Friday, June 30, 2006

If you cannot collect the dots, you cannot connect the dots

Hot Air has a nice video that makes the case for the perfidy of the New York Crimes Times

Mandatory reading: The Nazi Roots of Islamofascist Hatred of Jews

WILLisms asks the question:
Did Nazi hatred of Jews influence Islam, or did Islamic hatred of Jews influence the Nazis?
This is mandatory reading to understand the history of what we in the free world are facing today.

Supply and Demand

Wednesday, June 28, 2006

Fight Evil, Burn a Qur'an

Kudos to Saber Point for this!

Friday, June 23, 2006

Terrific close-up magic trick

Follow the link to the online-video. Watch it first. Then read the Snopes article.

Monday, June 19, 2006

Nerd Alert: Star Wreck: In the Perkinning

Watch this movie (Note: it is 1 hour 43 minutes long).

It is a total send-up of Star Trek and many other science fiction movies. It was made on a shoestring budget in Finland, but looks better than many high-budget movies. Almost all of it is watchable.

Energia Productions is at it again, producing another movie, Iron Sky

Stay Safe -- Stay in Shul

ECONOMICS: The concept of value to a lone human

I'm going to have a series of posts that will describe concepts in Economics. I've recently been listening to the Rukeyser series of audiotapes of the Great Economic Thinkers, and many of the concepts are difficult to understand, or, in contrast, some of the arguments between schools of economics are difficult to distinguish between.

The conceptualization of economic cases.

Before I begin the discussion, economics is rife with cases and models. One fault that many economists have with each others models is that the model (1) makes assumptions and (2) holds everything else equal and (3) oversimplifies.

Of course, the problem with these are that the assumptions may presuppose an answer, nothing is static, and simplifications may eliminate alternative explanations.

Thus, in each of my models, I will attempt to discuss the major assumptions, how static/dynamic each model is, and the simplifications employed.

The concept of value

Imagine a lone human, eking out a living by their own effort. There are no other humans involved in this model.

The human produces a quantity of food. What is the value of the food?

1) The value of the food is equivalent to the items used up in order to procure the food.

2) The value of the food is equivalent to the amount of effort involved in procuring the food. This can include (1) above if you argue that effort is used up.

3) The value of the food is equivalent to what was given up in order to obtain the food. This can include (1) and (2) above, if you argue that effort was given up and that items were used up, and that these could have been put to a different use. It can also include what is know as the opportunity cost, that is, the thing given up so that the current item can be obtained. {NOTE: This is a broad simplification of opportunity cost.}

Utility theory describes a notion of value that has each thing have a certain amount of utility, and thus, our lone human describes a certain amount of utility in producing the food that is equal or greater than the utility of not obtaining the food.

Some self-awareness will enlighten us to the use of utility theory.

Our lone human is not hungry. Therefore there is little need to obtain food. That is, there is little utility in obtaining the food. There is greater utility in using the time and effort that would be expended in obtaining the food in doing something else. Time passes. Our lone human becomes hungry. That is, the utility of obtaining food has increased over time.

In the illustration, the utility of obtaining food begins less than the utility of doing something to obtain the food. Over time, as our lone human becomes hungrier, the utility of getting something to eat increases until it has greater utility to eat, than to do nothing to obtain food. Generally, at this point our lone human will act.

To complicate this, let's assume that our lone human understands time and that, over time our lone human becomes hungrier. The lone human may not wait to act until the utility cross-over point is reached. Knowing that they will become hungry, the lone human may perceive utility in acting to obtain an item before the utility of consuming the item is equal or greater to the utility of the act of obtaining the item. Thus, you might argue that the perceived utility can be more or less than the actual utility, and a human might act upon the perceived utility rather than the actual utility. For example, our lone human might obtain the food early, in effect saving food, for later use. Or, the human might put off obtaining the food if the human perceives utility in self-denial. Both of these qualities are present in consumers.

At any particular time during these discussions, I may use any or all of these working definitions of value. I submit that the utility theory is most likely the best, but, it is also the clumsiest. I will most likely default to using utility as a synonym for value, and I will attempt to discuss other points of view as appropriate.

NEXT:Our lone human gains a friend.

The TechnoFirstSon is now the TechnoRav

As far as I know, this is the first person in my and my wife's family that has become an official Rabbi.

Friday, June 16, 2006

Vernon Robinson: Liberalism Has Brought Us into the Twilight Zone

See what the racist democrats are worried about:

An (en)Viable Third Party

The Insufferable Prick Party

Racism? It doesn't matter if you can outrun the tiger, but only if you can outrun your companions.

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

Scientific American Ignores History, an update

David B. from Scientific American responded to my query about their article totally ignoring the salubrious effect of the USA's liberation of Iraq on the local ecology.

Mr. xxxxx,

Thanks for writing. You are correct to point out that the article did not go into the political context of the change. I felt that was already known by most readers and therefore the science of the transformation was a more appropriate focus for a short news article on a science website.

The information you requested is as follows: in the 1990s the Hussein regime dammed and drained the marshes in reprisal for the marsh Arab uprising following the first Gulf War. This forced the resident marsh Arabs to leave the area. With the fall of the Hussein regime in 2003, the marsh Arabs returned and set about dismantling the dikes and dams that had destroyed their homeland. Their spontaneous efforts resulted in the restoration I wrote about.

I hope that helps.

David Bxxxxx

I still find it curious that it was a truly man-made disaster, and Scientific American assumed that the readers would know. There is nothing in the article, other than the later date, that points the reader to any event. The original article reads in a totally passive format: "it happened," rather than an active tense.

I guess I'm 85% Conservative

Your Political Profile:
Overall: 85% Conservative, 15% Liberal
Social Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
Personal Responsibility: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal
Fiscal Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
Ethics: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal
Defense and Crime: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal

Liberalism is Racism, III

The Herald Sun reports that a democrat, Rachel Lea Hunter, has referred to a black Republican as "a slave."

A few days later, she revised her statement. She no longer referred to him as a slave, but as an "Uncle Tom."

Liberals just don't get it. If they are planning to make ad hominem attacks, they are at least going to have to play by the same rules that they make conservatives play by.

On Morality and Money

As stated in Ynet News, Richard Desmond (according to Forbes, one of the world's billionaires) has recently been appointed the head of Norwood, an Anglo-Jewish charity.

The British press has apparently fallen all over itself in righteous indignation by exposing his less savory works to the general public. His pornographic businesses have made him a billionaire. He gives to Jewish and non-Jewish charities. What could be wrong by having him raise money for a good charity?


It would be one thing if he were giving the money himself. One could almost make a case for accepting it as some kind of charitable repentence or offering. Of course, one could make a case that dirty money (whether from pornography, drugs, gambling, or any number of other immoral sources) cannot purchase good works.

But, this is not a case where he is giving the money. No, he is to be a fundraiser. He is going to represent the charity himself. One could argue that the public persona of the charity is going to be represented by a PORNOGRAPHER, and that some of the stink of his immorality will stick to the charity itself.

Now, some have called for the charity to repudiate Mr. Desmond, and to not let him become part of the Norwood heirarchy. I do not believe it is in the best interest to try to force a charity (or any other organization for that matter) to choose or un-choose whom they will.

Yet, I am truly puzzled that the Norwood board of directors could only see the money, but not the implications. It is not as if there were even a question of his association with the pornographic portion of his holdings.

I, personally, would go out of my way to not give any of my charitable donations to any organization that would hire someone of such dubious character. The free market is the best place to solve this. If enough people would turn their back on any organization that publicly associates itself with immorality, then those organizations would be forced, via market pressure, to change, or fold.

Scenes from a TechnoDaughter's High School Graduation

The TechnoFirstDaughter and the TechnoWife

The TechnoWife and the TechnoSecondDaughter

The TechnoSecondDaughter and the TechnoBrother-in-Law

The TechnoSecondDaughter and the TechnoFirstDaughter

Friday, June 09, 2006

Collect Call from History

Thursday, June 08, 2006

Scientific American Ignores History

Thanks to American Future for bringing this to my attention.

I've emailed the editors at Scientific American with the following email:

Date: Thu Jun 08, 2006 01:25:32 PM EDT
Subject: Reflooding Restores Wildlife to Iraqi Marshes

The article at

mentions that:

In the 1990s the Garden of Eden was destroyed. The
fertile wetlands between the Tigris and Euphrates
rivers were diked and drained, turning most of 15,000
square kilometers of marsh to desert. By the year
2000, less than 10 percent of that swampland—nearly
twice as big as Florida's Everglades—remained. But
reflooding of some areas since 2003 has produced what
some scientists are calling the "miracle of the
Mesopotamian marshes"—a return of plants, aquatic life
and even rare birds to their ancestral home.

Interestingly, what you failed to mention is that
those fertile wetlands were destroyed by Saddam
Hussein, and it is only by the liberation of Iraq by
George W. Bush and the USA that this "miracle"

We'll see if they will respond at all.

Tuesday, June 06, 2006

Europe Degrades, II

As I mentioned in my previous entry,
the German's are preparing whorehouses for the World Cup

The American Spectator (TAS) online has finally decided that it is time to raise awareness of the degradation of Germany.

Too little, too late.

The Germans (and Europeans in general) have high ethics but low morals. They are worried about global warming, but not about the exploitation of women, the poor, or poor women.

The time for morally-minded folk to begin to rail against the disgusting practices of the Eurotrash was back, a year ago, when it might have made some difference. By publishing this article now, TAS attempts to prove its moral bona fides, but without the need for actually calling for public outrage or action. It is a very safe place from which to complain.

Thursday, June 01, 2006

Liberalism is Racism, II

Thomas Sowell points out some of the lunacy of modern Liberalism in his article. For example, with regard to many of the socialogical things that had been improving up to the 1960s:

Every one of these beneficial trends sharply reversed after liberal notions gained ascendancy during in the 1960s

Modern Liberalism is intent (albeit probably unintentionally) in the destruction of this country and of Western civilization.