Stream—This Week In Doom: Women In Combat Edition


Today’s post is at The Stream: “Women In All Combat Roles Necessarily Means a Weaker Military.

Reality suffered another defeat Thursday, routed by the forces of Political Correctness. The army with a rainbow flag led in yesterday’s battle by Defense Secretary Ash Carter, who has ordered the military to open all combat positions to females.

According to one report, “Carter said that while moving women into these jobs will present challenges, the military can no longer afford to exclude half of the population from grueling military jobs.” Keep that “grueling” in mind. The report continues:

While noting that, on average, men and women have different physical abilities, Carter said the services must assign tasks and jobs based on ability, rather than on gender. He said that would likely result in smaller numbers of women in some jobs. Equal opportunity, he said, will not mean equal participation in some specialty jobs. But he added that combat effectiveness is still the main goal, and there will be no quotas for women in any posts.

Women are not just a little less strong and robust than men, but vastly weaker and less resilient, particularly among young adults, i.e. those who comprise our fighting forces. There is no reason to cite any “studies” to prove this most obvious of all human differences — but here’s one anyway; and here’s another.

If you find yourself doubting this most fundamental human inequality, then why aren’t you championing the complete removal of distinction by sex in the Olympics, or in any sport? Surely having male marathoners and male weight lifters and female marathoners and female weight lifters is unfair discrimination. Let all compete as one!

Go there to read the rest.

What strikes me is how little people care about this once-hot topic. Of course, the home-brew terrorists have something to do with distracting folks, but still, the will to fight against PC, at least on this topic, has been sapped.

Do read it, especially about the lie that women will have to uphold the same standards as men. They’ve never had to before, so there is zero reason to think they will in the future. Standards will be lowered, as they always are under Equality (right Loretta?), and even those who can’t meet the new, lowered standards will be given a pass.

Anyway, head on over and see why I say so.

Gift Suggestions


We’ll soon return to our tales of woe and wrongs of decadence and degeneracy of scientism and sin of over-confidence and underdealing; but for now, still replete in our postprandial Thanksgiving glows, filled with bonhomie and no small amount of gizzard gravy, pumpkin pie, and rye whisky, and with the thoughts of the goodwill of all mankind rising in our breasts, it’s time to be thankful.

Besides my obvious and overflowing gifts (of a personal nature), I’m grateful for you, dear readers, especially those with whom I don’t see intellect to intellect.

But forget all that, because now, in the true spirit of this most holy of secular holy days, one week removed, it’s time for shopping!

Who out there lacks a crazy uncle who spooks your family and friends with tales of conspiracy and skulduggery, tales which start to make a little too much sense but which you hope are wrong but you can’t see why? If not, then let me recommend Ianto Watt, everybody’s uncle and the last Welsh Barbarian, the author of The Barbarian Bible: The True History of Man Since the Fall of Troy. From the Amazon description:

In Watt’s world view, four groups dominated the last two thousand years: Imperial Rome (now represented by the United States), Holy Rome, The Chosen Ones, and the Barbarians. Each group is fundamentally opposed to the other three, forming uneasy alliances only to strike at (and betray) each other. Just to make it interesting, each group also has a major impostor.

Watt’s arguments are likely to offend many in the English-speaking world, the seat of modern Imperial Rome. At the same time, he aims his iconoclastic sarcasm at all four world groups (and their impostors), making scathing commentaries on religion, politics, culture, and social assumptions. Controversial, offensive, and revolutionary, Watt’s opinions generate heated debate in all who read them.

Or why not by your (male) loved one the best novel in the English language, starting with volume one, Master and Commander by Patrick O’Brian? Incidentally, do NOT buy Norton’s box set, which is machine produced and riddled with errors.

Books make the best gifts. What would you recommend for people to give?

I can’t yet offer my book, The Philosophy of Uncertainty: An Introduction, but perhaps soon, soon. Meanwhile, if you want to demonstrate to yourself some of its fundamental concepts, such as there is no such thing as probability, then you can’t go wrong with purchasing multiple packs of these:


Why isn’t probability ontological, i.e. real? Consider the secret of riffle shuffling, which I learned from Persi Diaconis, who was briefly one of my advisers when I was at Cornell (I shared an interest in amateur magic and exposing fake psychics). Here’s how you can prove there is no such as “randomness”.

Take an official Playing Cards to the Stars! deck and note the order of the cards, whatever it is. Then riffle shuffle them once: I mean, roughly split the deck and fan each side toward one another. When finished, the order of the cards has not changed inside each splits. True, the cards in the (say) left split are interspersed with those on the right, but the order of both the left and right are the same. Prove this to yourself by trying it.

Now repeat the shuffle. The order again has not changed, though the interspersed “layers” are four. It takes more work to reconstruct the original sequence, but if you try it, you’ll get the idea. You can do this four more times and the same order holds, more or less, assuming you have roughly half the deck in each riffle. But if you do the procedure seven or more times, the original order cannot be reconstructed. (Why? Well, crudely, there are 52 cards, which are always split about in two, and after 7 splits involves more than double the 52 cards.)

This is why you hear you must shuffle at least seven times. But in each shuffle, each card is caused, by a combination of forces, to take the places they do. This too is obvious when you try it, especially slowly. After a while, you can’t tell by the result what the original sequence was. “Randomness” as a thing doesn’t exist.

Lastly, nothing beats a subscription! Get one for yourself, and one for your mother. Hurry, the human race may expire at any moment.

Subscription Options

(If you’d rather contribute a fixed amount, go to the bottom of this page.)

Addendum As a spiritual work of mercy, I’ve been thinking of organizing a fund to send emergency combs to the British Isles. Let me also know your interest in participating in this.

The Real Reason For The Paris Global Warming Talks #COP21

The government is ready to hand out more global warming grants.
The government is ready to hand out more global warming grants.

Today’s post is again at The Stream: The Real Reason For The Paris Global Warming Talks #COP21..

Many are asking, “Why are they holding this global warming conference now, after it is clear that the sky is not falling as promised?” An excellent question, that, and only I wish I had an exciting answer. Like maybe that that Charlie Sheen movie The Arrival, where aliens invade earth and are secretly modifying our climate, was prescient. What better explanation for The Donald’s haircut is there? Come to think of it, what better explanation for Charlie Sheen?

But, no. The dull truth is that it’s the same, tired, old story. Money. Moolah, the great spendoolie (you heard me: spendoolie), filthy lucre, the root of all evils, dinero. And lots and lots of it.

You don’t have to believe me. Believe German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who opened the conference by saying “leaders have to show they can deliver what they promised in Copenhagen – a $100 billion a year climate aid to poorer countries by 2020.”

If that isn’t confirmation enough, how about what China’s President Xi Jin-ping said? He demanded “that the richest countries need to raise the level of funding they are providing to poorer nations as part of a global deal to combat climate change.” He spoke of mobilizing “$100 billion each year before 2020” as a start. Only a start.

Mobilizing? As in redistributing, as in…

Go there to read the rest, if you can stomach it.

Stream: Most Idiotic Aspects of the Paris Global Warming Conference


We’re already sick to death of global warming. If it were up to me, I’d never write about it again. There are far more interesting subjects. But, our dear leaders give us no choice.

So go to the Stream: Most Idiotic Aspects of the Paris Global Warming Conference.

COP21 is upon us; a darkening gloom gathers; apprehension builds. It was therefore a tense and important moment Sunday at Charles de Gaulle airport when China President Xi Jin-ping stepped off his aeroplane into a sea of cameras. The Communist-party approved announcer said Xi was in Paris to “combat climate change.

This is my entry for the Most Asinine Statement About Global Warming. I admit that it has stiff competition. With politicians, bureaucrats, activists, and, bottoming out the list, mainstream reporters converging on the City of Light to try and convince the world that the sky has long since fallen, and that the only way to prop it back up is to spend, spend, spend your money, the idiocy is going to fly thick and fast. My humble entry might therefore not appear to stand a chance. But it’s a sure winner, as I’ll prove in a moment.

But first, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, doubtless upset President Xi had scored first, and, anxious not to be blamed for a widening asininity gap between these two up-and-coming carbon-fueled economic powerhouses, retorted that the West suffered from “climate imperialism“.

Go there to read the rest.