In Episode 27 Professor (Department of English, University of Ottawa) Janice Fiamengo discusses the fifth of five pernicious feminist terms: Microaggression. Fiamengo also explains how feminists use the theory of microaggression, and the misandric claim that masculinity is toxic, in their strategy for power through the dehumanization of males.
Month: June 2016
Why Social Justice Warriors Throw Tantrums
Language Warning:
Mandating the fairness of SJW warriors in the workplace:
Two Key Unanswered Questions for State Dept.
1. How many other times has this State Department or the administration, more broadly, deleted video that was perhaps inconvenient for them politically?
2. Who ordered this deletion?
Whale of a Tale ~ Debating Evolution
This post is with thanks to Philip Cunningham.
(For a great introduction to the below video of which the following is a clip from, see Evolution News & Views)
More About the Male (Whale’s) Refrigeration System ~ The system actually works better when the whale swims hard. How can that be, when the testes are located right between the abdominal swimming muscles? It’s like trying to keep a refrigerator cold between two furnaces.
It works because the blood pumps harder during exercise, allowing more heat to escape into the water through the dorsal fin and tail. The higher volume of cool venous blood then enters the “miraculous web” (Latin rete mirabile, read more here) between the abdominal muscles, where the heat from the arteries is transferred to the cooler veins before entering the testes. It’s a marvelous solution: a “counter-current heat exchanger” (CCHE) mechanism.
As Richard Sternberg and Paul Nelson explain in the film, without both internal testes and the refrigeration mechanism existing simultaneously, natural selection would halt, and whales would have gone extinct. Females, too, have a CCHE to protect the young during pregnancy. Similar CCHE systems are found in other marine mammals such as manatees and seals, providing more unlikely examples of “convergent evolution.”
[fbvideo link=”https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/vb.100000088262100/1161131450566453/” width=”640″ height=”400″ onlyvideo=”1″]
One of the key (most complete) missing link in this WILD scenario is Rodhocetus. Rodhocetus’ discoverer, Dr. Phil Gingerich, one of the leading experts on whale evolution, promoted the idea that Rodhocetus had a whale’s fluke (tail) and flippers. Later Dr. Gingerich admitted,
- “Since then, we have found the forelimbs, the hands, and the front arms of Rodhocetus, and we understand that it doesn’t have the kind of arms that can be spread out like flippers on a whale.”
When asked about the missing fluke, Dr. Gingerich replied,
- “I speculated that it might have had a fluke… I now doubt that Rodhocetus would have had a fluked tail.”
Without this fossil, there is no evolutionary story telling like we see in this WHALE OF A TALE:
Will museums and textbooks change their displays or portraits Rodhocetus as a transitional fossil? Don’t hold your breath.
(Philip Cunningham Intro) In the following video, Philip Gingerich, the paleontologist who discovered and reconstructed Rhohocetus, which has been called by evolutionists, ‘the most spectacular intermediary fossil in whale evolution’, states this about that, “most spectacular intermediary fossil”….
- “Well, I told you we don’t have the tail in Rodhocetus. We don’t know for sure whether it had a ball vertebrate indicating a (tail) fluke or not. So I speculated (that) it might have had a (tail) fluke…. Since then we found the forelimbs, the hands, and the front arms, the arms in other words of Rodhocetus, and we understand that it doesn’t have the kind of arms that can be spread out like flippers are on a whale.,, If you don’t have flippers, I don’t think you can have a fluke tail and really powered swimming. And so I now doubt that Rodhocetus would have had a fluke tail.”
Philip Gingerich paleontologist – Whale Evolution vs. The Actual Evidence – video – fraudulent fossils revealed (Starts at the 11:40 minute mark – see another clip of this here):
Here we get into the weeds with these fraudulent Plaster of Paris replicas for the myriad of students visiting natural history museum. The excerpt here comes from Uncommon Descent:
Vestigial Responses
(just that, old… useless [baseless] theories)
Here is an example of my child’s biology textbook from grade school (enlargeable by just clicking the image ~ for maximum enlargement, right click with the mouse and choose, “open link in new tab“):
George B. Johnson and Peter H. Raven,
Biology: Principles & Explorations, Annotated Teacher’s Edition
(Austin, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 2001), 284-285.
On page 288 of the same text we read:
- The pelvic bones found in modern whales are homologous to the pelvises that are found in land vertebrates. Although the whale pelvis bones are located near their reproductive organs, these bones do not function like a pelvis in a land vertebrate. The whale pelvis is located far from the vertebrae and has no apparent function. Thus, the whale pelvis is a vestigial structure.
The “pelvic bones” in whales are said to be vestigial. Here is another example from my son’s public schooling:
Here, Philip Cunningham fills in what these “vestigial” bones are used for via a couple examples, the first being an Email Exchange regarding “vestigial legs” pelvic bones in whales:
This second example comes by way of PHYS.ORG and like all other vestigial organs, the “Darwinism-of-the-gaps” is proven to be vacuous:
The Smithsonian Institute has and article on this as well… the title is illuminating:
I thought this was a telling commentary in the article:
My only question would be…
…why this “speculation” wasn’t applied to the previously held position that these bones are vestigial.
Are Questions Now Considered Bigoted!?
Firefighters Called Terrorists For Having American Flags On Firetrucks
“They look like a bunch of yahoos,” Gralinski said. “Like in the paper, like ISIS in Syria going to take over a city. I don’t think they need that big flag on the back of the truck. That’s not America to me. Those are a bunch of terrorists. So, I’m going to ask you to take the flag off that truck.” (Daily Caller)
An American flag on the back of a fire truck and decals on the truck windows is leading to a new dispute at the Central Coventry Fire District. The firefighters union said they’re being asked to take them off. “The members are very upset,” Firefighters Union President David Gorman told NBC 10 News. “I have a couple members, armed service retired, retired from the guard.”
Friedman vs. Sanders ~ Democratic Socialism
I Fell In Love With… A Republican
Video Description:
A cute story of leftist female journalist falling in love with a Republican man (http://tinyurl.com/kydobey). She intimates the irony in her tolerant friends being the opposite towards her man… and his friend’s being more accommodating (tolerant) to her. Love the story. (Which is why I added the caller into the show defining “tolerance”)
It is like the an earlier story Dennis highlighted of a liberal Jewish woman:
…So, Tamara is in a quandary. She has actually fallen in love with one of those people she learned to deride.
Adding to her cognitive dissonance, this Republican has “a big generous heart.” That must really vex Tamara — aren’t conservatives greedy and far less compassionate than liberals?
For all these reasons, Tamara candidly concedes: “I can’t date a Republican! What was I thinking? What if I have little Republican babies?”…
Very funny! Maybe these women should start a help group?
Here is a portion of the article from Salon Prager is reading from:
Victor Davis Hanson on “The Forgotten War” (Prager U)
What was the Korean War? And why was America involved in such a faraway conflict? Was the United States’ sacrifice–35,000 killed, over 100,000 wounded–worth it? Historian Victor Davis Hanson, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, shares the fascinating story of a transformative war that many have forgotten.
Here is the interview of Victor Davis Hanson about the above contribution to Prager U:
A Leftist Mother Bumps Up Against Reality
The transgender bathroom issue, flying in the face of biological reality and bullied through pressure from elites (see, for example, the corporations bullying North Carolina) is going to continue to open eyes. ~ American Thinker
Powerline has a story on the director of the Georgia ACLU bumbing up against reality:
These are “special rights” and not “equal rights” as the Constitution calls for… not a “hierarchy of rights,” who decides which right is more important? For instance, when you stop protecting life innocent life by saying getting an uninterrupted education for women (and not men), and you isolate gay persons rights into lobbyist groups… you see a conundrum in the following:
- “If homosexuality is really genetic, we may soon be able to tell if a fetus is predisposed to homosexuality, in which case many parents might choose to abort it. Will gay rights activists continue to support abortion rights if this occurs?”
Gay Patriot notes the story by how an activist responds to this mother:
Powerline responds to that derogatory response by the tolerant leftist social justice warrior:
Consensus Papers Disected
In a discussion with a person online about “consensus,” he list some retorts proving his point. I do not have time to refute everything he posts. So I will onle dea with his first link:
This example of a good study is the biggest joke ever. A total of 77 climatologists replied. Seventy-five agreed. Here is the graphic representing this survey:
Larry Bell asks this of that “consensus” survey:
By Larry Bell
- So where did that famous “consensus” claim that “98% of all scientists believe in global warming” come from? It originated from an endlessly reported 2009 American Geophysical Union (AGU) survey consisting of an intentionally brief two-minute, two question online survey sent to 10,257 earth scientists by two researchers at the University of Illinois. Of the about 3.000 who responded, 82% answered “yes” to the second question, which like the first, most people I know would also have agreed with.
- Then of those, only a small subset, just 77 who had been successful in getting more than half of their papers recently accepted by peer-reviewed climate science journals, were considered in their survey statistic. That “98% all scientists” referred to a laughably puny number of 75 of those 77 who answered “yes”.
That anything-but-scientific survey asked two questions. The first: “When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?” Few would be expected to dispute this…the planet began thawing out of the “Little Ice Age” in the middle 19th century, predating the Industrial Revolution. (That was the coldest period since the last real Ice Age ended roughly 10,000 years ago.) - The second question asked: “Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?” So what constitutes “significant”? Does “changing” include both cooling and warming… and for both “better” and “worse”? And which contributions…does this include land use changes, such as agriculture and deforestation?
(FORBES)
By the way, from that FORBES article I really liked this part:
Two things. LOT’S of money is involved in “proving” global warming. Which is unlike the skeptics monetary situation. Also, take note that the jump in logic is connecting Man’s CO2 to rising temperatures. By doing so, politicians get the power to get more power (legislate over peoples actions as well as businesses), and it allows these same politicians to tax people to fund their coffers, and then to pay for more studies. And round-and-round we go. Dr. Richard Lindzen observes that these people are really saying that “…regardless of evidence the answer is predetermined. If government wants carbon control, that is the answer that the Academies will provide.”
Larry Elder Hits Hillary Over the Head with Emails
This is the segment after Larry Elder played this Chris Wallace interview: