Banality and bigotry

Well, well, well. Richard Dawkins declared himself a “cultural Christian” on Easter, which is no surprise and no big deal. He has been saying how much he likes Christmas and church bells for years, so this is absolutely nothing new. I could say that I’m a “cultural Christian,” too, being brought up in a functionally Christian country with Christian traditions and a Christian history, but I’m defined more by my atheism, and my rejection of many of those beliefs. It’s meaningless and trivial to say that we have all been shaped by our environment…although, of course, many Christian believers think that this is a huge deal and are acting as if Dawkins has renounced his unbelief.

He has not. What he then goes on to do, though, is to declare his bigotry, and that is what I find disturbing.

He likes hymns and cathedrals and parish churches — fine, uncontroversial, kind of boring, actually. But then he resents the idea that people would celebrate Ramadan instead of Christmas. Why? They both seem like nice holidays, that some people follow a different set of customs shouldn’t be a problem. Then he goes on to say that Christianity is “a fundamentally decent religion, in a way that Islam is not.”

How so? Because Islam is hostile to women and gays. He goes on to talk about how the Koran has a low regard for women.

Jesus. It’s true, but has this “cultural Christian” read the Bible? I don’t see any difference. The interviewer tries to bring up the record of actual practicing Christians, and he dismisses that as only those weird American protestants, as if jolly old England has no gay baiting, no murders of young women, and as if JK Rowling were just an open-minded, beneficent patron of the arts. Many American Christians are virulent homophobes who treat women as chattel, but his equally nasty culturally English Christianity has people and organizations that are just as awful.

70% of women teachers in the UK face misogyny. The British empire left a legacy of homophobia. The UK is so transphobic that some people are fleeing. Cultural Christianity does not seem to have made Great Britain a kinder, gentler place, but Dawkins must have some particularly rosy glasses that he wears at home, and takes off when he looks at any other country.

Dawkins has come out as sympathetic to Christianity, but only because it justifies his bigotry. At least he’s being open and honest about both biases.

Turn off all your appliances, devices, and lights!

The other day, I told you that Republicans were trying to legislate against chemtrails in 6 states. I regret to inform you that another state has joined the club, and it’s Minnesota.

Republicans in the Legislature, including Senate assistant minority leader Justin Eichorn, R-Grand Rapids, have introduced legislation (HF4687/SF4630) inspired by the “chemtrails” conspiracy theory.

The bill contains a mishmash of conspiratorial pseudoscience, including references to made-up phenomena like “xenobiotic electromagnetism and fields,” with just enough parroting of actual science to give it a veneer of credibility.

It requires county sheriffs to investigate citizen complaints of “polluting atmospheric activity,” and grants the governor the authority to call up the National Guard and ground any aircraft suspected of spreading pollutants.

To professionals who study and understand atmospheric science, the legislation bears all the hallmarks of the “chemtrails” conspiracy theory, which posits that airplane exhaust is deliberately laced with harmful chemicals for various nefarious purposes, including forced sterilization and mind control.

“Because the text of this bill focuses so much on electromagnetic radiation, you can tell that it is coming from the community of people concerned with chemtrails,” said Holly Buck, who studies geoengineering at the University at Buffalo in New York.

The proposed law says that if anyone alleges that “weather-engineering or other atmospheric experimentation that involves releasing xenobiotic agents or producing electromagnetic radiation” is going on, a sheriff must be dispatched to shut it down. They’ve got a list of electromagnetic criteria that defines unlawful levels that sounds scientific, but has little connection to reality.

(1) radio frequency or microwave radiation, including maser, of signal strength metered at the reported, publicly accessible location in excess of negative 85 dBm for any frequency or channel band specified by a transmitting entity’s FCC transmission license;
(2) extreme-low-frequency alternating current electric fields in excess of 1 volt per 25 meters;
(3) magnetic fields in excess of one milligauss;
(4) ionizing radiation in excess of 0.02 millisievert per hour;
(5) laser or other light with harmful effects; or
(6) any vibration, noise, laser, sonic weapon, or other physical agent exceeding building or biology guidelines.

Uh-oh. Light bulbs put out about 5V/M — we’re already exceeding the legal limit. Watching Fox News on your color TV is criminal, because that’s about 60V/M. If you’re concerned about magnetic fields, one of the deadliest tools in your home is the hairdryer, which generates about 300 milligauss…and you stick that right up next to your brain!

But yeah, that airplane at 20,000 feet that is surrounded by a 1 milligauss magnetic field must be grounded.

ACAB, now and forever

I’m always so critical of the police…maybe I should give the Central Marin Police Authority an opportunity to express their side of the story first, to be fair.

Police Chief Michael Norton declined an opportunity to be interviewed, but in an email said that his department “regrets that Bruce Frankel has elected to pursue litigation against us for an alleged improper emergency medical response to him.”

Norton added that his department “will vigorously defend itself against this meritless and factually inaccurate litigation. Unfortunately, this individual has decided to first litigate his case in the media rather than in court, where we are confident the action of our officers will be vindicated.”

Oh, dear…they are being unjustly accused, they say. Of what, you might wonder.

Bruce Frankel’s wife called for emergency help because he was having a grand mal epileptic seizure, expecting EMTs to come to the rescue. He was incoherent and flailing about. The police arrived instead (uh-oh!), repeatedly told the unresponsive man that they were there to help, and help him they did: by handcuffing him and tasing him. They charged him with resisting arrest.

I guess the police considered that a proper emergency medical response.

The developmental origins of adult diseases

I weighed 7 pounds, 7 ounces when I was born on Saturday, 9 March 1957, at 7:07 in the morning. I know this because all the 7s were memorable, but mainly because this is what doctors and nurses do: they document everything.

You know this. Everytime we visit a doctor, they write down our weight, our height, our blood pressure, every parameter they can squeeze out of us. I can go online right now and read the doctor’s notes on every medical visit I’ve made in the last 20-some years — every prescription, every measurement, all of my complaints, every recommendation, every vaccination…it’s all there. Doctors are obsessive record keepers. There is so much medical data stored away that I sometimes wonder how anyone can extract useful information from it.

But they have! One attempt that has had significant influence was to correlate birth weight data in infants with their adult history of cardiovascular disease. Surprise, your weight on the day you were born is associated with your blood pressure, 60 years later (in a broad statistical sense, of course — this is a population-level correlation.) This led David Barker to make the specific hypothesis that “poor nutrition, health and development among girls and young women is the origin of high death rates from cardiovascular disease in the next generation.” This idea has since been broadened to form the developmental origin of adult disease hypothesis, that all kinds of medical phenomena have their origns in fetal development, and in the environmental effects that have influenced that development.

Credit where credit is due, the original exploration of the hypothesis was thanks to careful records kept by one midwife, Margaret Burnside, who assisted in the birth of over 15,000 babies in Hertfordshire between 1911 and 1930, and also the records of over 2000 births at Jessop Hospital in Sheffield between 1907 and 1924. They then compared birth records with death certificates in the 1950s-1990s to extract the first hints of associations.*

There’s a huge industry of papers being turned out now that look at correlations between birth weight and adult medical conditions. We’re also seeing more complex connections between disease and growth rate in the first year.

Some of them are very well established associations with low birth weight, like hypertension, coronary artery disease, non-insulin dependent diabetes, stroke, dislipidaemia, elevated clotting factors, and impaired neurodevelopment. Other ‘problems’ have been associated with low birth weight in a small number of studies — there really are amazing numbers of papers where researchers mine the medical data for connections, some of them possibly spurious. So small babies may be more likely to develop issues with chronic lung disease, depression, schizophrenia, and general behavioral problems. They may have reduced uterine and ovarian size and precocious pubarche. They might be more prone to breast and testicular cancer.

Surprisingly, they may also marry later, if at all, be left-handed, and have denser fingerprint whorls. You can find it all in the scientific literature.

If you are thinking that you were a plump, fat baby, so you have nothing to worry about, think again. There are correlations between large birth weight and breast cancer (everything seems to cause breast cancer,) prostate cancer, childhood leukemia, and polycystic ovary disease.

This week in my eco devo course, we talked about this hypothesis, and I also handed out a bunch of papers, a different one for each student (there are so many papers in this field!), and today we’re going to have the students assess the literature. It should be fun! The goal is to get a feel for how strong or how valid the various correlations actually are. We’ve also discussed the Dutch famine data. The Nazis starved much of Holland, including the major cities of Rotterdam, Amsterdam, and Leiden, for 7 months in 1945, until the country was liberated by the Allies.

Wasn’t that nice of Nazis to do a massive experiment on a whole nation of 9 million people for us? They let women in each trimester of their pregnancy subsist on 580 calories/day, and then went away and let us analyze the effects. Maternal malnutrition in the third trimester turns out to be bad for babies, who knew? Anyway, the subtext for this week, as it should be for every week, is that Nazis are bad***.

The bigger message is, of course, that development matters and has lifelong consequences, and good, responsible governments provide adequate nutrition to pregnant women and children.

*All these records were handwritten on pieces of paper! The effort to transcribe everything and extract the information in a computational form must have been daunting.**

**My daughter is currently involved in a research project to use natural language processing to synthesize information stored in modern medical records at UW Madison Department of Medicine. That’s useful for a lot of reasons, including drilling down through years of impenetrable treatment notes.

***I hope that overtly political message doesn’t get me in trouble with the university administration.

Are my lungs really that garish?

A paper in the journal Pharmaceutics, Inhaled Medicines for Targeting Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer by Arwa Omar Al Khatib, Mohamed El-Tanani, and Hisham Al-Obaidi, might be good science, but it’s so far outside my field that I’m not equipped to judge. There are little things that I would have taken a red pen to — the first sentence of the abstract starts, “Throughout the years…” which is vague and clumsy and useless, but OK, we can’t expect literary excellence in everything some nerd writes — which put me on edge, but nothing to obviously indict it as a poor bit of work. That is, until I saw the figure.

Figure 1. Examples of current drug delivery strategies for the treatment of NSCLC.

Wow. What a glorious splortch of utterly useless visual noise. Is the whole paper an equivalent pile of machine-processed nonsense?

I really am wondering what the authors were thinking. Why would you insert a vivid technicolor example of obviously meaningless garbage into the middle of your work? Because you can? It really calls into question the validity of the text, and it makes the journal look like a rinky-tink circus sideshow. Where were the reviewers? The editors? Non small cell lung cancer is a serious concern — imagine a patient researching their disease, and seeing that doctors see their organs as exploding balls of orange and blue, like the contents of a SF movie poster.

It’s the insincerity, Joe

In case you’re wondering why Joe Biden’s poll numbers aren’t the best, consider the fact that it’s becoming increasingly hard to believe him. For instance, here’s his official statement on 2 April.

I am outraged and heartbroken by the deaths of seven humanitarian workers from World Central Kitchen, including one American, in Gaza yesterday. They were providing food to hungry civilians in the middle of a war. They were brave and selfless. Their deaths are a tragedy.

Outraged. Heartbroken. Tragedy. That’s what he needs to say.

But does he mean it? Here’s a headline from the next day.

U.S. approved more bombs to Israel on day of World Central Kitchen strikes
The Biden administration signed off on thousands more bombs to Israel despite global condemnation of the IDF’s killing of seven World Central Kitchen employees

You can only rely so much on the fact that your political opponent is a corrupt, incompetent boob to win an election. Biden might win anyway, but think of the legacy he’s leaving the Democratic party…what will the Democrats do if the Republicans nominate a war-mongering, racist scumbag in the future, who isn’t quite as deplorable as Trump? I’m not exactly seeing the Democrats as a benign alternative.

Can’t he even look at the polls and see that his constituents despise the genocide we’re enabling?

You must remember this: our opponents aren’t particularly bright

If you’ve never heard of Ian Miles Cheong, count yourself lucky: he’s nothing but an obsessed right-winger spewing noise non-stop onto social media. It’s still sort of satisfying to see that he’s actually rather dull.

Excuse me, Apple, why is the calculator wrong?
When you key in 50 + 50 and hit the equals key, it’ll give you 100. Multiply that by 2 and you get 200. That’s correct.
But type in 50 + 50 * 2 and it spits out 150. What gives?

It’s not Apple. Try it on any calculator. There are rules about the order of operations, where multiplication is done before addition.

I think I learned that in 5th or 6th grade, or thereabouts.

Betelgeuse, Betelgeuse, Betelgeuse

Something funny is going on 650 light years away…or should I use the past tense? Something funny was going on 650 years ago. The star Betelgeuse is/was acting up, dimming and then brightening (well, it’s always been flickering a bit, but this was a greater reduction in brightness than usual.) And now some people are saying it’s about to go supernova! There is a real-time deathwatch on YouTube. “LIVE Betelgeuse Supernova Explosion Is Finally HAPPENING NOW!” it says.

That’s a bit much, and I hope no one is staring at a YouTube page hoping to catch the instant when a rare cosmic event happens. You might be waiting a lifetime. Or maybe seeing it in the next few minutes, but not likely.

Here’s a less sensationalistic perspective.

“Our best models indicate that Betelgeuse is in the stage when it’s burning helium to carbon and oxygen in its core,” Morgan MacLeod, a postdoctoral fellow in theoretical astrophysics at Harvard University and lead author of a recent study about Betelgeuse’s Great Dimming, told Space.com. “That means it’s still tens of thousands or maybe a hundred thousand years from exploding, if those models are correct.”

Awww, but it sounds like it will be spectacular when we do get the Giant Space Kablooiee, and not spectacularly dangerous, the best kind of spectacular there is.

“When it happens, the star will become as bright as the full moon, except that it will be concentrated in a single point,” Montargès said. “For maybe two months, it will be so bright that if you shut down all the lights in a city and have no clouds, you would be able to read a book in the light of the supernova. It will be so bright that it will be visible in the daylight, too. There will be another star shining in the sky during the day.”

Fortunately, although close enough to provide such a spectacle, Betelgeuse is too far away from Earth for its explosion to be dangerous to us. Astronomers think that a giant star would have to blow up within 160 light-years from our planet for us to feel the explosion’s effect, according to EarthSky.

Don’t get your hopes up, though. I do wonder if that guy running the live video feed is prepared to keep it going for 10,000 years. How can you be interested in astronomy and not be aware of the scale of the events you’re interested in?

Oh no! Please don’t send Chaya Raichik on tour!

I’m quivering in my boots at the thought of Raichik traveling around the country, campaigning for Republican politicians. The Democrats will wither under her devastating arguments! When she unlimbers her definitions for “woke” and “DEI” and all those things near and dear to us “Rainbow Bullies,” we’ll be left in tears.

Of laughter. The college students at this meeting are amused, anyway.

Do I need to tell everyone…do not trust the internet?

You’d think if there were anything AI could get right, it would be science and coding. It’s just code itself, right? Although I guess that’s a bit like expecting humans to all be master barbecue chefs because they’re made of meat.

Unfortunately, AI is really good at confabulation — they’re just engines for making stuff up. And that leads to problems like this:

Several big businesses have published source code that incorporates a software package previously hallucinated by generative AI.

Not only that but someone, having spotted this reoccurring hallucination, had turned that made-up dependency into a real one, which was subsequently downloaded and installed thousands of times by developers as a result of the AI’s bad advice, we’ve learned. If the package was laced with actual malware, rather than being a benign test, the results could have been disastrous.

Wait, programmers are asking software to write their code for them? My programming days are long behind me, in a time when you didn’t have many online sources with complete code segments written for us, so you couldn’t be that lazy. We also had to write our code in a blizzard, while hiking uphill.

There’s another problem: AIs are getting their information from publicly available texts written by humans on the internet, and those are the people you should never trust. Here’s a simple question someone asked: how many years did it take to form a layer of sediment that I see in cliffs? It’s an awkward sort of question of the kind a naive layman might ask, but the computer bravely tried to find an answer.

No, the “traditional view of sedimentary layers” is not being challenged. It is not being replaced by a “biblical view.” You can hardly blame the software for being stupid, though, because look at its sources: the Institute for Creation Research and Answers in Genesis. Bullshit in, bullshit out.