Monday, May 30, 2022

Keeping a wary eye

We are now at a place where Russia sees the United States as essentially at war with her. Putin does anything at all that he thinks he can get away with in order to prevail in his Stalinistic grab of a neighboring nation.

What was one of Stalin's ambitions, or at least contingency plans? To destroy America from within by stirring up race war. In fact, Russia has always had that move in its toolbox. In the 1960s, the even-then controlled press mostly failed to report the strong evidence of communist influence in inciting the devastating race riots. Yes, of course there were great grievances that had been left unaddressed. But the point is that communists were taking full advantage of those grievances. Note that most of the rioting occurred during a time of war against communism in Southeast Asia.

Recently, even before Putin's invasion of Ukraine, the George Floyd civil disturbances spread across America's cities. Some were minor. Some quite violent. Quite a few were organized looting sprees that had little to do with real protest.

If you observed the behavior of the leftist local authorities and the press, you might have sensed a wilfull design to make sure the disorders spread. Curiously, BLM and affiliated movements were sponsored by self-proclaimed communists, who were the real movers and shakers behind the mass of liberals involved in the protests.

Now what are we seeing? Mass shootings with a strong racial (I prefer the word "ethnic") component. The fact that the last incident concerned Mexican-Americans shot by a Mexican-American in no way reduces the racial antagonism that is bound to spring up, especially when whipped into a devil's propaganda brew by leftist troublemakers. Then we have a press and an officialdom that, at best, neglect important facts concerning these events -- to the point that much of what we get is really fake news.

The shootings aren't the only things to consider. There is the Great Marginalization of America's poorer workers by the leftist government's catastrophic economic policies. Think that won't throw more fuel onto America's racial problems?

We don't of course have quite enough evidence to say that Deep State traitors are running an operation to foment race war in America as a means of destabilizing the country to make it weak against its adversaries. But enough has been exposed about the FBI and CIA operations in the Trump Frame-up and Witch Hunt to suspect that other dirty tactics are quite possible. It almost looks as tho a group of psy-ops professionals is working closely with clandestine actors to incite a race war. They probably think they have all this down to a science, and know exactly what social panic buttons to push, and when.

Sure, we have here a conspiracy conjecture. But cautious people should watch out for such maneuvers during nation-shaking times. We're not saying the conjecture is correct. We're saying, use due caution. We must never take American freedoms for granted. To do so is to dishonor the lives of all -- of every ethnicity -- who have perished on behalf of America.
If disarming citizenries is such a good idea, why is Germany now a vassal state of Putin's Russia?

Sunday, May 29, 2022

If disarming citizenries
is such a good idea,
why is Germany
now a vassal state
of Putin's Russia?

Friday, May 27, 2022

What does the Green New Deal say
about Savory's 'reverse desertification'?

Ecologist Allan Savory's 2013 Ted Talk shows a number of impressive examples of reverse desertification, which he believes could transform the huge swath of desert lands stretching around the globe to sequester enough carbon to reach pre-industrial levels of atmospheric carbon. His secret: Deploy large animal herds to leave their excrement on a big patch of ground, and then move the herd elsewhere in the next day or two.

Why? Desertification has long been associated with overgrazing of herds, he notes. But once past a certain point, the desertification accelerates once herds are gone. In the period since the last Ice Age, grasslands have been cleared of wild herds and predators in favor of human-controlled herds. The result has been that, without predators, the herdsmen don't replicate that tight predator-prey dynamic

that kept the grasslands chemically suited to sustain grass. Desertification follows. But if the predator-prey dynamic is mimicked by herders following a predator-prey herd motion pattern, the desert ground is chemicalized as grass-suitable soil.

As with any scientific proposal, Savory's work has received criticism. Wikipedia reports that his controversial ideas have sparked opposition from academics -- ranging from debate on evidence for treatment effects to the scope of the potential impact for carbon sequestration.

Yet how much do the political Green New Dealers know about this possibility? Certainly it would seem plausible to consider this process for part of an armamentarium of methods for countering climate change. The Green New Dealers -- including in the White House -- are using the terroristic approach of frightening and forcing people to give up gas-propelled vehicles, when it is not necessarily clear that this is the best approach to climate change, especially when scientists are well aware that there are other massive sources of airborne carbon pollution that have far more impact than automobile traffic. In fact, uncontrolled desertification stands out like a sore thumb, as does methane flatulence from large cattle herds. Airborne methane molecules are are said to form a highly effective greenhouse gas as opposed to the carbon dioxide molecule.

The point is that the "silver bullet" panaceas should be viewed with concern. Rather an array of approaches is needed, which would be tweaked over time as practical results come in. What is an essentially "one-size-fits-all" approach is NOT earth science, though it makes for a ruthless ideology aimed to squeeze everone into socialist conformity. (It's just another manifestation of the covid scaremongering technique.}

Thursday, May 12, 2022

Style Note: Avoid hospitalization

A nice thing about speech freedom is that we get to do things our own way around here.

Sometimes you'll find that NotW mixes Britishisms into the Americanism brew. Case in point:
The crash victim was rushed to hospital.
Adrienne is in hospital.
The lack of an article before hospital is not accepted among American media or Americans in general. The form is regarded as a Britishism. Americans would say,
She was just released from the hospital.
The gunshot victim was transported to the hospital.
These days, the American form isn't very logical, either. In a great many urban centers more than one hospital is available. Even in quite a few rural areas, two urban hospitals may serve different parts of a rural region.

The form the hospital stems from earlier days when the local newspaper, and locals in general, could only be referring to one local hospital. So these days, technically, it would be better to write, "a hospital," but that sounds lame when two local hospitals exist. After a multi-casualty emergency, the non-local U.S. press often uses the form, were taken to area hospitals.

So why not then, on first reference, simply use the correct name of the hospital in question? The obvious reply is that the writer or speaker does not have that information to hand yet or that the information is of such low value in the context of the conversation as to be irrelevent.

When you hear that "Jenn is in hospital," you may not need further elucidation. You are more likely to ask, "What for?"

In any case, when one uses the Britishism in hospital, the line between one hospital that is unspecified (by the article a) and one that is specified (by the article the), is left handily fuzzy. I don't think the British phrase is used much for plurals, tho I would have no problem with "the victims were rushed to hospitals," which is grammatically orthodox anyway.

Some may quibble that "Jane is in hospital" is better written "Jane is [or "has been"] hospitalized."

Perhaps so. But the gerundization (aagh!!) of hospital with -ized strikes me as a bit barbaric.

Another point: Keep in mind the trend to ax words that these days are often seen as superfluous. The use of the words that and which are examples of this dramatic trend, a trend especially notable among news writers. Ax as many as possible, but not too many.

Similarly, why insist on an article before nouns or noun units (a noun or pronoun modified by one or more words), when sometimes our comprehension is fine without it -- as with in hospital.

Friday, May 6, 2022

It's the new showbiz:
Cloudy Days by The Petersens

News of the World spotlights this band often. The Petersens are making the most of the new showbiz, as exemplified by Youtube for the time being.

The Petersens have demonstrated they have staying power: In their latest incarnation they're in their fifth year as a band. Their distinctive, and extremely well-wrought, fusion bluegrass also has staying power. Their music is always in demand.



New playlist for Matt Petersen. (The previous playlist was lost in cyberspace.)


Mr. Smooth: MATT PETERSEN
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLRTSFgot_wgp01LaPlaabf852NfUWM9MW

Tuesday, May 3, 2022

Style notes

In order to versus to. A number of people believe that there is no difference. Yet, there can be. I helped her to write a song. That surely does not mean I helped her in order [that we might be able] to write a song.

My rule is skip in order to when to will do. But in a longer sentence the lone auxiliary as opposed to the longer phrase makes the reader hesitate as she or he struggles to decode the sense. Any place that leads to even mild momentary confusion may do better with in order to.

By the way, the best construction of the above sentence is I helped her write a song.

Now consider, for to, as in I left Texas for to go to Tennessee or I went up Dalton's Hill for to see my true love.

Tho these days we deem that formation to be dated, notice that in order to is equivalent to for to, which is not really all that dated. It was still used by quite a few ordinary speakers in mid-20th-century America. I recall my dad, who was a crackerjack newspaperman and professional writer, using it on occasion. I suppose he was thinking, "Why use in order to when for to will do?

NotW pauses

Nearly all issues -- military and political -- in the Russia-Ukraine conflict have by now been covered on this site and others. Now is the time for the parties involved to work on their antagonisms and issues. I don't say that aggression should be rewarded by a peace agreement that concedes anything to the aggressor.

What troubles me is that tho the propaganda war is necessary for the two sides, NotW's commentaries are not all that helpful in this phase of the struggle. So it makes sense that we desist from much commentary in order to permit God's hand to be revealed.
May the Lord bless the people in Ukraine and the people in Russia.

NYT takes a stab at jab risk