FAILS and WINS and other topics

Workout notes Weights (10 x 170, 4 x 175 on the bench press, plus other stuff), swimming (2200 yards: 1000 of back/free, side/free, then 500 of drill/swim, 5 x 100 IM on 2:20, 200 paddle cool down).

Note about the weights: I “rushed” the weight workout (less rest between sets; did curls, military, pull-down, leg lifts, etc.) and when I do that, I have to lower the weight that I use).

Politics
Ok, why am I so ga-ga over President Obama? It isn’t just that he is a liberal from Illinois. Check out the headline from this Maureen Dowd article:.

Hail the Conquering Professor

The rest of the article is pretty good; on facebook my liberal friends have been popping off quite a bit over the past couple of days. We are indeed in a “state of shock” that our party FINALLY didn’t cave in.

Republicans
Yes, conservatives have a valuable purpose. E. J. Dionne explains it very well:

First, conservatives are suspicious of innovation and therefore subject all grand plans to merciless interrogation. Their core question goes something like this: Maybe you think this new health (or education or environmental) plan is a great idea, Mr. Liberal, but will it really work?

What are its unintended consequences? Can our governmental institutions carry it off? Not all progressive ideas pass the test. In the health care debate, conservatives were at their best when they shelved the demagoguery and asked practical, focused questions.

Second, conservatives respect old things and old habits. They are not always right in this. Racial segregation and discrimination are good examples of “old ways” that were morally wrong. But an admiration for what the conservative writer Russell Kirk called “custom” and “convention” speaks to something deep in the human heart.

Our habits are the product of time, based on the slowly accumulated wisdom of our ancestors. That’s why tradition should not be discarded lightly. You don’t have to be a conservative to agree with Kirk that custom and convention “are checks both upon man’s anarchic impulse and upon the innovator’s lust for power.” [...]

Related to this is the third great contribution of conservatism: a suspicion of human nature and a belief that humans cannot be remolded like plastic. Conservatives see a fallen side of human nature usually described in terms of original sin. And when utopians propose to create a New Man or a New Woman, the conservative typically cries: Stop!

From generation to generation, human nature doesn’t really change.

AMEN. My guess is that why so many successful CEO’s and military officers are conservative: they know how to organize and to get people on the same page, and they don’t fall for every new untested fad (and we sure do see those in education!)

We need principled, intelligent conservatives.

But this doesn’t mean that we aren’t witnessing a hearty helping of conservative FAIL at the moment. One of the fails is the so called threat of lawsuits:

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) has a message for all the attorneys general and Republican lawmakers who are threatening lawsuits and claiming that an individual mandate for insurance coverage is unconstitutional: You don’t have to abide by it — just set up your own plan.

The Oregon Democrat isn’t inviting opponents to defy the newly-enacted health care law. Instead, he’s pointing out a provision in the bill that makes moot the argument over the legality of the individual mandate.

Speaking to the Huffington Post on Tuesday, Wyden discussed — for one of the first times in public — legislative language he authored which “allows a state to go out and do its own bill, including having no individual mandate.”

It’s called the “Empowering States to be Innovative” amendment. And it would, quite literally, give states the right to set up their own health care system — with or without an individual mandate or, for that matter, with or without a public option — provided that, as Wyden puts it, “they can meet the coverage requirements of the bill.”

Note that this provision came straight from the 2007 Healthy Americans Act, which had 10 Republican co-sponsors.

Education
Yes, I can handle lazy students who accept the consequences of their actions. I can handle the less-than-brilliant students who try. But there are those I don’t like. Note: in general, students don’t always accept what they actually did or actually said.

Science
This is a delightful article on the geometry of space.

This is a funny article about parrots: this particular type has “forgotten” how to fly and, at times, “forgot that it forgot” how to fly. And yes, there is a hilarious video (yes, a very sex-starved male parrot)

Human evolution Was there yet another line of homos (along with the homo sapiens and neanderthals)? DNA evidence seems to indicate “yes”.

Nuclear Power: Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu talks about a new design for nuclear reactors: “small modular reactors”:

America is on the cusp of reviving its nuclear power industry. Last month President Obama pledged more than $8 billion in conditional loan guarantees for what will be the first U.S. nuclear power plant to break ground in nearly three decades. And with the new authority granted by the president’s 2011 budget request, the Department of Energy will be able to support between six and nine new reactors.

What does all of this mean for the country? This investment will provide enough clean energy to power more than six million American homes. It will also create tens of thousands of jobs in the years ahead.

Perhaps most importantly, investing in nuclear energy will position America to lead in a growing industry. World-wide electricity generation is projected to rise 77% by 2030. If we are serious about cutting carbon pollution then nuclear power must be part of the solution. Countries such as China, South Korea and India have recognized this and are making investments in nuclear power that are driving demand for nuclear technologies. Our choice is clear: Develop these technologies today or import them tomorrow.

That is why-even as we build a new generation of clean and safe nuclear plants-we are constantly looking ahead to the future of nuclear power. As this paper recently reported, one of the most promising areas is small modular reactors (SMRs). If we can develop this technology in the U.S. and build these reactors with American workers, we will have a key competitive edge.

Small modular reactors would be less than one-third the size of current plants. They have compact designs and could be made in factories and transported to sites by truck or rail. SMRs would be ready to “plug and play” upon arrival.

If commercially successful, SMRs would significantly expand the options for nuclear power and its applications. Their small size makes them suitable to small electric grids so they are a good option for locations that cannot accommodate large-scale plants. The modular construction process would make them more affordable by reducing capital costs and construction times.

Their size would also increase flexibility for utilities since they could add units as demand changes, or use them for on-site replacement of aging fossil fuel plants. Some of the designs for SMRs use little or no water for cooling, which would reduce their environmental impact. Finally, some advanced concepts could potentially burn used fuel or nuclear waste, eliminating the plutonium that critics say could be used for nuclear weapons.

Richard Dawkins: this is an interesting essay on him:

Part of me wishes Dawkins wouldn’t rail so much against religion, though. Not because I necessarily think he’s wrong, but because it has become the only thing many people know about him. He gets a lot of stick for being a “militant atheist”, which is a little ridiculous. Until you behead someone, or blow them up on a bus, or at the very least tell them they’re going to hell for sleeping with the wrong people or eating the wrong food, you’re hardly being militant, at least as far as theological positions go.

But nonetheless every time someone describes him as an “atheist” instead of a “scientist”, or better yet a “zoologist” or “neo-Darwinist”, it distracts attention from what I would call his real work – advancing science, and explaining it in lucid prose.

Next year is the 25th anniversary of his third book, The Blind Watchmaker. I think it remains his best. 1976’s The Selfish Gene and 1982’s The Extended Phenotype were more important scientifically, but narrower in scope, while his middle-period works (River out of Eden, Unweaving the Rainbow, Climbing Mount Improbable) felt a bit like retreads of each other.

I agree with what I highlighted. The idea that he is a “militant atheist” is laughable; for some reason religious types get judged by a much softer standard. It isn’t as if I am going to blow up a church (though someone from a competing religion might!). Also, many scientifically minded believers would actually enjoy his science works such as The Greatest Show on Earth.

Religion FAIL
Many religious myths have violence at their core.

Also, some religions still have some backward social views:

Women Not Allowed to Speak During Lutheran Church Vote
icon1 Posted by Hemant Mehta in Education, General on March 24th, 2010 | 57 Comments

Before you read the headline and the article, realize a few things:

This took place yesterday.

In Wisconsin.

In a Lutheran church.

So much for a “harmless” Christian sect.

The headline:

Baraboo church doesn’t let women speak or vote as school principal is fired

Then again they ARE being Biblical:

29Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
As in all the congregations of the saints, 34women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

Of course modern Christians look for ways to ignore or rationalize away what they don’t like.