Foreign Policy Magazine has identified what it considers the top 100 public intellectuals. Now they want our help to pick the top 20. On one of their webpages, you can vote for your top 5. Here were my choices:

1. Peter Singer
2. Steven Pinker
3. Richard Dawkins
4. J. Craig Venture
5. Steven Levitt

As with any voting system to chose the top anything, it’s far from perfect. Everyone brings their own bias, not least of which is familiarity bias. I voted for those because they were members of the subset of listed intellectuals that I actually know about. Still, it’ll be interesting to see who winds up in the top 20 list.

Who did/would you vote for?

Is the government actually ahead of the curve on an issue?? It appears they may be (or I am sorely ignorant to this issue)! According Wired Science the Senate unanimously (95-0) approved the bill that bar employers and insurance companies from using genetic information to hire, fire, determine premiums or deny coverage.

GINA, as it is affectionately know, apparently has been bouncing around for 10 years in Congress and is know fully expected to be passed by the House and then signed by President Bush.

The prompt behind GINA is that individuals were hesitant to obtain genetic testing to help screen for predispositions to certain disease indicators. The fear was that a genetic “bank” would be maintained by employers and insurance companies and they would use the genetic information to hire and insure only the most fit or individuals that have clear genetic tests.

The benefits to patients having genetic testing done to me is obvious, if you are genetically predisposed to a disease you can take measures to help prevent it or detect it very early and allow for proper treatment.

I think the most amazing thing of all of this is that the government is taking steps to protect individuals from discrimination prior to the mass discrimination occurring. I didn’t believe we really have a pro-active government because history has shown that we are a very reactive system. Add to this amazing occurrence that I actually agree with the legislation almost makes me awe struck. Yes we were really proactive on a positive issue! Now if we could only guarantee that discrimination won’t occur for all those others that live in this country and prove no threat to the life and liberty of their fellow citizens!

Tonight, we are off on another camping trip! Due to all the weddings we had to attend last year, this will be our first big outdoors trip in quite a while. We are going to spend four days and three nights in Shenandoah National Park. This will be the first time going there for both Bunnies4Buddha and myself. Bluebird will be going with us and we will meet up with Chopdeli, Bridget, and a few others (sorry that you couldn’t make it to this one, Santini). It should be a great time.

Needless to say, I’ll be absent from the blog for a while. I hope to have some nice scenery and nature photos to share with everyone once we get back.

That’s right! You too can join the International Society of Solipsists. That is, if my mind creates a scenario in which you join the society… Still! All you have to do is “send a brief Vita and three letters of recommendation from yourself.” Then you can look forward to enjoying activities like next fall’s ethics symposium “The Me Generation”, which will be followed by a reception in the Hall of Mirrors.

What will my subconscious dream up next?

A while back, I blogged about my disappointment over the British government employing a ‘psychic’ to de-haunt a home. Now, that very same government is implementing new laws that protect gullible consumers from supposed fortune tellers, mediums, spiritual healers, etc. The new laws require such ‘psychics’ to demonstrate the efficacy of their trade before selling products or services.

Not surprisingly, the bullshit artists are complaining about the new laws. An astute observer might note that they have nothing to fear if their products and services actually work. So why are they protesting? It’s likely because most of them know it’s bullshit and fear that their ill-gotten income will be lost.

If I’m giving a healing to someone, I don’t want to have to stand there and say I don’t believe in what I’m doing,” said Carole McEntee-Taylor, a healer who co-founded the Spiritual Workers Association.

“I’d rather keep that to myself,” she may as well have added.

Many of con-artists are claiming these laws amount to religious discrimination. I’m sorry, but being religious doesn’t not exempt you from consumer protection laws or any other laws for that matter.

This is a small victory for evidence-based policy advocates!

For more information behind what this video is parodying, click here. Enjoy!

In recent blog posting Janet has mention how busy she has been. With this in mind I have come up with my own question of the week. I am hesitant to title it a TTMT seeing as those originate from her site, but none the less enjoy the following:

If you had unlimited resources to run the successful business of your choice what would it be, why would you choose it and what would be the best part of the job?

Bunnies4Buddha

Not a full day passes since I learn about solar thermal energy before I receive a newsletter from my congressman about energy. This is a perfect opportunity to promote the exciting alternative and educate someone who’s in a position to make a difference! As I have done before, I wrote my congressman. Here is the email, in it’s entirety, that I sent Congressman Hayes (R-NC):

Dear Congressman Hayes:

Once again, I received your newsletter via email this morning. As always, the newsletter is greatly appreciated. It’s a great way to inform your constituents of your policies and your reasoning behind those policies.

I have responded to your newsletter regarding FISA renewal. I must admit that I am disappointed that I never received a response. I would like to make you aware that I posted the email I sent you on my blog and my readers are likewise disappointed that I have no response to share.

My primary purpose for writing you this morning is to express my concerns over your energy policy expressed in your most recent newsletter and to make you aware of a workable alternative. But first I would like to commend you for your support for nuclear power. I agree that nuclear power is a crucial component of our plan to achieve energy independence.

My first concern is your support for biofuels. While I appreciate the sentiment, biofuels have an unpalatable dark side that I simply cannot support. Biofuels puts energy in direct competition with food. The resulting higher food prices are already occurring. Your constituents are already struggling with higher energy costs. Consider how they will respond to the added burden of higher food costs.

Read the rest of this entry »

The above image is created and licensed by afloresm.

Thanks to fears about global warming, renewable energy is on more people’s minds than ever. More importantly, it’s on the minds of a lot of business executives as well. The public and businesses want more carbon-free energy. I’ve written positively about the nuclear power, but had to admit that it has some drawbacks (though I still think the safety concern is far overblown). I’ve also blogged about the inefficacy of biofuels. One of the biggest downsides to biofuels is rearing it’s ugly head right now. Additionally, hype about a hydrogen economy is unfounded. Hydrogen technology ends up being a very expensive, inefficient, potentially explosive battery. Finally, photovoltaic (solar) and wind power have proved to be too expensive, too unreliable, and produce too little power.

So, I’ve abandoned hope on alternative fuels hyped by ‘environmentalists’ and I also championed nuclear power as a stop-gap measure until a better technology comes along. Have I abandoned my liberal ways and registered with the Republican party? No. I’m just a realist. However, I have just learned of a renewable, carbon-free alternative that is already in use that could meet the current demands of the developed world and the growing demands. It’s smoke and mirrors; more accurately steam and mirrors…

Read the rest of this entry »

I found an excellent article on the website Science Progress via RichardDawkins.net. It was written by Leah Ceccarelli and is about a class of sophistry that is 2,500 years old yet is being used to great effect by anti-science elements in recent decades.

The technique manufactures a controversy where none exists to create public confusion in order to pursue an agenda. Ceccarelli gives three examples in recent years. The first is from global warming deniers. Those who have reason to delay action on global warming exaggerate the minority scientific opinion way out of proportion in order to make it appear main stream. This generated a controversy where none existed and it effectively halted political action that would have been based on good science.

A second example of the use of this tactic is from Africa. Some political leaders did the exact same thing with AIDS deniers (those who denied a link between HIV and AIDS) to forestall spending on treatment.

The final example is the ‘teach the controversy’ campaign used by the Discovery Institute and other evolution deniers. There is no controversy in the scientific community but by marketing the minute opposing view, the public has been convinced that there is. Their goal, of is to undermine science so that religion can once again become our culture’s only truth source.

The rest of the article is Ceccarelli’s hypothesis as to why this brand of ancient sophistry has been so effective at undermining science. These are her first steps in trying to find a way to combat this irrationalism from a rhetoric point of view. Please, read the article. It’s fantastic information for those of us who love and want to protect science.