Police arrest protester who told children that Santa wasn’t real

Police in Texas say they arrested a 31-year-old protester who told children that Santa Claus was not real.

Aaron Urbanski was arrested for trespass after officers were called to a church in Cleburne, North Texas, which was hosting breakfast with Father Christmas.

Heather Johnson, a mother of four young children, said two men confronted her as she made her way into the church with her family and said, “Do you let your kids believe in a fake Santa or do they know who Jesus is?”

Share

Hamas Celebrates After Pregnant Woman Critically Injured When Terrorists Open Fire In Israel

On Sunday, seven Israelis were wounded in a drive-by shooting near the town of Ofra, approximately 13 miles north of Jerusalem.

One of the critically wounded is a 21-year-old pregnant female. Following the violent attack, the woman was taken to Shaare Zedek Hospital, where doctors successfully delivered her baby, which is currently in a ward for premature infants.

Share

South Africa ‘sets date for white farmers land grab’ months after announcing ‘test case’ to see if ‘expropriation without compensation’ is legal

White South Africans could be forced to give up their own homes from next year as the nation’s government steamrolls through plans for land expropriation over claims ‘Africa’s original sin’ must be reversed.

Land is a huge issue in South Africa where racial inequality remains entrenched more than two decades after the end of apartheid when millions of the black majority were dispossessed of their land by a white minority.

The National Assembly agreed to the establishment of a committee that will draft an amendment to section 25 of the Constitution – a law which will allow the government to take homes from the people – and refuse to pay them compensation.

As many in the nation see the move as retribution for the ‘original sin’ when decades ago black people were driven off their land, it is believed white farmers will be driven from their homes immediately.

Share

Why you don’t care about the Oscars

Because they don’t care about you. From Derek Hunter at Townhall:

As the ratings have shown, fewer and fewer people each year watch them. This is due, in part, to the fact that the Oscars hold so many of us in contempt – political lectures and condescension are more common in acceptance speeches than thanking a manager.

They also nominate movies based on their left-wing messaging more than their audience appeal. No one wants to sit through a 4-hour lecture celebrating movies about how oppressive, racist, unfair, unjust, nasty, etc., the country is only to be subjected to a 30 second speech reinforcing the same from someone paid more for 3 weeks’ worth of playing make-believe than the average American earns in a year. More.

Reality check: The fascinating part is that showbiz people, who might actually want their industry to survive, and thrive seem locked into a treadmill. They can’t stop. It’s like SJW is stuck on only one setting.

See also: Murphy Brown remake fails, of course. Media simply aren’t what they were when Murphy Brown was big.

and

When the SJWs come for scientists, it gets ugly fast

Share

New York Magazine article claims Uber is failing

Well, at least listen. From Yves Smith:

By steamrolling local taxi operations in cities all over the world and cultivating cheerleaders in the business press and among Silicon Valley libertarians, Uber has managed to create an image of inevitability and invincibility. But the company just posted another quarter of jaw-dropping losses — this time over $1 billion, after $4.5 billion of losses in 2017. How much is hype and how much is real?

The notion that Uber, the most highly valued private company in the world, is a textbook “bezzle” — John Kenneth Galbraith’s coinage for an investment swindle where the losses have yet to be recognized — is likely to come as a surprise to its many satisfied customers. But as we’ll explain, relying on the extensive work of transportation expert Hubert Horan, Uber’s investors have been buying your satisfaction in the form of massive subsidies of services. More.

Reality check: Uber, he says, is subsidized by the fact that drivers really make only about $10/hr and have not factored in the cost of the use of their cars. Also, it’s all a physical business, not a digital business, which means dealing with down time, etc. We’ll see. But not everything can be digitized.

See also: Is a bad “AI Winter” looming? Artificial intelligence crashes and busts are historically common.

and

Who does the concept of “intellectual property” really benefit? Was traditional copyright law meant to protect algorithms that decide people’s financial fate?

Share

When the SJWs come for scientists, it gets ugly fast

Here’s what’s been happening: The social justice mob has gone all non-binary. That would be no more significant than shocking pink hair except for two things:

1. The SJWs want to impose on biologists the idea that male and female are just social constructs.

2. The biologists believe that humans are animals.

Now, if you didn’t believe that humans are animals, you could always just say: “Well, among cattle, there are bulls and there are cows – and it pays to know the difference. Among gorillas, there are great big silverbacks (males) and then there are she-gorillas. But humans, of course, can be non-binary because we aren’t animals.”

Having decided a long time ago that humans are animals, the biologists are kind of stuck. The social justice warriors are closing in, as one evolutionary biologist, Colin Wright, riskily relates:

Recently, this fear has been realized as social justice activists attempt to jump the epistemological shark by claiming that the very notion of biological sex, too, is a social construct.

Yes. And they are forcing science journals to publish articles implying that the idea has merit.

Even more recently, the most prestigious scientific journal in the world, Nature, published an editorial claiming that classifying people’s sex “on the basis of anatomy or genetics should be abandoned” and “has no basis in science” and that “the research and medical community now sees sex as more complex than male and female.” In the Nature article, the motive is stated clearly enough: acknowledging the reality of biological sex will “undermine efforts to reduce discrimination against transgender people and those who do not fall into the binary categories of male or female.” But while there is evidence for the fluidity of sex in many organisms, this is simply not the case in humans. We can acknowledge the existence of very rare cases in humans where sex is ambiguous, but this does not negate the reality that sex in humans is functionally binary. These editorials are nothing more than a form of politically motivated, scientific sophistry.

Actually, these editorials are warnings for people like Wright to conform to the nonsense or get buried:

What these articles leave out is the fact that the final result of sex development in humans are unambiguously male or female over 99.98 percent of the time. Thus, the claim that “2 sexes is overly simplistic” is misleading, because intersex conditions correspond to less than 0.02 percent of all births, and intersex people are not a third sex. Intersex is simply a catch-all category for sex ambiguity and/or a mismatch between sex genotype and phenotype, regardless of its etiology. Furthermore, the claim that “sex is a spectrum” is also misleading, as a spectrum implies a continuous distribution, and maybe even an amodal one (one in which no specific outcome is more likely than others). Biological sex in humans, however, is clear-cut over 99.98 percent of the time. More.

Reality check. At least Wright knows he is living dangerously. And in a world where there is a war on correct answers in general, we ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Here are some of the stories I’ve been covering from the SJW war on biology:

Larry Krauss? Francisco Ayala? And now Neil deGrasse Tyson? (All are pop science bigs, accused of sexual harassment.)

The perfect storm: Darwinists meet the progressive “evolution deniers” — and cringe… Double down cringe…

The Darwinians’ cowardice before SJW mobs explained in detail: They thought the mob was coming for someone else.

Is Darwinist Jerry Coyne starting to get it about SJW “science”? Ah, not a moment too soon.; Here is a perfect specimen of sp. SJW, Trollus inyerfaceus. We have certainly dealt with them. Coyne may find some in his own backyard.

Rob Sheldon: Have a little pity for scientists scared of SJWs I thought the Areo article was the most honest I have met in a long while. It is one thing to boast about courage in the faculty lounge, it is quite another in the provost’s office. I have been cursed with both experiences.

Share

Communist China’s Huawei: ‘Déjà Vu All Over Again’

…Further, he informs readers how, in 2012, the House Intelligence Committee released a “comprehensive report on Huawei and ZTE” that determined: “Inserting malicious hardware or software implants into Chinese-manufactured telecommunications components and systems headed for U.S. customers could allow Beijing to shut down or degrade critical national security systems in a time of crisis or war.”

This report’s perspicacity, Lake notes, was ironically attested to by communist China’s 2017 “National Intelligence Law and a related cybersecurity law,” which compels Chinese companies like Huawei to abet the communist dictatorship in its espionage activities—including “offensive intelligence operations,” such as “handing over access to ‘key business and personal data (which must be stored in China), proprietary codes, and other intellectual property” (per a Lawfare analysis).

Share

Mark Regnerus: How to research controversial subjects and stay employed

If not popular: From sociologist at Mark Regnerus, who found that gay parents were more likely to have problems that might impact children:

Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas’ Department of Sociology gave a talk about the challenges of conducting research on controversial topics at the 2017 Scherer Lecture and Conference. More.

Reality check: It was fascinating watching the Correct get together to try to destroy his research.

See also: How did Texas sociologist Mark Regnerus get to be so hated?

It was hard to find children of same-sex parents who had been together for long. Ironically, that fact—instead of pointing clearly to a problem for children in same-sex households—provided an opportunity to attack Regnerus’s findings.

A “re-analysis” of the data published over two years later in the same journal, Social Science Research, dropped from consideration the same-sex households that did not last long, keeping only the few that did. The result was a greatly reduced difference, loudly proclaimed.

That practice is called “data laundering.” The resulting sample of same-sex households was not only small but unrepresentative, whereas the other groups remained large and representative.

Media, however, had found what they needed in the newly cooked statistics. They jumped in to declare Regnerus debunked. Some of the takedowns were unusually dishonest. At the New York Times, Jesse Wegman dismissed Regnerus’s careful but deeply unpopular work alongside a study whose data turned out not to exist. More.

Share

Democratic Countries Should Back out of the UN Global Compact

The UN Global Compact objective 17 (paragraph 33 c) also stipulates that, “media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants” should not receive “public funding or material support.” Meanwhile, the Compact tries to claim that it is “in full respect for the freedom of the media”.

Already, it is clear what this stipulation means in practice — even before the UN member states have formally adopted the Compact. The UN recently banned the Canadian outlet Rebel Media from attending the Conference for the Adoption of the UN Global Migration Compact. When Rebel Media asked for an explanation, they were told that the UN, “reserves the right to deny or withdraw accreditation of journalists from media organizations whose activities run counter to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, or who abuse the privileges so extended or put the accreditation to improper use or act in a way not consistent with the principles of the Organization. The decisions are final”.

Share

Compassion director dumped at prominent science institute

No, see, “compassion” means you DON’T just tell them to jump in front of a truck. You need reprogramming.

No, we don’t sit around here, making stuff up:

Tania Singer, 48 , had achieved prominence outside the scientific world in recent years. She caused a sensation with her interdisciplinary studies on the foundations of social emotions such as empathy, envy, fairness or revenge. Since 2013 , she has headed the ReSource project at the MPI in Leipzig, one of the largest research projects ever on the effects of meditation on the brain. At events such as the World Economic Forum in Davos, she regularly called for more compassion in business and society.

This was missing but apparently in their own laboratory. The science journal Science and the online portal BuzzFeed reported in the summer of this year that Singer had bullied and intimidated employees and PhD students for years. Christian Weber, “Max Planck Director Tania Singer leaves the institute” at Sudddeutsche Zeitung

You could have predicted trouble when they hired a “compassion director” anyway. That’s about as useful as commanding people to be funny.

Note: If you don’t read German, you’ll need to hit the Translate button.

See also: Robot priests: And you thought “robotic religion” was just a pointed criticism… ?

How do robots “care”? From Sapiens: Emotional robots’ cameras and sensors respond to your facial expressions, tone of voice, and movements

and

The new, politically correct chatbot was worse?

Share