself — in disregard of those who have died trying to make the point — to force oneself to break faith with humanity.

You Be the Judge: Mike Gundy's Character Display

Starting from the "sports reveals character" line that Steve Durant left in the combox of a recent post on the topic, consider this article from the Daily Oklahoman about Oklahoma State quarterback Bobby Reid's attitude. Here is Coach Gundy's response. Now, is this revealing a good example, or a bad example?:

Fare Thee Well, Mr. Hunter

Was yesterday's 7-1 win over the White Sox the last occasion to see Torii Hunter at home as a Twin? Boy, it sure is feeling like it, regardless of what Simple Sid says.

Here's some idle speculation...

Soon-to-be-ex-GM, Terry Ryan, decided to give up his post because he realized he couldn't sign Hunter. The Luis Castillo trade is only worth swallowing if Hunter gets signed. Consider the Twins successes in the last 20 years were in part contingent upon having a legitimate lead-off hitter. The Twins "making room" for a weak-hitting platoon of the unready (and not likely to be ready any time soon) Alexi Casilla and the gifted glove of Nick Punto was a pure play for marketing the new ballpark. Terry Ryan knew he'd get run out on a rail (at least to the extent that those here in Bandwagonville can keep up their interest) if he failed to sign Hunter after giving up on this season.

But again, that's just speculation...

The Troglodyte Top Twelve - 9/24/07

Rank. Team (Previous)
1. LSU (1)
2. Florida (2)
3. USC (3)
4. Oklahoma (4)
5. West Virginia (5)
6. Ohio State (6)
7. California (7)
8. Texas (8)
9. Rutgers (10)
10. Wisconsin (11)
11. Oregon (12)
12. Boston College (--)

Everyone held serve, except for Penn State on the road against Michigan, who is not as bad as their first two weeks would have many believe. The weaknesses exposed last week show that they are properly part of the third tier and not the second. While Penn State couldn't finish on offense, they were up that far in the ranking because of the defense. Yes, Michigan managed only two touchdowns, but they missed a couple of field goals and were able to drive the ball with a freshman at the helm.

After the win at Ole Miss, it is becoming clear that Florida falls to the third tier if Tim Tebow were to get hurt.

Oklahoma is getting first-place votes in the coaches poll for the second week. I am not sure they are up there with the top three. Their defense can be had, but more by Texas Tech, or A&M, rather than UT.

How to Fight the Long War

Feast of St. Matthew

Sorry, no tactical blueprint here, but there is some quality boilerplate. Today, Pope Benedict described to the American-free Centrist Democrat International, an association of center-right political parties from around the world, how states must approach combatting terror, including hope:

Terrorism is a serious problem whose perpetrators often claim to act in God’s name and harbour an inexcusable contempt for human life. Society naturally has a right to defend itself, but this right must be exercised with complete respect for moral and legal norms, including the choice of ends and means. In democratic systems, the use of force in a manner contrary to the principles of a constitutional State can never be justified. Indeed, how can we claim to protect democracy if we threaten its very foundations? Consequently, it is necessary both to keep careful watch over the security of civil society and its citizens while at the same time safeguarding the inalienable rights of all. Terrorism needs to be fought with determination and effectiveness, mindful that if the mystery of evil is widespread today, the solidarity of mankind in goodness is an even more pervasive mystery.

He went on to note that the social teaching of the Church is a guide for how to achieve this, but it is not sufficient:

The integrity of Christians in political life is indeed more necessary than ever so that the “salt” of apostolic zeal does not lose its “flavour”, and so that the “lamp” of Gospel values enlightening the daily work of Christians is not obscured by pragmatism or utilitarianism, suspicion or hate.

How many in the presidential field do you think fit this bill?

What's So Great About Being Catholic?

Dave Hartline will tell you.

An Almighty Answer

Nebraska State Senator Ernie Chambers sued God last week, seeking a permanent injunction against the Almighty for making terroristic threats, inspiring fear and causing "widespread death, destruction and terrorization of millions upon millions of the Earth's inhabitants."

The filing was triggered by a federal lawsuit he considers frivolous by a woman against a judge who barred her from using "rape," "victim" and other such "prejudicial" words in court. He's trying to make the serious point that anybody can sue anybody by being absurd. Mr. Chambers considers the woman's lawsuit frivolous because the Nebraska Supreme Court has already considered the case, and federal courts follow the decisions of state supreme courts on state matters such as this.

Well, somebody is playing along (as we should have expected) and has filed a brief in God's defense, arguing that the defendant is immune from some earthly laws and, furthermore, the court lacks jurisdiction. It goes on to add that trying to hold God accountable for humanity's mass history of fear and suffering is misguided, suggesting these consequences are self-inflicted, rather than God's fault:

I created man and woman with free will and next to the promise of immortal life, free will is my greatest gift to you.

*** Sidebar

Any bets on whether this flushes out some "free-will deniers?"

*** End Sidebar

Following up has proved problematic because there was no contact information provided on the filing. The only listed witness, St. Michael the Archangel, has also been unavailable for comment.

Whose Game Is It Anyway?

Fellow Catholic Dad, Eric, posted a video from late last year of Minnesota Gopher men's hockey coach Don Lucia on the state of the game and youth hockey, in particular.



His points, while they are not unique, are readily taken and many observers would agree they extend to all youth sports: There should be an emphasis on having good coaches and coaching the fundamentals, players are being weeded out at too young an age, the game should be scaled to the age and physical skills of the players, etc. I am sympathetic to all these things. He makes a parting shot that we need to give the game back to the kids, and this is where I have recently concluded I have a slight, but important, disagreement.

I captured a few days ago the idea that character (moral excellence) is something bestowed from one generation to the next, and sports is a vehicle to do that. In this context then, we should not give youth sports "back to the kids" because, in fact, we cannot give youth sports back to the kids; it was never theirs to begin with. Youth sports are not for the kids, per se. Youth sports are for adults to pass on to children. It is our franchise to exercise in "the democracy of the dead:" Tradition.

Spygate Blowback

From the NYT:

Spygate did more than deepen the fissure between coaches Eric Mangini and Bill Belichick. It set off a debate in the N.F.L. community about whose behavior was more troubling. The Patriots and Belichick for breaking league rules? Or the Jets and Mangini for breaching an unspoken code among coaches by allowing his team to turn in his former mentor?

Unlike the video evidence that the Jets gave the N.F.L., the answer is more nuanced. Belichick was fined $500,000 and the Patriots $250,000. The team possibly could lose a first-round draft pick, but Mangini’s reputation might not have escaped the investigation unscathed.

Welcome to the twisted world of the NFL. Now, there is some dispute as to what involvement Mangini had in the Patriots getting caught. Also, former Broncos and Giants coach Dan Reeves contradicts the idea of an unwritten rule for snitching amongst the fraternity of coaches. Former Packer GM, however, has the truffle quote when questioning why the issue wasn't handled privately:

People have always cheated.

Maybe. Judd of hangingontonothing, while recognizing the Patriots' cheating, points out the risks of visual communication and draws a parallel with the age-old baseball tradition of stealing signs. What's different in football, however, is there is no response within the construct of the game to police the sport's culture that is the equivalent of the bean ball.

Letter to the Editor: Stem Cell Report

Reply last week to the claim that it isn't fair to judge ESCR by how many treatments and therapies it has derived with respect to ASCR because of ASCR's longer history:

[The] notion that a just comparison of effectiveness between ASCR and ESCR requires a comparable time frame is a fair point. However, [the] claim that the time ratio is 4:1 is dubious.

[A]dult stem cell work has been going on for more than 40 years. The presence of self-renewing cells in the bone marrow of mice was discovered in the early '60's and stem cells were confirmed to exist (in cancer) in humans shortly thereafter. Within 5 years, the first successful [human] therapy was developed via bone marrow transplant.

Mouse embryonic stem cells were discovered more than 25 years ago. What happened a decade ago was not the "discovery" of embryonic stem cells, but the Thomson team at Wisconsin being able to successfully isolate and grow [human] embryonic stem cells (create a line).

Either way, ESCR has failed the time to first therapy challenge. And with significant (worldwide) resources available to it.

Some References: NPR, Common Sense and Sound Policy Think Tank, NIH, Wikipedia

Vatican Confirms Papal Visit

Memorial of St. Andrew Kim Taegon, St. Paul Chong Hasang, and Companions

Pope Benedict XVI has accepted an invitation from UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and plans to travel to the United States next spring to address the United Nations. Despite rumored additional visits to Baltimore/DC, Boston, and Philadelphia, no other U.S. stops have been confirmed, yet.

Here's a couple of puzzlers from the AP report:

A stop in Boston would send a particularly poignant message of papal concern over the clerical sex abuse scandal, which erupted there in 2002 and forced its archbishop, Cardinal Bernard Law, to resign in disgrace.

Poignant?

The planning for the trip is delicate because it would come amid a presidential election campaign.

Delicate?

Nothing like intentionally unclear writing.

[submitted by e-mail]

Is This a Case of Not My Brother's Keeper?

From the AP:

Firefighters cut a hole in the side of a house and used a forklift to extricate a 900-pound man from his second-floor bedroom after a visiting nurse became worried about his health.

Rescue workers were called in Tuesday by the nurse, who determined the 33-year-old man needed medical help, Fire Chief Tom Cochran said.

Cochran said the man had not left his home since 2003. The man's brother, who lives with him, said he suffers from Prader-Willi Syndrome, a rare genetic disorder that creates a chronic hunger feeling that can lead to overeating and life-threatening obesity.

Scott Adams has a riff sort of along the lines of what I first thought:

My favorite part is the nurse who called firefighters because, in her professional opinion, the 900-pound man "needed medical help." Kudos to her. A lesser nurse might have missed the signs. ...

And what is up with the pizza place that presumably delivered to him five times a day? Did it ever concern them that their Customer of the Month was two pizzas away from forming a black hole? Maybe it all happened gradually and it snuck up on them.

We obviously do not know all the details of the situation, but I can't help but wonder how someone, despite being reclusive, is not completely alone, gets to this point. Wouldn't a passing notion of solidarity, a simple sense of human caring, prompt somebody to do something at 400 pounds, 600 pounds, 750 pounds? At what point do you drop pretentions of "rugged individualism," or "not my business," or avoiding embarassment, or whatever and pick up the phone? I suppose there's the possibility someone did before this, but it still makes me wonder.

[submitted by e-mail]

Brilliant Plan for What to Do With #756

Hip-hop mogul/fashion designer Marc Ecko bought Barry Bonds' record-breaking home run ball at auction last weekend for more than three-quarters of a million dollars. Now, with what amounts to a shrewd ad buy, he has put its fate in the public's hands by taking votes on his new website vote756.com to determine whether to A.) Give the ball to the Hall of Fame, B.) Give it to the Hall of Fame after branding it with an asterisk, or C.) blast it into space.

As you can imagine, The Barry is none to pleased:

He's stupid. He's an idiot. He spent $750,000 on the ball and that's what he's doing with it? What he's doing is stupid.

He goes on:

All of those options don't weigh anything. In baseball, that number (756) stands.

Yes, Mr. Bonds, it does stand. And now it's a record that has been robbed of its meaning. And for that, B, or C, sounds pretty good to me (see links below). The Hall of Fame makes a humble and decent case, so perhaps "B" is the way to go.

Minnesotan to Receive Silver Star

Chad Malmberg will be presented with the Silver Star this Saturday, perhaps becoming the first Minnesota National Guardsman from the 34th ID, aka the Red Bulls, since World War II to receive the country's fourth-highest military honor:

Staff Sgt. Malmberg's gallant actions and determined leadership allowed his convoy, trapped in an enemy ambush for nearly 50 minutes, to dominate a numerically superior enemy fighting from prepared positions, without a single member of the convoy being wounded or killed in action, or loss of a single vehicle...

His actions undoubtedly saved lives, at great risk to his own.

Mr. Malmberg hails from St. Paul and is currently a student at Minnesota State-Mankato, majoring in law enforcement. Perhaps St. Paul's finest will soon add a very fine one indeed.

Madonna: I am an Ambassador for Judaism

Memorial of St. Januarius

Having arrived earlier in the week to attend a conference on Kabbalah, Madonna toasted the Jewish new year on Saturday with Israeli President Shimon Peres. They met at Peres' official Jerusalem residence, where they exchanged gifts. Madonna, who was raised Roman Catholic and is not Jewish, received a lavishly bound copy of the Jewish Bible, while Peres was given a volume of the Book of Splendor, a guiding text of Kabbalah. Madonna was quoted as saying:

You don't know how popular the Book of Splendor is among Hollywood actors. Everyone I meet talks to me only about that. I am an ambassador for Judaism.

I guess we have another reason to pray for the conversion of the Jews, our "elder brothers in Faith," on Good Friday.

Catholic Carnvial 137 is Up

At Mommy Monsters Inc., with an emphasis on parenting.

Update:
In light of the Short List work, this week's Torchlight Post is Archbishop Burke: Bishops Must Discipline Pro-Abortion Catholic Politicians by Christine at The World... IMHO.

Most Scientific Research Suffers from Sloppy Analysis

Meagan Francis, who linked to my cross-post at Catholic Dads, pointed out an article that reminded me of articles I read a couple years ago,that the kinds of mistakes here are the unintended consequences of today's scientific funding (to be added to the other reasons not to publicly fund science). Here's a truffle quote from this most recent article by medical researcher John Ioannidis:

There is an increasing concern that in modern research, false findings may
be the majority or even the vast majority of published research claims... A new
claim about a research finding is more likely to be false than true.

Arrrr! You Best Be Makin' to Enjoy It, Mate.

Today is International Talk Like a Pirate Day. To celebrate here are the three basic pirate jokes in existence.

1. Any thing that includes a punchline with "Arrr:"
"What's the pirate movie rated? - Arrr!"
"What kind o' socks does a pirate wear? - Arrrrgyle!"
"What's the problem with the way a pirate speaks? - Arrrrticulation!"
...and so forth.

2. Pirate walks into the bar with a ships wheel attached to the front o' his trousers. The bartender asks, "What the hell is that ships wheel for?" The pirate says, "I don't know, but it's drivin' me nuts!"

3. A little boy is trick or treatin' on Halloween by himself. He is dressed as a pirate. At one house, a friendly man asks him, "Where are your buccaneers?" The little boy responds, "On either side o' me 'buccan' head!"

The Meaning of Chocolate

Changing the definitions of words is one approach to cultural subterfuge. Today, the meaning of something dear to millions is at stake.

Mars Inc. (makers of M&Ms, Snickers, Dove, Milky Way, etc.) is opposing a push led by Hershey's and other food-makers for the FDA to change long-established federal standards for what can be called chocolate. The request is to allow the substitution of a portion of cocoa butter with another vegetable fat and milk protein. Advocates claim the change would save money for manufacturers and allow more flexibility and innovation, in exchange for still being able to label the new products "chocolate." Manufacturers already can use vegetable fats instead of cocoa butter, but they are not allowed by the FDA to call it chocolate; The EU allows a substitution of up to 5%. Mars has pledged to not dilute the quality of its chocolate, according to Tom Lachman, president of Mars Snackfoods US:

Changing the definition of what chocolate is would be a mistake. The bottom line is that we're not going to change our chocolate. Today, Mars US chocolate products are pure, authentic chocolate and they're going to stay that way."

So, on behalf of the Troglodytrix and other chocolate lovers, on behalf of those for whom words mean things, I say to Mars (with apologies to Tolkien's memory):

Hold your ground, hold your ground! I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me. A day may come when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is not this day. An hour of woes and shattered shields, when the age of chocolate comes crashing down! But it is not this day! This day, fight! By all that you hold dear on this good Earth, I bid you STAND, MEN OF CHOCOLATE!

Sports and Character

Sports does not build a life characterized by prudence, fortitude, self-discipline, and humility in pursuit of what is good, or "moral excellence," in other words. That is the claim by Anthony Bradley of Covenant Theological Seminary and the Acton Institute. He cites a litany of recent examples from the high-profile sports world to support his case, including Travis Henry, the Duke University lacrosse team (What were they doing ordering a stripper in the first place?), cycling’s Patrik Sinkewitz, NASCAR's Michael Waltrip, and, of course, Michael Vick. No doubt Bill Belicheck’s recent attempt to videotape the opponent’s sideline in violation of league rules would have made the list and possibly OJ Simpson, too. Unfortunately, it’s not an argument that holds together for various reasons. Nevertheless, despite its flaws, Mr. Bradley swerves into a truffle quote at the end that is on the mark:

Sports do not build character in young people but virtuous adults do. In one
sense youth sport is simply a medium for adult mentoring within the context of
challenging situations. Character is bestowed—or not—from one generation to
another.

Until adults in the world of sports are willing to commit their
own lives to virtuous character, until they are willing to pair a valid desire
to make money with an equally powerful concern for the true welfare of athletes,
the cycle of young “professional” adults ruining their lives will continue. In
athletics as elsewhere, we reap the moral character we sow.

The Simpson Circus

I struggle to be as sympathetic as some in this case, and I am generally skeptical of our modern penchant for making perpetrators out to be victims. And I certainly would not mind seeing a miscarriage of justice corrected. Nevertheless, considering the goofiness, for lack of a better word, of the current scene, I am beginning to wonder whether OJ is afflicted with post-concussion syndrome. Just a thought...

Time That Tries Manilow's Soul

Democrat super-donor Barry Manilow reportedly has refused to appear on the The View with "dangerous" token conservative co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck because to do so would "compromise his principles. "

I'm not sure into which camp Mr. Manilow falls, summer soldier, or sunshine patriot, but if this is all it takes, perhaps the Republicans aren't as bad off as we all think.

Economic Pillow Talk in the Offing

The Fed is expected to kick the can down the street in terms of having the economy assimilate the deflating housing bubble by cutting its target for the federal funds rate, the interest that banks charge each other, for the first time in four years.

This action by the Fed is deemed necessary to offset the credit crunch caused by the surge in delinquencies in subprime mortgages that followed in the wake of the inevitable bursting of the housing bubble that was created by... the Fed. There's a subsidiarity lesson in here somewhere.

Anyway, it's time to dust off the book of Fed Chairman clichés... brace yourselves for a "soft landing."

Alan Keyes Wags (His Finger) into Presidential Race

Ambassador Keyes announced his candidacy last Friday, which will prompt another review of the watch list, and is participating in tonight's Value Voters Debate. On Janet Parshall's radio program he outlined what would be the top priorities of a Keyes presidency:

Top three issues, I think, at the moment, are clear. We have got to restore our respect for Declaration principle by defending life, and making it clear that life begins at conception and must be respected, from that moment, as the will
of the Creator, God, because that's what the Declaration establishes as our principle, and what the Constitution says we owe to our "posterity." That has to be clearly done, and clearly established.

Number two would be the restoration of our allegiance to and respect for God's authority, especially when it comes to clear moral decisions like marriage, where we need to restore the sense that the God-given family is an unalienable right. I wrote about this, in articles that I've done over the last several weeks, trying to restore a sense of what our principles really mean, when it come to decisions like this.

And finally, across the board, I would be trying to restore the moral character and morale and sense of our commitment to our basic moral values, starting in the area of national sovereignty, both in terms of our security from terrorism, and especially the security of our borders, and our assertion of the sovereignty of the American people, which our elites have been betraying and trying to throw away.

Now, I love listening to Mr. Keyes speak. I think he is a compelling orator and his is a voice of a substantial portion of Americans. But (you knew there was one) he seems to have a political tin ear.

Look at his answer above and you can see that his top priorities clearly include an end to abortion, an end to embryonic stem cell research, an end to euthanasia, a ban on cloning, the preservation of marriage as between one man and one woman, continued prosecution of the Long War, and a priority on border security. These are all the views of a significant percentage of Republicans, particularly those who are active in primary season. But how many flags does he raise with his rhetoric? Not to mention that for all the campaigning he's done, it would be nice to see at least one victory for dogcatcher, or something, in his CV. He doesn't have a snowball's chance... Then again, that's probably not the point.

The Troglodyte Top Twelve - 9/17/07

Inaugural ranking for 2007-08:

Rank. Team
1. LSU
2. Florida
3. USC
4. Oklahoma
5. West Virginia
6. Ohio State
7. California
8. Texas
9. Penn State
10. Rutgers
11. Wisconsin
12. Oregon

I freely admit to going against convention by having USC third. In fact, I think it's a toss-up amongst LSU, Florida, and USC. LSU beat a slightly over-rated VaTech at home, Florida downed a reasonably rated Tennessee at home, and USC cruised against a Nebraska team that I thought was significantly over-rated. So how to differentiate?

Before we had the joy that is the BCS, there was a controversy when at one time Penn State was ranked number one, won their game one week, but was still bumped to number two by, I think it was, Nebraska. That is something that should never happen once teams are into conference play.

I put a lot of emphasis on conference strength and depth to separate the upper teams. Now, consider the road LSU and Florida have to travel, compared to USC. If one of those two should run the table in the SEC, that would be a bigger statement than USC rolling through the Pac-10. Similarly, if either falters in conference play, then the ranking will take care of itself. Anyway, it will be be a surprise if USC isn't in New Orleans come January.

As for the rest of the rankings... OU, West Virginia, Ohio State, Cal, Texas, and Penn State all appear to be solid, but all can be had. After that, regarding Rutgers, Wisconsin, and Oregon, and bubble teams like BC, Virginia Tech, South Carolina, and Clemson, it's anybody's guess at this point because they all have significant flaws. Plus I haven't seen enough of them all to really order them with any confidence.

Final Notice

Those were the words in big, red letters on the front of the envelope I received a few days ago. My membership of nearly 20 years in the Republican National Committee will lapse if I don't I send in my $25 soon. I must admit I am on the fence. This has next to nothing to do with the president, and next to everything to do with the party. Here's a sample...

Saturday, I received a "survey" from the National Republican Senatorial Committee, telling me I am part of the 1% of the party membership given the privilege of providing "critical" answers to unite the party behind a "new conservative Republican Agenda." First, I am not a political conservative. Second, I am fed up with some of the questions they put in these things that render them largely meaningless.

• Should we continue to demand that North Korea and Iran dismantle their nuclear missile programs?
• Should we fight Democrats when they force wage and price controls ontor our free market economy?
• Should we stop the Democrat majority from approving only activist judges?
• In general, do you support Second Amendment Rights under the Constitution that allow law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms?
• Do you agree that if we fail to unite our Grand Old Party, we will hand liberal Democrats the keys to the White House and Majority Status in the Senate for a generation?

You want "critical" feedback? Why don't you try conducting a serious survey with serious, well-constructed questions? But that's not really the point. This "survey," of course, is but another transparent fundraising ploy.

One of the things I teach the basketball teams I coach is that I manage the team assuming their priorities are as follows:

1. God
2. Family
3. School
4. Basketball

This list is a guide for how I think about party matters, as well. I have common cause with the GOP on many issues and share many goals. We rightfully got our clocks cleaned in the last election, but I haven't seen many (if any) meaningful, consistent improvements in attitude, much less action. For example, there has been nary a peep from Republicans, although exceptions like Tom Coburn and Jim DeMint do exist, on the recent making of earmarks less, not more, transparent. And now I am looking at a presidential field where 1.) the only candidates whom I consider to have clear positions that are consistent with mine on foundational issues have essentially zero support for the nomination (Fred Thompson could still prove an exception here, although I consider his lack of executive experience to be significant), and 2.) the party's leading national candidate, Rudy Guliani, has several fundamental positions out of step with mine and a counter-vailing track record on others for which he is unrepentant. Should he become the nominee, I simply do not consider him trustworthy to advance other parts of his agenda such that they overlap enough with mine (constructionist judges and the like). His nomination could very well be the final straw because I find the lesser of two evils argument less than compelling. After all, with all due respect to my rationalizing fellow-travelers, when my path diverges from the party, then I must expect trials and, I hope, rewards different from the party's.

For now, I remain a reluctant Republican, but the RNC should know that I am not the only one on final notice.

The Emmys Were on Last Night

Do people really still watch? In Saturday's StarTribune, the local TV critic, Neal Justin made a quip about his insights helping to win the office pool. Two questions jumped to mind: 1.) Who would still have office pool entries allowed on a Saturday? and 2.) Are there still office pools on this stuff? It's been at least a decade since I remember hearing discussions about an awards show at work, particularly the Emmy's, much less having an office pool.

Apparently Al Gore had another big night. Good for him, I suppose. It's better that he win awards than elections--better for him, better for us. And Sally Field said a naughty word during a silly statement that if mothers ruled the war, there wouldn't be any wars in the first place. Horse hockey. They'd just be about different things.

Update:
The Troglodytrix commented that if war were ruled by mothers, we would still be embroiled in civil war--the facebook lactivists' revolt would only be the beginning. In fact, it has spilt (no pun intended) into the grocery store, the mall, park benches, and yes, even the Communion line.

Nation Prepares for Culture Clash

I can't take credit for all these...

Huckleberry vs. Blackberry
Corn Plants vs. Implants
Livestock vs. Birkenstock
Griddle vs. Gridlock
Ham Hocks vs. Botox
Buh-bye vs. Drive-by
Nebraska vs. USC

[submitted by e-mail]

Update: Well that turned out to be a big nothing.

Comfortable in (Nothing But) Their Own Skins

Feast of the Triumph of the Cross

From Reuters:

Two decades after a nude photo scandal helped cost a Miss America her title, Americans may be adopting a more ho-hum attitude toward people who bare it all for the cameras.

Some experts say the Internet and more explicit TV are fostering a more relaxed response by Americans to public displays of bare flesh, even if many people profess to be more conservative.

Take, for example, the muted reaction to nude photos of 18-year-old Vanessa Hudgens, the star of Walt Disney Co.'s squeaky clean "High School Musical" franchise.

Here' the truffle quote from Paul Levinson, communication and media professor at Fordham University:

I do think that general attitudes about nudity are becoming more relaxed, but these changes take time, which is why there's still mixed responses. We as a society are finally growing up and it's a healthy thing.

Sidebar ***

Query: Isn't Fordham supposed to be a Catholic university?

End Sidebar ***

So here's another example, in both deed and explanation, that the pornification of America continues. I'm sure it's going to get worse before it gets better; a nation capable of anti-tobacco zealotry is surely capable of turning the tide here, but whither the tipping point?

Short List Update

Again this is an exercise for establishing who gets my support in the primaries, if any. After the initial scrubbing for the five non-negotiables and better than zero support, here's how it stands...

Short List: Empty

Watch List: Thompson, Gingrich, Brownback, Hunter, Tancredo

Despite open questons for all these, consider the secondary criteria:

A. Meaningful executive, or organizational leadership, experience,
B. A compelling American vision to project from the bully pulpit,
C. An appreciation of subsidiarity and solidarity,
D. A dedication to the proposition and an understanding why governments are instituted among men.

Given there are issues keeping all these off the short list, I consider clear issues with the secondary criteria to also be disqualifying. I've also tracked down new information regarding the 5 non-negotiables (5nn). Here's the updated list:

Candidate - Status (5nn, support above zero, secondary criteria)

• Fred Thomspon - DQ (TBD, yes, A)
• Newt Gingrich (unofficial) - DQ (3, yes, OK)
• Sam Brownback - Watch (OK , no, OK)
• Duncan Hunter - DQ (OK, no, A)
• Ron Paul - DQ (OK, no, A)
• Tom Tancredo - Watch (OK, no, TBD-B)

Getting closer. And I think I know where this is heading...

Update:
I'll be adding Fred Thompson back to the watch list on the next go 'round, still pending clarity on the five non-negotiables because a grace period is reasonable given the fact he hasn't been a formal candidate for very long. Not making these positions clear in good order, however, will be held against him. How committed are you if you are unwilling to communicate where you stand?

Dog Bites Man: Iraq Report Fallout

For all the anticipation and agitation about the Petraeus report and the president's plan, it all turned out to be all so expected. Including the predictable responses. No point in commenting really.

Amendment in Waiting

In yesterday's StarTribune, Katherine Kersten sounded the alarm for a Minnesota marriage protection amendment. Despite the state law defining marriage as between one man and one woman, she sees the judicial happenings in Iowa, where a similar existing state law with strong public support was jettisoned recently by fiat (pending review), as the gathering of forces on our cultural flank.

This is the same argument President Bush (and others) used last year to argue in favor of a federal Marriage Protection Amendment. The failure of an amendment in the US Senate has been mirrored by a similar failure in the Minnesota Senate. I say now what I said then, after the federal amendment failed to even reach the floor of the Senate for a vote:

A constitutional amendment in this case is a pre-emptive prescription for when, not if, an activist judiciary moves to block the [public] sentiment. That the Senate did not even allow the amendment to come to a ... vote underscores the reactive nature of our politics and illustrates that what Chesterton called the medical mistake is alive and well...; insisting on "stating the disease before we find the cure, ... when we must actually find the cure before we find the disease." Oftentimes waiting to act is not a failing, for a host of reasons. Here, however, what is wrong is not the failure to respond with the cure for traditional marriage, but the failure to respond to the "cure" of what is right and good with traditional marriage.

For all the hullabaloo of Minnesota's self-styled "progressivism," we're as reactionary as anyone (everyone?) else.

Show Me the Data: Large Families are Bad for Parents

Memorial of St. John Chrysostom

The BBC is reporting that University of Utah researchers who surveyed the records of couples living in the late 19th through the late 20th century have concluded that the more children couples had, the worse their health and the more likely they were to die early. The study for the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science covered 21,000 couples living in Utah between 1860 and 1985, who bore a total of 174,000 children. The increased mortality rate applied to both mothers and fathers, but mothers showed a higher rate. These results are said to shed light on the evolutionary development of menopause and the cultural establishment of modern family planning.

OK. A few flags.

The statements about menopause and family planning are narratives outside the described scope of the study that are made to be consistent with the results; that makes them speculation. Interesting, perhaps, but not necessarily a conclusion (this is something of a pet peeve of mine regarding science reporting).

There is no mention of blocking the data (sometimes called factoring) for other variables, such as occupation, or residency, or access to medical care, to name just a few, so we are provided no understanding of the relative sensitivity of family size on mortality with respect to the other risks of daily life in Utah. In fact, the actual increased mortality risk is never quantified, nor is the definition of "early death" provided.

However, as a father of seven, given all that, the conclusion here about increased mortality could still very well be true; it does sound plausible that having more kids wears you down sooner. To which I say, "So what?" Higher mortality may just be the price for having a higher density of household joy and love.

(HHT: Laura Ingraham)

[submitted by e-mail]

Update: This has been cross-posted at Catholic Dads.

A Dubious Honor

The University of Minnesota has claimed the top spot in a ranking of 139 colleges and universities for "sexual health" by the makers of Trojan condoms. The ranking is based on a survey of 11 factors. Here's a truffle quote from one of the students involved in a campus "education" program that included passing out free condoms to freshmen about the "priceless faces"she receives from some of them:

Some of these kids were like, 'I've never seen a condom in person in real life and someone's handing one to me.' They're definitely shocked, a lot of them. Their parents probably weren't expecting that when they sent their kids off to college.

Another anecdotal case of the persisting cultural gap. And yeah, I'm pretty sure the Troglomatrix isn't tickled to be an alumna today.

Catholic Carnival 136 is Up

At Just Another Day of Catholic Pondering. This week's torchlight post is The Adventure of the Creed by Freder1ck at Deep Furrows. Hey, it's got Chesterton...

Ran into Someone in the Cave the Other Day

Many of the takes from the Catholic Cavemen are what would appear on The Troglodyte if I didn't think about it. Irreverent, often crude, and usually spot on.

UK Crosses the Chimera Line

Memorial of the Most Holy Name of Mary

This is not a total green light for cytoplasmic hybrid research but recognition that this area of research can, with caution and careful scrutiny, be permitted.

The U.K. Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority approved the creation in principle of certain human-animal hybrids for stem cell research. Researchers may now apply to conduct work that implants human genetic material into animal eggs. Each application would be handled on a case by case basis.

The animal (cow, or rabbit) eggs would have their DNA extracted prior to the injection of human material, but animal traces would remain. The resulting embryo would have a ratio of human to animal genes of approximately 1700:1. Scientists engaged in human embryonic stem cell research think such a process is necessary to compensate for the limited supply of human eggs, although some question the suitability of any stem cells created with this process because of the animal "contamination" (making the human lives destroyed all for naught, by the way).

This, of course, is an obvious consequence of denying the hard cold scientific fact that it is human lives that are being destroyed and exploited in ESCR. But we are not to worry: Hybrid embryos are not allowed to be implanted in a woman and must be killed, er... destroyed, in 14 days. Plus, the HFEA notes that we also have nothing to fear in terms of other kinds of hybrid and chimera research, not only because the scientific community does not wish to perform such research at present, but that the prospect is so distant that they cannot envisage what form this research would possibly take in the future.

We are just supposed to trust them. The Authority says that, having looked at all the evidence, there is no fundamental reason to prevent the research. "We're not creating humans with rabbit ears, as much as Playboy magazine might like that," said Dr. Robin Lovell-Badge, the head of the stem cell biology division at the National Institute for Medical Research in London. "What we are trying to do... is to understand the cause of diseases and the cures for it." Ah, yes. If you ignore that there is no reason to direct research elsewhere other than the most fundamental reasons, and you are willing to grant the utilitarian's sacred license, then maybe you should trust them.

But what of those concerned with the mixing itself of humans and animals? Consider how John Harris, a professor of bioethics at the University of Manchester, said the issue has been misunderstood:

The fear is that (scientists) are trying to breed a human with some other creature.But when you eat a bacon sandwich you take animal cells into your body.

So regarding whether to trust a scientist, my question is this: How could any rational person trust anyone who 1.) tries to equate genetic combination with metabolism and 2.) would dilute the unbridled deliciousness of bacon by jamming it between two pieces of bread?

There it is, isn't it? ESCR isn't about being rational--deny a fundamental truth, praise ends over means, create an inapt analogy to mislead--just let me do it because I can.

[submitted by e-mail]

Update: Jordan Ballor at PowerBlog has more.

What Heaven is For

Patriot Day

In honor of this day, here is a link to last year's tribute to the life of Firefighter Joe Leavey of Ladder 15.

No other blogging today.

Never a Doubt

Well, maybe a little one... but I'll take it.

You know the Bible 100%!

Wow! You are awesome! You are a true Biblical scholar, not just a hearer but a personal reader! The books, the characters, the events, the verses - you know it all! You are fantastic!

Ultimate Bible Quiz
Create MySpace Quizzes

Proof We Are Winning the Long War?

Last year, Brendan O'Neill noted in Reason Online that Osama bin Laden clearly gets his talking points from the nutter left:

Bin Laden’s reliance on Western theorizing about the reasons for Al Qaeda’s existence and actions is clear in Messages to the World. Reading his statements from 1994 to 2004, one can see clearly that he transforms himself from a religious crank obsessed by Saudi Arabia (circa 1994) to a self-described warrior for Palestine (around 2001–02) to a full-fledged Bush basher (from 2004 onward). His campaign is shaped less by his own program of ideas or aims than it is by the West’s interpretation of that campaign.

...

Who knows whether bin Laden has access to the Web? Who knows whether he reads blogs, or if he hears such arguments from supportive visitors from Pakistan or Afghanistan or Wherever-istan? One thing is clear: His arguments sound remarkably familiar. Like bloggers on both the left and right, he seems obsessed by media coverage of the Iraq war (and of himself) rather than by the substance of the war. He certainly speaks in the shrill tones of some of the crankier left-wing bloggers.

Bin Laden, it seems to me, is regurgitating the arguments of Western commentators and using them to justify his crimes. He is less the armed wing of a clear or coherent Islamist worldview than he is the armed wing of the West’s own fearful and tortured debates about war and terrorism today.

So now Osama bin Laden has a new look, perhaps from the salon, or maybe a half-dozen boxes of Just for Men, but strip the Islamic references from his latest message and once again it sounds like Democratic boiler plate. What's more, there's another new video coming for the anniversary of September 11--I heard on the radio that it's expected to have better production values and serve as something of a multimedia marketing spiel.

Let's see: a sudden concern with vanity, increased dabbling with a Madison Ave. sensibility, and taking more rhetorical cues from the American Left. Boy, it sure sounds an awful lot like the Soviet Union just before the collapse.

Spectator Sport: ID on the Right

I sometimes find it hard to believe that the intelligent design debate continues, particularly on the right, as has happened recently at the American Spectator (ends here). I'd have thought buy now everybody would have gone back to the their corners. Then again John Derbyshire is not one to pass on mixing it up, or so it seems. Of course, Iike a moth drawn to flame, I'm the one who keeps jumping in. But that's neither here, nor there.

As I've mentioned before, there are two ID groups, the one for convenience I'll call the "scientists," trying to establish a body of scientific work to challenge the neo-Darwinist mechanism of random mutation and natural selection on the merits, and the other, the "movement," trying as its main object to counter its philosophical extension, materialism. True blue, literal creationists predominantly fall into this second category. There is an overlap to be sure. This is not to say that an anti-materialist cannot operate authentically as a scientist, for to do so would at best reveal sloppy thinking and at worst be intellectually dishonest, with all due respect to the finding in the Dover case. Nevertheless, there are two distinct characteristics of ID, and its opponents have effectively blurred the difference in the public square.

One thing that comes out in the series exchange between Tom Bethell and Derbyshire that I hadn't appreciated is the extent to which they are basically exploiting each other, although perhaps unintentionally, as buyers and sellers of the "Intelligent Design road show," to use Mr. Derbyshire's phrase. In some ways it is a strange alliance. And a bit of a public relations mess for both camps.

Another thing is one that I've touched on briefly, where Mr. Bethell uses the same example I have toward the end of the exchange, the case of SETI. In this case he notes that operating within scientific protocol, SETI is attempting to use structure to infer design. Earlier Mr. Bethell noted that Mr. Derbyshire was asked what would it take to falsify Darwinism, to which he replied, "I think miraculous creation would do it. The miraculous appearance of an entirely new species." Of course, we would need to begin almost immediately the parsing of "miraculous" and probably even "entirely new." The scientists investigating ID are not quite this whimsical. In effect, they are attempting to describe this characteristic of miraculousness as "complexity," or "orthagonal information," or whatever. I'd ask why some get so torqued over this modest pursuit, but I've already been there (with follow-ons).

Rules of the Jungle 1: Have a Take

From last week's New Hampshire Republican Debate:

MR. GOLER: Governor Romney, you have suggested that U.S. troops in Iraq move to a support phase after the surge, which pretty much has to end in the spring, and a standby phase after that in Kuwait and Qatar. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems even Hillary Clinton is willing to commit troops to Iraq longer than that, sir.

MR. ROMNEY: I don’t have a time frame that I’ve announced. What I’ve indicated is that -- is very consistent with what the president is speaking about and what we’re hearing from Iraq right now. And that is that the surge is apparently working. We’re going to get a full report on that from General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker very soon. But the Center for Strategic and International Studies and Brookings have come back with positive reports. If the surge is working, then we’re going to be able to start bringing back our troop levels, slowly but surely, and play more of a support role over time. Ultimately, down the road, I would anticipate that we’re not going to have a permanent presence in Iraq. And we’ll be in a standby mode in surrounding nations. But we’ve -- when we consider moving to a support role and bringing, at some stage, our troop levels back, we’re going to be doing that from a position of strength, because the surge has worked. There’s no question: It’s essential for America to show that we are committed to success in Iraq. Our men and women are the bravest and most patriotic in the world, that are over there fighting. We deserve to give them the kind of support they need to make this mission successful. (Applause.)

...

MR. WALLACE: Do you see the support phase in 2008?

MR. ROMNEY: I think you’re going to begin to see, if the surge is working, and I think we’re going to get that report very soon, that we’re going to begin to slowly but surely pull back to a support role. But the timetable for that, I hope, will be as soon as possible. We all hope for that; we all hope for that. But the question of timetable will depend upon how successful the surge is. And the key is we don’t start pulling back troops. We don’t go into a support mode until we are successful with the surge and we are providing the security and the stability that we anticipate for this country. Chris.

Thanks to a late friend of mine, I listen to Jim Rome's sports talk radio program (aka The Jungle) from time to time. To successfully participate on the program, as determined by the host, there are some rules, one of which we may want to consider for this next election round:

Have a take. Do not suck.

Crude as it is, it does seem reasonable that anyone who is running for president and opens his mouth on anything (yes, anything), ought to have a solid position (the take), have at least one good supporting point, and put together a reasonable argument (not sucking).

Now the snip above is fairly standard debate fare, and you could sort through it to find a reasonable take, but I'd prefer a take like this from someone with Romney's position (note this is not necessarily my take):

I've said it before, I'm not going to talk about timetables for withdrawal from Iraq. It's the wrong way to look at it. We will base our actions on the facts of what is happening on the ground. Not on what somebody's spin machine says is happening. Not on what we wish were happening. Curent indications are positive, and General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker report next week. Keep in mind, these are checkpoints; important, yes, but still only checkpoints. We never stop measuring, we never stop adjusting, and we never stop working until we accomplish what we set out to achieve. That's what it means to have benchmarks--not arbitrary timetables.

To compare, here is John McCain's actual response:

SEN. MCCAIN: Governor, the surge is working. The surge is working, sir. It is working.

MR. ROMNEY: That’s just what I said.

SEN. MCCAIN: No, not apparently -- it’s working.

It’s working because we’ve got a great general. We’ve got a good strategy. Anbar province: Things have improved. The Maliki government is not doing the things we want it to do. The police are not functioning the way we want them to do.

But we are succeeding, and the great debate is not whether it’s apparently working or not. The great debate is going to take place on the floor of the United States Senate, the middle of this month. And it’s going to be whether we set a date for withdrawal, which will be a date for surrender, or whether we will let this surge continue and succeed.

And I can assure you, it’s more than apparent. It is working, and we have to rally the American people.

The people of New Hampshire are saddened and frustrated and angry over our failures in Iraq. I share their anger, their frustration and their failure, and I want them home, too, but I want them home for the right reasons. I want our troops home with honor, otherwise we will face catastrophe and genocide in the region.

It's not ideal, but separate the content of the original debate responses for the moment. Whose bandwagon would you rather pull? Like it, or not, signs of our times include the 24/7 news "cycle" and major political announcements on Oprah and The Tonight Show. The ability (and desire) to have a timely decent take is increasingly important, as the president has shown too many times.

And until I see someone cut through it consistently, I won't be trying to pull anyone's. Ron Paul's clarity is the closest, but I think he proceeds from too many false assumptions. 'Tis wha' 'tis.

Not What I Would Have Expected

From a member of Ayn Rand's cohort, anyway (per AP):

"The human race has never found a way to confront bubbles," former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said Thursday in reference to the euphoria that can precede contractions, or reactions, like the current market turmoil, according to a published report.

That's a bit of a conceit. It is inherently impossible in a mixed economy to not exaggerate bubbles, where a central authority arbitrarily influences business profitability apart from productivity. It's the price our culture chooses for government "security" and "convenience," but that doesn't mean the way hasn't been discovered.

[submitted by e-mail]

Another Late Acknowledgment

From a few months ago... The Troglodyte has been banned by The Spirit of Vatican 2. Good stuff.


[submitted by e-mail]


Update:
There's even a logo!

Another New Addition to the Family

No not mine (besides our foreign exchange student). I'm a bit late on this, but Dan Berthiaume (former staff writer at the local journal, The Catholic Servant, and brother of hangingontonothing's Judd) launched a blog this summer, The Everlasting Man. Anything that's Chesterton-inspired is worth a gander, and this is no exception.

Some of you may remember Dan as the father of young Benedict, who was the subject of a prayer request last year. I'm happy to report that those prayers were answered. Thank you.

*** Separate topic

Judd and Dan aren't the only internet celebrities in the family... What's interesting about this link is that it includes a pic and graf from my old B-squad baseball coach at Holy Angels.

Catholic Carnival 135 is Up

At A Catholic Mom climbing the Pillars.

Adult Stem Cells Identified with Potential to Repair Muscle

According to the results of a study are published in the September issue of the journal Nature Biotechnology, for the first time using human muscle tissue, scientists at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center's Children's Hospital have successfully isolated a population of adult stem cells that could be used to treat muscle injuries and diseases such as heart attack and muscular dystrophy.

The cells are taken from blood vessels in a patient's injured or diseased muscle and can be easily sorted and proliferated. After the treating the cells, they would be re-injected, with no risk of rejection, to repair the damaged tissue.

This, of course, is another exciting development in the field of ASCR. One thing to note, however, is the use of the word "potential." We need to keep an even keel and not fall into the same hype trap as the hESCR crusaders. I am reminded of an up and coming athlete (football player, I think) some time back who was asked what he thought of the consensus opinion that he had the potential to be one of the best players in the league in just a few years. His comment was something along the lines that if someone has great potential that just means he hasn't done anything yet.

Intellectual honesty requires this kind of thinking when you hear about human embryonic stem cells showing promise in repairing heart damage in rats at the Center for Cardiovascular Biology and Regenerative Medicine at the University of Washington, in Seattle, as reported by the on line version of Nature Biotechnology last week.

But for those keeping track of the real (not potential) stem cell research treatment score (as of April 11):

ASCR - 73
ESCR - 0

[Submitted by e-mail]

Laying Down Markers

I know I said two years ago that I was off the bench for 2008. That was foolhardy. And frankly, I'm not that geeked by anybody yet to direct my time, talent, or treasure to any candidate(s). That said, I do follow things enough, after all culture and politics are related, that I am compelled to begin sorting through candidates.

The process is fairly simple here for the primaries. Begin with evaluating/disqualifying with respect to the five non-negotiables and with those candidates outside the margin of error (recent poll) from zero in at least one of the leading primary/caucus states to create a short list to measure against secondary criteria, which will include, for starters, a record that demonstrates:

• Meaningful executive, or organizational leadership, experience,
• A compelling American vision to project from the bully pulpit,
• An appreciation of subsidiarity and solidarity,
• A dedication to the proposition and an understanding why governments are instituted among men.

You'll note that I have no specifics regarding the popular issues of the day (Iraq and the Long War, taxes, immigration reform, health care, etc.). I most definitely have biases on these, but I am open to an argument, you just better bring one.

Here are the lists (as I understand the candidates' positions)...

Democrats:

• Hillary Clinton - DQ (at least non-negotiable #1)
• Barack Obama - DQ (1)
• John Edwards - DQ (1)
• Al Gore (unofficial candidate) - DQ (1)
• Joe Biden - DQ (1)
• Chris Dodd - DQ (1)
• Dennis Kucinich - DQ (1)
• Mike Gravel - DQ (1)

Republicans:

• Rudy Giulani - DQ (1)
• Fred Thomspon - TBD
• Mitt Romney - DQ (3 - exploit "leftover" embryos)
• John McCain - DQ (3 - exploit existing lines)
• Newt Gingrich (unofficial) - TBD
• Mike Huckabee - DQ (3 - exploit existing lines)
• Sam Brownback - OK , not better than zero
• Duncan Hunter - OK, not better than zero
• Ron Paul - OK, not better than zero
• Tom Tancredo - TBD, not better than zero

Note: I've deleted Jim Gilmore and Tommy Thompson because their campaigns are no longer active.

Makes for a very short list and not much to get excited about, yet...

New Seasons

Labor Day marks the traditional end of summer and the end of the only real pause in The Clan's yearly schedule. Our little break was following the end of five spring & summer sports for four of the Troglotykes, so it was particularly appreciated this year.

Troglotyke #1 actually started high school last week, but school is now in swing for a total of six 'Tykes (at least part-time) and the foreign exchange student who is staying with us for a term (still working on a catchy cave-related moniker for him), as are fall sports.

As I watched the Twins get blanked yesterday by the Indians, I was also emotionally able to quit holding out for another miracle run to the play-offs and am free to shift my attention to football. Unfortunately, with the Gophers' overtime loss to Bowling Green on Saturday and the Vikings' offense, even with explosive #1 draft choice Adrian Peterson, generating so much apathy that poor ticket sales have them flirting with a TV black-out for the home opener against the Vick-less Falcons on Sunday, things are not shaping up well for the Bandwagonville locals on the grid iron. At least I'll have the (triumphant?) return of The Troglodyte's Top 12 to keep me occupied, beginning Sept. 17th.

And, lest we forget (as if we could), the presidential campaign season now begins in earnest.

Yes, the seasons have changed. As usual, like with the liturgical cycle, we come back around and find ourselves not quite in the same place. And thank goodness for that.