The
Wall Street Journal: Dismissing Environmental Threats Since 1976 How
deniers do it. It's not just the WSJ.
I am loathe to get into the arguments on drones. It seems to
me that killing fewer people with a more precisely targeted drone is better
than wiping out a town with a less-precise missile. There are issues of
responsibility - who makes the kill decision and how that fits into the conduct
of war - and of tactics - whether it's a smart thing to do in a particular
situation. I'd like to see more discussion on the subject. I'm pretty close to this guy in my thinking.
I agree with Stephen Walt: this seems like a really bad idea.
And, speaking of desensitization, I find these
photos desensitizing, although their maker is trying to make a point about
desensitization. And a photoshopped version of a famous Far Side cartoon that
they reminded me of.
I don't have much sympathy for Jonah Lehrer. I didn't
realize, until a friend pointed it out to me this week, that Lehrer wrote this article, which, upon my first reading, seemed like one
of the dumbest I had ever read in the New Yorker. More
here from someone who actually dealt with him. Look guys (I use the term
advisedly), there are plenty more smart people out there, some of them female.
Give them a chance and let Lehrer find a nice job proofreading or maybe
teaching science in a private school.
A photo tour of some of the Manhattan Project sites that
may become part of a national park. Mostly Oak Ridge and Hanford.
1 comment:
My wife and I also saw the ad for 'stars earn stripes'. She asked me if I knew the premise behind the popular books 'The Hunger Games'.
Turns out that the author got the idea while flipping around the channels back in the early 2000's. All that was on TV was reality TV shows (Survivor, Big Brother) and video from the Iraq invasion. The soldiers, of course, not much older than teenagers. The book simply took that mashup to the next logical level.
No idea if that's really true, but it's certainly believable.
Post a Comment