May 15, 2010
You couldn’t get fiction like this published.
Republicans in Maine voted to scrap the Republican platform and write a new one — not enough unholy discrimination in the old one, too much Eisenhower, too much Lincoln, or something like that. The convention spilled out into a local middle school for some of the platform writing shenanigans.
In one 8th grade classroom, the Maine Republicans found something they objected to, something they don’t want taught to 8th graders: The U.S. Constitution.
Pharyngula has the story and comments here. ThinkProgress has more gory details here. Portland (Maine) Press-Herald story here. Bangor Daily News story here.
The Republicans were particularly incensed by a poster showing a collage used to open a project assigned to the Portland 8th graders. The 8th graders make poster collages elaborating on the Four Freedoms speech of Franklin Roosevelt, and the accompanying posters by Norman Rockwell. Norman Rockwell. You know. The guy who started his professional career as art director for the Boy Scouts of America . . .
“Brainwashing” the Republicans called U.S. history. Brainwashing.
Speaking of the children, they got into the act Tuesday after a note from “a Republican” was found in Clifford’s classroom. “A Republican was here,” it read. “What gives you the right to propagandize impressionable kids?”
Responded eighth-grader Lilly O’Leary, one of several students who sent e-mails to this newspaper decrying the behavior of their weekend guests, “I am not being brainwashed in his class under any circumstances. I am being told that I have the right to my own opinion.”
She added, “These people were adults and they were acting very immaturely.”
Remember when Republicans used to complain that we can’t jail flag-burning protesters? When did those guys get kicked out of the party, and who are these new thugs?
When did it become the Re-Poe-blican Party? When did they take up the Blackshirt tactics?
C’mon, Republicans. Come back to America. Repent now.
And — as for us Texans? This is the stuff Don McLeroy wants to see happen in Texas social studies standards — vandalism of the U.S. Constitution and American law and tradition.
As a Scouter, as a teacher, as a fan of the U.S. Constitution, I’m concerned. Should I be scared?
“I saw nothing in the room — and nobody pointed out anything in the room — that appeared to give a more balanced view,” [Knox County Republican Party Chairman William] Chapman said.
[Teacher Paul] Clifford and the school’s principal, Mike McCarthy, pointed out in media accounts that the posters were part of projects on freedom and free expression. [Bangor Daily News]
Maybe everyone should be scared.
_______________
Hmmmmm. Ken County, Maine, Republicans offer rewards to people who rat out others who vandalize campaign signs. How about they extend that to rat out the Republicans who vandalized Paul Clifford’s classroom? You know, in the interest of free speech and all . . .
More:
Norman Rockwell, poster of his paintings on the Four Freedoms (Library of Congress image). This is part of what the Maine Tea Party Republicans objected to.
Exercise your right to stand up for freedom and education — spread the word:
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
13 Comments | 
Classroom management, Education, History, History Methods and Tools, History Revisionism, Poe's Law, Political conventions, Political Smear, Politics, Teachers, Teaching, U.S. Constitution | Tagged: Maine | 
Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
May 15, 2010
Keith Tucker, WhatNowToons.com, via Tennessee Guerrilla Women
In a series of articles at George Mason University’s History News Network, historians from Texas and across the nation make a powerful case against the changes in social studies standards proposed by the politicians at the Texas State Board of Education.
Together, this is a powerful indictment of the actions of the SBOE, and strong repudiation of the raw political purposes and tactics employed in the War on Education by the “conservative” faction, including especially lame duck, anti-education crusader/jihadist Don McLeroy.
Texas scholars
- “A Culturally Irrelevant History of Melodramatic Minutiae,” by Iliana Alanís, University of Texas at San Antonio
- “A Sanitized History,” by Roberto R. Calderón, University of North Texas
- “An Almost Impossibly Large Set of Standards Produced by a Problematic Process,” by Jesús F. de la Teja, Texas State University-San Marcos
- “An Overstuffed Laundry List that Treats Seniors Like Kindergartners,” by Keith A. Erekson, University of Texas at El Paso
- “Review of the TEKS,” John Fea, Messiah College
- “An Incomplete Version of the Past that Silences Important Struggles,” by Kirsten Gardner, University of Texas at San Antonio
- “Plagiarized Work,” by Michael Soto, Trinity University
- “Is Texas Messing with History?” David Upham, University of Dallas
- “A Pattern of Neglect and a Missed Opportunity,” by Emilio Zamora, University of Texas
Scholars outside of Texas
- “The Texas SBOE and History Standards: A Teacher’s Perspective,” by Ron Briley, Sandia Preparatory School
- “Texas School Board Whitewashes History,” by Daniel Czitrom, Mount Holyoke College
- “What Texans Aren’t Talking About—But Should Be,” Keith A. Erekson, University of Texas at El Paso
- “Twisting History in Texas,” Eric Foner, Columbia University
- “We Prefer a Shiny Image of America,” Steve Haycox, University of Alaska Anchorage
- “One Classroom, From Sea to Shining Sea,” Susan Jacoby, Independent Scholar
- “Comment,” James McPherson, Princeton University
- “The Historical ‘Narrative’ Has Changed,” Joseph A. Palermo, California State University Sacramento
- “‘T’ is for ‘Texas Textbooks’,” Diane Ravitch, New York University
- “Texas SBOE Tries to Dilute History of Women, Minorities,” John Willingham, Independent Scholar
- “American History — Right and Left,” Jonathan Zimmerman, New York University
Historians can sign a petition set up for the purpose at a site that offers links to the essays, too, An Open Letter from Historians to the Texas State Board of Education.
SBOE will take up the issue again in meetings in Austin this coming week.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
1 Comment | Bogus history, Chilling Effect, Education, History, Political Smear, Politics, Voodoo history, War on Education | Tagged: Bogus history, Don McLeroy, Economics, Education, geography, History, Social Studies, Voodoo history, War on Education | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
May 12, 2010
There’s the relatively new movie. There’s the news from Toronto. There’s the real stuff:
"Indoor" art from Banksy - the Flower Chucker 2 (give the guy credit -- can his kind of art be copyrighted, or just never stolen?)
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Leave a Comment » | Art, History, Politics | Tagged: Art, Banksy, Grafitti, Politics | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
May 8, 2010
Utah’s political year can be odd. Among other things, there is an unusual feature to get the nomination of a party. A candidate can win the nomination outright, and avoid the party primary, by taking 72% of the delegates at the state convention. Delegates vote in rounds, eliminated those with the least support, until some magic number of total delegates is divided among the leaders. If the leading candidate gets anything less than 72% in the final round, there is a run-off at the primary election. This way, only two candidates show up on the primary election ballot in September.
The winner of the primary then appears on the ballot in November.
Saturday in Salt Lake City Utah Republicans scanned a list of eight people contesting incumbent U.S. Sen. Bob Bennett for his seat. Bob Bennett represented Utah in the U.S. Senate for three terms.
Bennett’s father, Wallace F. Bennett, represented Utah for four terms. Bob Bennett is married to a granddaughter of LDS Church President David O. McKay (LDS call the president of their church “prophet, seer and revelator”). He was president of the University of Utah studentbody in college, and he headed several corporations, including his father’s Bennett Paints, and the probably better known nationally, FranklinQuest manufacturer of organizers and appointment books. Bennett got the 2010 endorsements of the National Rifle Association and popular Mormon politician Mitt Romney.
Mr. Republican, in other words.
Utah Republicans put Bennett third in the final round, Saturday (Salt Lake Tribune story). Mike Lee and Tim Bridgewater face off in the primary election. Bennett is out. Bennett was “too liberal.” Bennett was “too Washington.” Bennett was viewed as not tough enough on government spending.
U.S. Sen. Robert F. Bennett and Utah constituent - campaign photo
What can one say about such an event?
Utah Republicans have a long history of nominating cranks and crackpots, and sometimes they get elected. Rarely does the story turn out happily for the state, or the party, though.
Douglas Stringfellow turned out to have made up the stories about his World War II bravery behind enemy lines, and lost his bid for re-election. Enid Greene’s husband was the one with the imaginary biography, but the damage from the revelations ended her career in Congress. Utah Republicans narrowly renominated Sen. Arthur V. Watkins, many Republicans refused to support him and bolted the party for that race, because they disapproved of Watkins’ having chaired the committee that recommended the censure of Sen. Joseph McCarthy. [It appears McCarthy’s history rewriting team got to Sen. Watkins’ biography at Wikipedia. Troubling.] Because of the split, Democrat Frank E. Moss won the seat and held it for three terms.
Lee clerked for Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, but based his Utah campaign on a claim the U.S. government is acting unconstitutionally. Bridgewater lifted himself out of his trailer park beginnings to be a consultant on “emerging markets,” and a sometimes education-advisor to Utah Gov. John Huntsman (now U.S. ambassador to China).
What’s that ticking I hear? Do you smell something burning, like a fuse?
Is there a warning siren going off somewhere? 2010 is already a bizarre election year.
_____________
Update, May 9: A source informs me that Mike Lee is Rex Lee’s son — Rex Lee was the founding Dean of the Law School at Brigham Young University, past Solicitor General, and Assistant Attorney General, in charge of the Civil Division. He served nine years as president of Brigham Young University. Rex Lee graduated first in his class at Chicago, and clerked for Justice Byron White. Justice Alito was an assistant to Rex Lee in the Solicitor General’s office, 1981-85.
Setting up the law school at Brigham Young, Rex Lee personally recruited many of the top Mormon graduates from universities around the country, intending to make the first graduating class (1976) at BYU’s law school notable, to build the school’s reputation from the start. Political organizing may run in the family.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
4 Comments | 2010 Elections, Elections, History, Political conventions, Politics, Utah | Tagged: Campaigns, Conventions, Election 2010, Elections, Politics, Republicans, Sen. Robert F. Bennett, Utah | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
May 7, 2010
Members of commitee and scientist witnesses at May 6 hearing of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. From left: Rep. Jay Inslee, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, Dr. James Hurrell, Chairman Ed Markey, Dr. Lisa Graumlich, Dr. James McCarthy, and Dr. Chris Field
Excerpt from the opening statement from Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., chairman of the U.S. House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, at a May 6 hearing:
Those who deny global warming point to past uncertainties that have been refuted. They ignore the overwhelming observational evidence that the increased levels of heat-trapping pollution are already warming the planet. Instead of trying to understand the science, they use stolen emails about analysis of tree rings in Siberia to turn an honest discussion into a Russian Tree Ring Circus. Or they manufacture a cooling trend by cherry picking a few years out of a longer record of warming temperatures.
While the deniers hope to confuse the public, the real world consequences of inaction mount. Over the weekend, killer storms blew through Tennessee, Mississippi and Kentucky. In Nashville, nearly 13 inches of rain fell in just over two days time – almost doubling the previous record that fell in the aftermath of a hurricane in 1979.
These storms follow the wettest March on record in Boston. Two 50-year storms occurred within 2 weeks of each other. The National Guard was mobilized. Hundreds of people were evacuated from their homes. The region suffered millions of dollars in damages.
No single rainstorm can be attributed to climate change. Nor can a snowstorm disprove its existence. But the underlying science and the observed trends do point to more extreme weather events, especially heavy precipitation events because a warmer atmosphere can hold more moisture.
Extreme rainfall is just one of the consequences of the carbon pollution we are releasing into the air. Our witnesses today will explain how science has revealed this unseen pollution for what it is and discuss the very real consequences of its continuing accumulation in the atmosphere.
As we approach summer, our clean energy debate needs to acknowledge what many would like to deny. Our dependence on oil carries with it national security, economic and environmental risks. As gas prices rise and the oil slick spreads, perhaps we will finally acknowledge that we cannot drill our way to independence. We have less than 3 percent of proven oil reserves. Perhaps we can also acknowledge the basic facts that have been known for decades—increasing carbon pollution in the atmosphere is warming the planet and that the only way to put a halt to such warming is to move to clean energy solutions.
Tell the anti-warmists to refute this:
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
4 Comments | Climate change, climate_change, Global warming, Green Politics, History, Politics, Science | Tagged: Chris Field, Christopher Monckton, Climate change, Global warming, Green Politics, History, House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, James Hurrell, James McCarthy, Lisa Graumlich, Politics, Rep. Edward J. Markey, Science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
May 7, 2010
Stupid is as stupid does.
Climate denialists trumpeted a hearing scheduled for Thursday before a select committee of the U.S. House of Representatives at which the madcap, veracity-challenged Christopher Monckton will carry the banner for denialism:
Also testifying to the panel will be another Briton, Lord Christopher Monckton, a hereditary peer in the House of Lords and prominent critic of the scientific consensus supporting anthropogenic climate change.
Of course, Monckton is not a hereditary peer of the House of Lords. He has a peerage, but in Britain, they won’t let him near the levers of government. No one has a hereditary peerage any more, and Monckton has never sat in Lords or Commons.
If Monckton can lie about stuff like that, what won’t he lie about? If the denialists can be suckered so easily, what makes anyone think they are skeptics, and not gullibles? Bogus history, voodoo history, and voodoo science from the Republican end of the Select Committee. Astonishing.
At the hearing a letter from 250 scientists, members of the National Academy of Sciences, called on Congress to act wisely and soon to fight human-caused global warming.
Incredibly, Monckton was the sole witness from the Republican side. Remember the title of Chris Mooney’s book, The Republican War on Science? It’s still a valid title, it appears.
Monckton squirms among the scientists: From left, Dr. James Hurrell, Dr. James McCarthy, Lord Christopher Monckton, Dr. Chris Field, Dr. Lisa Graumlich; photo from the Select Committee
The hearing was before the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, chaired by Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass.
Written statements from the May 6 hearing:
Statements are in .pdf format.
- OPENING STATEMENT: Chairman Edward J. Markey
- Dr. Lisa Graumlich, Director, School of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Arizona, and member of the “Oxburgh Inquiry” panel
- Dr. Chris Field, Director, Department of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution of Washington, and co-chair of “Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability” portion of new IPCC report due in 2014
- Dr. James McCarthy, Professor of Biological Oceanography, Harvard University, past President and Chair of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, co-chair of “Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability” portion of IPCC report published in 2001
- Dr. James Hurrell, Senior Scientist, National Center for Atmospheric Research, contributor to IPCC reports
- Lord Christopher Monckton, Chief Policy Adviser, Science and Public Policy Institute
The hearing got precious little press, but it’s interesting to see the blogs that lead the denialism charge try to ignore most of the hearing.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
13 Comments | Bogus history, Climate change, climate_change, Global warming, Green Politics, History, Politics, U.S. House of Representatives, Voodoo history, Voodoo science | Tagged: Bogus history, Chris Field, Christopher Monckton, Climate change, Climate Science, denialism, Global warming, Green Politics, James Hurrell, James McCarthy, Lisa Graumlich, Oxburgh Inquiry, Politics, Rep. Edward J. Markey, Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, Voodoo history, Voodoo science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
May 1, 2010
Diane Ravitch in Dallas, April 28, 2010 – Copyright 2010 Ed Darrell (you may use freely, with attribution)
Bill McKenzie, editorial board member and writer for the Dallas Morning News, wrote briefly about the rekindled controversy over standards a year ago — but did he listen to Diane Ravitch on Wednesday night?
He should have.
I first met Ravitch a couple of decades ago when I worked for Checker Finn at the Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Ted Bell’s idea of a commission to look at education quality, and it’s 1983 report, saved the Reagan administration and assured Reagan’s reelection in 1984. She was one of the most prodigious and serious thinkers behind education reform efforts, then a close friend of Finn (who was Assistant Secretary of Education for Research) — a position that Ravitch herself held in the administration of George H. W. Bush.
Ravitch now criticizes the end result of all that turmoil and hard work, the No Child Left Behind Act, and the way it has distorted education to keep us in the crisis we were warned of in 1983. Then, the “rising tide of mediocrity” came in part because we didn’t have a good way to compare student achievement, state to state. Today, the mediocrity is driven by the tests that resulted from legislative efforts to solve the problem.
Conditions in education in America have changed. We still have a crisis after 27 years of education reform (how long do we have a crisis before it becomes the norm), but for the first time, Ravitch said, “There is a real question about whether public education will survive.” The past consensus on the value of public education and need for public schools, as I would put it, now is challenged by people who want to kill it.
“The new issue today: Will we have a public education system bound by law to accept all children.”
Ironic, no? The No Child Left Behind Act has instead created a system where many children could be forced to the rear.
I took an evening in the middle of a week of TAKS testing — the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills. With ninth through twelfth grades, we had four days of testing which essentially requires the shutdown of the education for the week (we had Monday to review for the test). It was a week to reflect on just how far we have strayed from the good intentions of public education advocates who pushed the Excellence in Education Commission’s report in 1983.
Ravitch spoke for over an hour. I’ll have more to report as I get caught up, after a month of meetings, test prep, testing, and little sleep.
Background, more:
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
8 Comments | Education, Education assessment, Education quality, Education reform, History, Politics, Teacher Pay, Teachers, Teaching, Testing | Tagged: Education, Education assessment, Education reform, Politics, Public education, Teachers, Teaching, Testing | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
April 27, 2010
Rupert Murdoch’s purchase of the Wall Street Journal provoked groans in 2007, but especially among those of us who had dealt with the news teams of the paper over the previous couple of decades.
For good reason, we now know. An opposite-editorial page article in the European edition shows why.
Richard Tren and Donald Roberts, two anti-environmentalist, anti-science lobbyists, wrote a slam at scientists, environmentalists, malaria fighters and the UN, making false claims that these people somehow botched the handling of DDT and allowed a lot of children to die. Tren, Roberts and the Wall Street Journal should be happy to know that their targeting essentially public figures, probably protects them from libel suits.
Most seriously, the article just gets the facts wrong. Facts of science and history — easily checked — are simply stated erroneously. Sometimes the statements are so greatly at odds with the facts, one might wonder if there was malignant intent to skew history and science.
This is journalistic and newspaper malpractice. Any national journal, like the WSJ, should have fact checkers to check out at least the basic claims of op-ed writers. Did Murdock fire them all? How can anyone trust any opinion expressed at the Journal when these guys get away with a yahoo-worthy, fact-challenged piece like this one?
Tren and Roberts make astounding errors of time and place, attributing to DDT magical powers to cross space and time. What are they thinking? Here are some of the errors the Journals fact checkers should have caught — did Murdoch fire all the fact checkers?
- Beating malaria is not a question of having scientific know how. Curing a disease in humans requires medical delivery systems that can diagnose and treat the disease. DDT does nothing on those scores. Beating malaria is a question of will and consistency, political will to create the human institutions to do the job. DDT can’t help there.
- DDT wasn’t the tool used to eradicate malaria from the U.S. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control — an agency set up specifically to fight diseases like malaria — says malaria was effectively eradicated from the U.S. in 1939. DDT’s pesticide capabilities were discovered in mid-1939, but DDT was not available to fight malaria, for civilians, for another seven years. DDT does not time travel.
- DDT doesn’t have a great track record beating malaria, anywhere. Among nations that have beaten malaria, including the U.S., the chief tools used were other than pesticides. Among nations where DDT is still used, malaria is endemic. DDT helped, but there is no place on Earth that beat malaria solely by spraying to kill mosquitoes. Any malaria fighter will tell you that more must be done, especially in improving medical care, and in creating barriers to keep mosquitoes from biting.
- Beating malaria in the U.S. involved draining breeding areas, screening windows to stop mosquitoes from entering homes, and boosting medical care and public health efforts. These methods are the only methods that have worked, over time, to defeat malaria. Pesticides can help in a well-managed malaria eradication campaign, but no campaign based on spraying pesticides has ever done more than provide a temporary respite against malaria.
- DDT is not a magic bullet against malaria. Nations that have used DDT continuously and constantly since 1946, like Mexico, and almost like South Africa, have the same malaria problems other nations have. Nations that have banned DDT have no malaria.
- DDT has never been banned across most of the planet. Even under the pesticide treaty that specifically targets DDT-classes of pesticides for phase out, there is a special exception for DDT. DDT was manufactured in the U.S. long after it was banned for agricultural use, and it is manufactured today in India and China. It is freely available to any government who wishes to use it.
- People in malaria-prone areas are not stupid. Tren and Roberts expect you to believe that people in malaria-prone nations are too stupid to buy cheap DDT and use it to save their children, but instead require people like Tren and Roberts to tell them what to do. That’s a pretty foul argument on its face.
- DDT is a dangerous poison, uncontrollable in the wild. Tren and Roberts suggest that DDT is relatively harmless, and that people were foolish to be concerned about it. They ignore the two federal trials that established DDT was harmful, and the court orders under which EPA (dragging its feet) compiled a record of DDT’s destructive potential thousands of pages long. They ignore the massive fishkills in Texas and Oklahoma, they ignore the astounding damage to reproduction of birds, and the bioaccumulation quality of the stuff, which means that all living things accumulate larger doses as DDT rises through the trophic levels of the food chain. Predatory birds in American estuaries got doses of DDT multiplied millions of times over what was applied to be toxic to the smallest organisms.
DDT was banned in the U.S. because it destroys entire ecosystems. The U.S. ban prohibited its use on agriculture crops, but allowed use to fight malaria or other diseases, or for other emergencies. Under these emergency rules, DDT was used to fight the tussock moth infestation in western U.S. forests in the 1970s.
- Again, DDT’s ban in the U.S. was not based on a threat to human health. DDT was banned because it destroys natural ecosystems. So any claim that human health effects are not large, misses the point. However, we should not forget that DDT is a known carcinogen to mammals (humans are mammals). DDT is listed as a “probable human carcinogen” by the American Cancer Society and every other cancer-fighting agency on Earth. Why didn’t the Journal’s fact checkers bother to call their local cancer society? DDT is implicated as a threat to human health, as a poison, as a carcinogen, and as an endocrine disruptor. Continued research since 1972 has only confirmed that DDT poses unknown, but most likely significant threats to human health. No study has ever been done that found DDT to be safe to humans.
- Use of DDT — or rather, overuse of DDT — frequently has led to more malaria. DDT forces rapid evolution of mosquitoes. They evolve defenses to the stuff, so that future generations are resistant or even totally immune to DDT. Increasing DDT use often leads to an increase in malaria.
- Slandering the World Health Organization (WHO), Rachel Carson, the thousands of physicians in Africa and Asia who fight malaria, or environmentalists who have exposed the dangers of DDT, does nothing to help save anyone from malaria.
Tren and Roberts have a new book out, a history of DDT. I suspect that much of the good they have to say about DDT is true and accurate. Their distortions of history, and their refusal to look at the mountain of science evidence that warns of DDT’s dangers is all the more puzzling.
No world class journal should allow such an ill-researched piece to appear, even as an opinion. Somebody should have done some fact checking, and made those corrections before the piece hit publication.
Full text of the WSJ piece below the fold.
Read the rest of this entry »
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
7 Comments | Accuracy, Africa, DDT, Disease, History, Hoaxes, Political Smear, Politics, Public health, Rachel Carson, Voodoo history, Voodoo science | Tagged: Africa, DDT, Disease, History, Hoaxes, Malaria, Political Smear, Politics, Public health, Science, Voodoo history, Voodoo science, World Health Organization | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
April 20, 2010
From NOAA, released April 15, 2010
Global warming slowed or stopped? Let’s look at the facts:
April 15, 2010
The world’s combined global land and ocean surface temperature made last month the warmest March on record, according to NOAA. Taken separately, average ocean temperatures were the warmest for any March and the global land surface was the fourth warmest for any March on record. Additionally, the planet has seen the fourth warmest January – March period on record.
NOAA’s (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration) report points out — again — that local weather is not world climate:
- The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for March 2010 was the warmest on record at 56.3°F (13.5°C), which is 1.39°F (0.77°C) above the 20th century average of 54.9°F (12.7°C).
- The worldwide ocean surface temperature was the highest for any March on record –1.01°F (0.56°C) above the 20th century average of 60.7°F (15.9°C).
- Separately, the global land surface temperature was 2.45°F (1.36°C) above the 20th century average of 40.8 °F (5.0°C) — the fourth warmest on record. Warmer-than-normal conditions dominated the globe, especially in northern Africa, South Asia and Canada. Cooler-than-normal regions included Mongolia and eastern Russia, northern and western Europe, Mexico, northern Australia, western Alaska and the southeastern United State
News continues to roll in about the investigations of the stealing of e-mails from England’s Hadley Climate Research Unit (CRU), and the news is that the scientists who documented global warming were accurate and honest. Alas, such reports do not slow the anti-science denialist mob provocateurs.
So, we have assurance that the scientists are honest and hardworking. Their hard work shows the planet warming, and the most likely proximate cause of the warming is human-caused effluents.
Did your newspaper cover the story? How will denialists react? Will anyone really notice?
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
3 Comments | Cost of Green, Green Politics, Hoaxes, Politics | Tagged: Climate change, Cost of Green, denialism, Global warming, Green Politics, NOAA, Science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
April 17, 2010
Pat Oliphant on health care legislation as Obama's Waterloo, March 23, 2010 - Washington Post
How’s that “make health care Obama’s Waterloo” working out for you, Sen. Demint?
Didn’t expect Obama to be Wellington at Waterloo, eh?
See Steve Benson’s take, below the fold.
Read the rest of this entry »
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
33 Comments | Cartoons, Health care, History, Political cartoons, Politics, Santayana's ghost | Tagged: Cartoons, Health Care Reform, History, Pat Oliphant, Political cartoons, Politics, Santayana's ghost, Steve Benson, Waterloo | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
April 17, 2010
When he interned for our office, he was such a clean-cut, return-missionary sort of guy. Steve Benson’s cartoons continually push the envelope for what is acceptable in an editorial cartoon, not exactly what I had come to expect from his early work with conservatives. A welcome surprise.
This one was probably quite controversial in Phoenix, don’t you think?
Steve Benson in the Arizona Republic, on the Affordable Care Act and President Obama, April 2, 2010
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
22 Comments | Barack Obama, Cartoons, Health care, Political cartoons, Politics | Tagged: Arizona Republic, Cartoons, Health Care Reform, Obama, Political cartoons, Politics, Steve Benson | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
April 16, 2010
Wing nuts, from Fastener Superstore.com
What did you expect to see? More caucasian wingnuts?
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Leave a Comment » | Humor, Politics | Tagged: Humor, Politics | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
April 11, 2010
Pulitzer Prize-winner Tom Toles in the Washington Post, March 19, 2010
It’s pretty embarrassing when the State Board of Education’s actions leave Texas open to jokes about whether Texans remember the Alamo. Remembering the Alamo is as much a Texas monument or icon as anything else — maybe moreso.
Tom Toles demonstrates why Texas should be embarrassed by the Texas State Board of Education’s work on social studies standards.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
1 Comment | Cartoons, Education, Education assessment, History, Political cartoons, Politics, State school boards, TAKS, TEKS, Texas | Tagged: Cartoons, Education, History, Political cartoons, Politics, Social Studies, state board of education, Texas, Tom Toles | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
April 10, 2010
Heartland Institute, a right-wing political “think tank,” is sponsoring another conference of crank science about and crank scientists on global warming, May 16 to 18 in Chicago.
“Another?” Yeah, this is the fourth one.
The first one featured pure crankery, often, from Christopher Monckton and Steven Milloy, two people who have made careers out of pissing in the soup of science. The second conference pretended warming isn’t happening (the title of the conference was). The theme of the third conference is “Reconsidering the Science and the Economics,” but you’d have to be complete fool to think the Heartland Institute would allow a reconsideration of their misplaced sniping at science and bizarre claims that we cannot afford a healthy planet (we can’t afford an unhealthy planet!).
Monckton and Milloy, you recall, are two of the people promoting the shameful and erroneous attacks on Rachel Carson. Monckton stepped up the insanity, blaming Jackie Kennedy for malaria in Africa.
Milloy’s been left out of this one, but most of the grand cranks of climate science denial will be there — Soon, McIntyre, Monckton, and our friend Anthony Watts, who thinks talk of sunshine in policy issues is “hate speech” (Watts does not appear to be familiar with the ethics rules of journalism and political reporting.) Former Sen. George Allen will be there to lend his expertise on energy issues, as director of the Houston-based Institute for Energy Research. Fred Singer and Ian Plimer are scheduled. It’s a dense program.
Watts’s topic will be “Is the U.S. Surface Temperature Record Reliable?” It should be a remarkable presentation.
If the surface temperature record isn’t reliable, what’s he doing using it every day in his weather forecasts? If it is reliable, what’s he doing attacking scientists for using it, and where does he propose to get better, more reliable data?
You can rely on this: There will be lots of press releases, but precious little science that has gone through any peer review process to provide reliability.
In fact, now would be a great time to brush up on Jeremy Bernstein’s methods for telling crank science from genius, and Bob Parks’s “Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Science.”
I’d love to have the concession to sell the “Bogus Science Bingo” cards at the meeting.
Chicago in May can be delightful. Cooler days do not get so cool. Spring flowers still erupt. Warmer days will invite outdoor dining downtown and at Chicago’s great neighborhood restaurants.
But these guys will stay indoors and carp about science, about imagined conspiracies to keep their words of wisdom out of publication. Most of them will have some corporate or PAC group paying their way, but a few people will pay to see this parade of voodoo science. They will be had by all.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Leave a Comment » | Bogus history, Climate change, climate_change, Green Politics, History, Hoaxes, Politics, Voodoo science | Tagged: Climate change, Global warming, Hoaxes, Voodoo science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
March 31, 2010
Nick Anderson of the Houston Chronicle on Texas SBOE social studies standards, in 2009
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
2 Comments | Accuracy, Cartoons, Economics, Education, Education quality, History, Political cartoons, Politics, Separation of church and state, Social Studies, State school boards, TEKS, Texas | Tagged: Accuracy, Cartoons, Education, education standards, History, Houston Chronicle, Nick Anderson, Political cartoons, Politics, Social Studies, state board of education, Texas | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Millard Fillmore's Bathtub 