pages

Thursday, February 25, 2010

global warming advocates backing off?

I guess:

Sunday, February 14, 2010


Never Mind? [Jonah Goldberg]

From the Times of London: "World May Not Be Warming, Say Scientists"

The United Nations climate panel faces a new challenge with scientists casting doubt on its claim that global temperatures are rising inexorably because of human pollution.

In its last assessment the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the evidence that the world was warming was “unequivocal”.

It warned that greenhouse gases had already heated the world by 0.7C and that there could be 5C-6C more warming by 2100, with devastating impacts on humanity and wildlife. However, new research, including work by British scientists, is casting doubt on such claims. Some even suggest the world may not be warming much at all.

“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC.

The doubts of Christy and a number of other researchers focus on the thousands of weather stations around the world, which have been used to collect temperature data over the past 150 years.

These stations, they believe, have been seriously compromised by factors such as urbanisation, changes in land use and, in many cases, being moved from site to site.

Christy has published research papers looking at these effects in three different regions: east Africa, and the American states of California and Alabama.

“The story is the same for each one,” he said. “The popular data sets show a lot of warming but the apparent temperature rise was actually caused by local factors affecting the weather stations, such as land development.”

02/14 08:47 AMShare

Joe Bastardi verus Bill Nye the Science Guy

Here is the simple bits, although I wish I had the time to look more into it:
Bill Nye is an engineer, not a climate-scientist.... but he seems like a climate-religionist.

Monday, February 15, 2010

Presidents Day

The day when we Americans celebrate Presidential history by enjoying great mattress prices.

Saturday, February 06, 2010

Who in Google looked for my site?

Seriously....
Apologies Demanded
By Referrals > Visit Detail
Visit 116,455
[<<] [>>]
Domain Name google.com ? (Commercial)
IP Address 72.14.193.# (Google)
ISP Google
Location
Continent : North America
Country : United States (Facts)
State : California
City : Mountain View
Lat/Long : 37.4192, -122.0574 (Map)
Language English (U.S.)
en-us
Operating System Microsoft WinXP
Browser Internet Explorer 6.0
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)
Javascript version 1.3
Monitor
Resolution : 1024 x 768
Color Depth : 24 bits
Time of Visit Feb 6 2010 4:37:40 pm
Last Page View Feb 6 2010 4:37:40 pm
Visit Length 0 seconds
Page Views 1
Referring URL
http://www.google.co...emanded.blogspot.com
Search Engine
google.com
Search Words
apologiesdemanded.blogspot.com
Visit Entry Page http://apologiesdemanded.blogspot.com/
Visit Exit Page http://apologiesdemanded.blogspot.com/
Out Click
So someone from a Google office used Google website to look for my website by its URL specifically, travels there and looks for barely any time whatsoever.

Why?

a Doctor Who TARDIS message board icon animated .gif

Friday, February 05, 2010

ordering archived material on the internet

Voting records on various websites, when organized simply by chronology within a tenure are placed top-to-bottom in either a chronological order or a reverse chronological order. Each order would be determined by the purpose of the record, be it historical or contemporary, respectively.

If a biography of an inactive legislator were constructed and his voting record were portrayed it would likely be in complete chronological order starting with the beginning of his governmental service and ending with his most recent actions at the end of the narrative. This, I think, would be obvious. I see this rarely because retired legislators, and indeed retired politicians, rarely have their deeds depicted in cold statistical presentations and often see their lives told in a sort of prose. That narrative usually skims details and only features the most important, vital aspects or the items most relevant to the point or agenda of the narrator, historian, pundit, or writer.

Records of more-or-less contemporary politicians, especially those in legislatures, must be complete to remain relevant sources, or they may be ignored or replaced as such. When these exist as static presentations with individual data sorts or variable in preset order, not as different items with a sorter, then the stuff is usually in reverse-chronological order because the most relevant is the present-day legislation and the past leading up to that is underneath. When the items are created and existing separately and can be sorted however by different search settings then it may be something presented in different orders, but in general this stuff is either in chronological order, for pure biographical purposes, or reverse-chronological order for different research purposes.

Of course I do not know enough about search technologies or enough to these technical terms to avoid it seeming like I am just talking, but there has to be a reason for all of this.

The Ultimate point for conjecturing reasons is that the Washington Post has charts for voting records of US Congressional legislators, even temporary US Senators from Massachusetts, and for some reason it is presented in a reverse chronological order. Similarly MichiganVotes.org presents its stuff, like these "support" votes of State Senator Cameron Brown are in reverse chronological order (and yet it has all these separate lists for separate sorts of votes and different stretches of time). MichiganVotes.org commits to this complete with the sin that most weblogs commit by continuing along the conventions of reverse-chronological listing:
Votes 21 to 30 of 751
Votes "1" through "20" were the twenty most recent votes, not the first twenty votes. The "21 to 30" is misleading because it is not historically the 21st vote and so on, and the "Previous 10" are the ten most recent and the ten nearest to the front of the list. The "Next 10" are chronologically the previous ten votes. WaPo, short for the Washington Post, does not commit that sin. To go back to the previous page of newer votes, the second pages would be "More Recent Votes", in Paul Kirk's instance, the link goes to "page1" and the "Older Votes" link on page1 was first, and headed to "page2". "Older Votes" is to the right of "More Recent Votes" and so on. This at least is a resistance to the old problems. I wish, however, that WaPo had one page with one chart with all the votes of whatever type, given how comparatively short was the tenure of Paul Kirk as US Senator.

The best way to tackle this is not in terms of broad generalities with the specific variables of votes, but to see it in terms of weblogs, so I will steal how Shamus Young does in "A Philosophical Question About Hyperlinks", which is about ordering archives:
When you get to the bottom of the page on a blog and they have links to go to earlier entries in the archives, the link usually has an arrow pointing either to the right or left. Which is correct? And should this link be called “prev” or “next”?

Blog entries are posted in reverse-chronological order. This seems to confuse people. Do we reverse EVERYTHING, then? If we think of each group of posts in the archive as pages in a book, then which way is it read? Are new pages added to the beginning of the book, or the end?

Destructoid has a link at the bottom which points left and says “Next”. It links to earlier entries.

The same link on my site points to the right and says “Prev”.

I’ve seen blogs that use other combinations, such as a rightward “next” or a leftward “prev”.

Without worrying about the “correct” or “standard” way of doing things or what the “default” behavior is, just picture it in your mind. Which makes the most sense to you and feels intuitive?

Blog entries and archives of government actions are different things but on the internet there is consistency whenever and wherever the latest thing accomplished is supposed to be the thing that people want to have noticed first or the most. Yet there are different perspectives and ideas.
Ergonomic Cat

Left pointing arrow <- to indicate the Previously typed entry.

From the beginning of time, left on the net has meant back in time.

Here is another:
Gary

I have noticed this too and been equally confused and annoyed by how some people handle it.

I personally prefer it to read like a book, that is, you move to the right. Even with it in reverse chronilogical order. The first page is the first page, no matter “When” it happened and all subsequent pages should be to the right of the first page.

As to the names, I prefer “Older ->” and “<- Newer”, or something similar.

Then another:
Zeta Kai

I second E.C.’s opinion. That’s how the browser always works, so that’s what I expect from a page within my browser.

For some reason, Gary seems to be contradicting himself.

Then another:

Seb

I’d say either reverse everything: newest post on top of the page, “” on the bottom, like you add a note on a pile of notes;
or use the “natural” order all the time, more like posts in a forum thread.

I’m all for consistency

Different spaces have different ways for different purposes

SeekerOfThePath

In my opinion, the answer to the question depends on what you want to express. If you want to navigate user to the next page with more blog posts, it should be “rightward next”. Else, if you want user to navigate to page with older posts, it should be “leftward previous”. Finally, to avoid any confusion, I would label arrows with full text, such as “Next page” or “Previous posts” as opposed to simple “Next” and “Previous”. I, personally, wouldn’t confuse users with left-next and right-previous buttons.

This whole thing could have been simpler.

craigslist tricked a man into raping someone

Some ex-Marine went on craigslist pretending to be his ex-girlfriend. In his entry he put up a picture of his ex-girlfriend, ostensibly it was her putting up her picture, described herself, provided her address and claimed that she wanted a strong, aggressive man to rape her. One man decided to fulfill her demand, or what he thought was her demand; he went to her house, understanding that he was invited, broke in, tied her up, gagged her, and raped her.

He thought it was consensual sex. The moron is being charged with rape. The ex_marine is being charged as an accomplice to the crime. The perverse moron is named Ty McDowell and is 26 years old. The ex-Marine is Jebidiah Stipe.
CASPER, Wyo. - Even in the Craigslist "Casual Encounters" section -the red light district of the Internet- it was a shocking offer.

A woman named 'Sara,' looking for a "real aggressive man," asking him to rape her inside her home. Even more shocking, however, was that at least one man, 26-year-old Ty McDowell answered the ad, saying he was willing to be the woman's attacker. But the biggest surprise was yet to come. The author of the dark fantasy, police say, was really the woman's ex-boyfriend, a U.S. Marine named Jebidiah Stipe. And it was Stipe, police say, who was e-mailing with McDowell as he planned the break-in and rape. Police say Stipe provided an address, a picture, and then waited for the brutal assault to happen.

On Dec. 11th, Ty McDowell broke into the woman's home in Casper, Wyoming, gagged her, tied her up and raped her, according to police.
That is the meaty part, but while everyone else may comment on whether the McDowell should be raped in prison (he should not) or whether a moron should be charged with rape simply because he was under the impression his rape was consensual sex (he should and is) there is a sociotechnological aspect of which I was not aware.
Anti Craigslist

United States

Judged:

1

I can't even get ads to sell my furniture posted on CL - they keep deleting them. The guy up the street with a business can't get his special sales listing to stick, they keep deleting them. A storage business mgr in the next town over can't post her specials, and can't even get to post the fact they are hiring, they keep deleting them, fer goodness sakes in this economy. But child porn and rape, U bet: A man can get his woman raped, and killers and child traffickers can get their quarry on Craigslist. Over and over again. CL is now the go-to standard in legitimized Internet porn and crimes. I'm just about as sick of Craigslist as this incident.
Anti Craigslist

United States

Judged:

1

1

Espcially after this, we're banning anyone in our family from even accessing Craiglist; and if a business advertises on CL we will have nothing to do with them. Clearly CL does not want legitimate stuff. Until we see Law Enforcement go after Craigslist in a meaningful way.
The service, which is supposed to be for the purpose of facilitating commercial action and actions, especially sales and distribution of product and legitimate commercial services, does very little for the real thing yet is more than perfectly adequate to pave the way for crime and a young woman's intimate violation. You want someone tied up, gagged and helpless as she is attacked in the most horrible way imaginable, put it on craigslist.

Starting with David Drwencke all I can associate craigslist with is violated women and sexual crimes. Of course Dave Drwencke did not violate or rape anyone and by what I see as First Amendment rights he can do whatever he wants with his own photographs of another individual.

Barack Obama's daughters are fat

Apparently the First Lady said so and then busybodies are afraid self-images will be hurt.

Haloscan is shutting down

Ostensibly the service which I have used for many years for its Trackback function and (because I had to) to manage Comments is shutting down because the software and hardware is "failing". I have a hard time believing it. Haloscan is being shut down on: Feb 13, 2010



Notice that there is an alternative to continue the service as a new service that will eventually charge money. Echo is yet another comment system and apparently costs 12 dollars a year to function and to use and I am entitled to a free trial period. This free trial period is 30 days long and presumably starts on February 14th, 2010.

In response to the impending destruction of one of the technical institutions of my seven-year-long-running weblog I am taking measures to manually cutting or copying the responses from each Haloscan-provided space and then pasting the text (all of it), including the identity of the commenter (including the IP address) within the edited/updated post that is relevant to the Comment or Trackback. This comment will be found under the phrase
Comment-Update:
or
Comments-Update:
depending on plurality. I pursue these steps to preserve the data and the comments both for historical purposes (for posterity) and because there is some real data, good information in some of those. The existence of those comments also indicates or indicated that there was some response to and impact made by this weblog and that it grew and grows slightly beyond the stated mandate of Apologies Demanded.

The useful and good ones will be kept without hesitation. I am taking advantage of this pain-staking and time-sucking operation by purposely or in some cases through inaction removing stupid or profane (or cowardly) comments from the history. Some get deleted, and some will be deleted on March 15, 2010 or so as I will let the Echo transition take place but will not pay for it. At that point I will likely go to Blogger for my comments function (as I have not received a Trackback ping in over a year regardless). Blogger did not have a Comments function when I installed Haloscan; I was particularly enamored (and still am) by Trackback. Nevertheless I will explore Disqus and other services. Sphere does not engage Trackback that I know of but any way to bring in several new streams of information will make me more satisfied; too bad it changed its name. I will not "go premium" with any service

As I go through the old comments I will preserve (and I have to do this by hand) anything I believe will serve the posts and serve the weblog. If something is just purely insulting or does not lend any good argumentation or information I will dump it. If someone makes a charged statement and uses only his first name and no e-mail or other identifying information I will dump it. As I successfully copy and paste and publish the new versions of the posts I will delete the original comments-copy and remove the Haloscan-hosted comments entirely. For the Star Wars Design Alliance comments, which were too many to host on Apologies Demanded without destroying any sense of aesthetic, were simply posted on my article-copy blog entirely and I removed all of the old stuff from the Comments list, which cuts it all down by a few pages.

What is most problematic in the end is that due to parallels in the evolution of Blogger and Haloscan, most of the comments are linked to their Haloscan-host-pages through a link that has the title of the blog post, but some are just numbers because the relavant blog posts do not have titles; I never gave the articles titles and for the first few months of the blog, Blogger did not allow or enable the blog posts to have titles. In point of fact I had to alter the template code by hand to allow the use of titles for this blog and I still have never gotten around to retroactively assigning titles to all of each blog entry. One of the dumber things that Haloscan did was neglect to create back-links from the Comments pages to the respective posts' pages so I cannot simply copy and paste and I have to hunt down the edit-pages on the Blogger Dashboard and worst of all the comments that belong to posts without titles cannot be tracked down because nothing in the comments effectively relates which posts I should find and edit. For that note when I have finished copying and pasting and thus deleting most Comments I will leave the ones that I cannot associate with their respective posts and hope that whatever Echo is it will have the feature that Haloscan lacked and allow me to find the related stuff, as Echo is supposed to keep the old Comments. If Echo can do that I will make the right moves and then disassociate from Echo.

None of you care; I do. The entire system for comments and leaving comments and tracking your own comments will change.

Village Voice on Conservatives' races

This is a half-hearted retraction of a story that libels me and some friends of mine. I was at this "Race and Conservatism" forum in September 2006 and there were no "racists". The closest thing we had to "racists" were Jared Taylor and Marcus Epstein and I have the photographs of them indiscriminately embracing their fellow men.

The Village Voice is just attempting to portray my philosophical sort in the worst light possible.

It had as little to do with James O'Keefe as it did with me.

Monday, February 01, 2010

I cannot endorse Tom George for governor

Nevertheless, he is a good guy and would make a fine governor. If you wish to volunteer for him at a Forum at Central Michigan University:
Hey Everyone!
Senator and Gubernatorial candidate Tom George will be speaking at Central Michigan University tomorrow Tuesday February 2! Volunteers would be much appreciated for obtaining petition signatures!
Maria George will be driving, no need to worry about mileage and gas money!

So......if you want to visit CMU and see the one and only Senator George please contact me, Angela Taylor via cell 3134603337

Jack Hoogendyk versus David Frum versus Rush Limbaugh

David Frum, a political rightist professional writer whose gimmick is "pragmatic" politics typically derides Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and others for sponsoring and advocating a sort of Conservative extremism that in Frum's view would limit and diminish Republican and Conservative chances at winning elections and thus making policy. That this is an idiotic view is obvious only when one considers that despite the rhetoric that Conservatives articulate and the speeches that leftists love to quote the Republicans have governed (when they had the chance) as leftist or Moderates and paid dearly for it, typically. Jack Hoogendyk weighs in.
Core Principles Logo

Is Rush Right? David Frum Doesn't Think So.

Author and blogger David Frum just posted an essay that is likely to create, or perhaps expand the debate about what the Republican Party was, is, and should become. You can read the entire essay here.

According to Wikipedia, "David J. Frum (born 1960) is a Canadian-born neo-conservative journalist...and former economic speechwriter for President George W. Bush. His editorial columns have appeared in a variety of Canadian and American magazines and newspapers, including the National Post and The Week. He is also the founder of NewMajority.com, a political group blog."

Let me quote Mr. Frum from his latest blog:

"When Republicans line up behind Rush Limbaugh...they are dividing the country 80-20 against themselves. Our supreme priority now has to be to reinvent ourselves as a pragmatic, inclusive, modern party of free enterprise and limited government. We have to relearn how to talk to moderates, independents, younger voters, educated voters, women - it's a long list.

The relationship between these radio talkers and the larger Republican and conservative world has become parasitic and antagonistic. They flourish and profit to the extent they can polarize and radicalize. The GOP will recover only to the extent that it moderates and reaches out."

For the record, let me say I wholeheartedly disagree with Mr. Frum. Granted, Rush Limbaugh can sound a little outrageous at times, but don't forget, he is by his own admission, an entertainer.

The Republican Party is having a real identity crisis. Frum apparently thinks that we lost because we were too "hard line" in our position on the issues. Yet, if you look at what Republicans have been doing for the last six to eight years, how can anyone make that assertion? Too often it has been the exact opposite. We have become so weak, we are afraid of our own shadows.


Remember why Ronald Reagan was such an effective President. He got the largest REAL economic stimulus plan in history through a heavily democratic Congress in 1981. It was called the Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA). It cut marginal tax rates by 25% and launched the largest and longest private sector economic recovery in history. It also led to a big increase in federal revenues, while still shrinking government relative to the size of the economy. What a miracle. But here is my point. How was Ronald Reagan able to accomplish such a feat with a Democratically controlled Congress? I believe it was not only his "sunny disposition" and persuasive attitude, but it was also the fact that Congress knew Ronald Reagan meant business.

The ERTA was passed on August 4, 1981. One day previous, in probably his shortest speech ever, Ronald Reagan told the striking air traffic controllers that if they did not return to work within 48 hours, they would be fired. And, true to his word, on August 5th, he did just that. He called their bluff and never looked back. You can read his speech here.

Now, I suppose you can say the timing was coincidental, but the fact is, Congress knew they had a President who meant what he said and said what he meant. He was a leader with a spine of stainless steel.

Should the Republican Party become "moderate?" I think not. I believe the GOP should rediscover what it stands for and then STAND. Strong leadership is what people are always searching for.

Looking forward,
Jack Hoogendyk


Your thoughts and feedback are always welcome. Click here.
Jack Hoogendyk owns this angle because he is rightist and Conservative to a point that is beyond pragamatism and firmly in the realm of idealism. This is not wrong. I daresay I am more Conservative, extremist, and idealistic than the former State Representative out of Kalamazoo. While David Frum is wrong is the broad view, and in my view, when acting in a political field of battle, not a Rush Limbaugh entertainer/advocate role, we must battle pragmatically, fighting with the ammunition we have. When it comes to having votes you cannot bluff and no one simply folds. There are votes and we have to win the people that are out to vote.