Dunno. Seems problematic to me that it is the (proto)CRT that's tearing the town apart rather than the mock slave trade of their Black neighbors. But your mileage may vary.
As rule, I try never to bother picking fights with headlines rather than the substance of the article. But that was ridiculous.
If anyone is trying to teach the White kids to feel ashamed of their whiteness, it's not working very well ... because they are holding slave auctions of their Black peers. FFS.
Ummm. Actual non-racist people generally don't get goaded into becoming pro-slavery-type racists by having to confront and grapple with racism ... in an academic setting.
I'm sorry but if you aren't racist, spending a little time having to recognize that racism exists isn't generally so traumatic that it turns you from a non-racist it a pro-slavery bigot.
When you are wheeling out George Wallace's line that 'anti-racism is the real racism' you really need to ask yourself how non-racist are you, really?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I'm not a fan of Sinema, but people are dragging her on this when it looks like she might get the $1.2 trillion bipartisan plan into the endzone while asking for some cuts to the $3.5 trillion plan (not torpedoing it).
Most people aren't old enough to remember, but there was a time two or three years ago when big spending bills were denominated in $100s of billions while $trillion infrastructure plans were the stuff of mirages and messaging bills.
I think there is a lot more room for federal spending and I'm really happy that the general consensus has moved in that direction. But it is not surprising to see pushback against sums considered science fiction just a few years back. The full $3.5 trillion was always unlikely.
@TwitterSupport please, please, please make the Twitter feed stable and stop updating when I'm halfway through reading a tweet and then have to leave the new tweets you just put in my field of vision and start scrolling for the tweet I was trying to read.
This is dumb. Stop.
It happens CONSTANTLY. I never read the new tweets. I hunt for the tweet I was trying to read. If I want new tweets, I can hit refresh. Why would you do this? Especially when I have only been looking at my Twitter feed for 45 seconds. Don't need it to refresh when I just got here
Oh FFS, my mouse was just over the ❤️ button of a tweet I was about to 'like' and my feed jumped yet again. Now I have to go find the tweet. Trying to like a tweet shouldn't be like trying to swat a fly.
This is a point I made back in 2014:
When we label people as anti-science, we are usually talking about someone who considers themselves pro-science but is just particularly bad at it. 1/10 fafdl.org/blog/2017/04/2…
We've all had countless encounters with people who believe obviously erroneous things who then turn out to have a bottomless library of bookmarks for study after study after study to support their view. 2/10
I first saw it among friends and acquaintances during the fluoride debate in my hometown of Portland, OR in 2013. They were just really bad at separating the signal from the noise and evaluating the credibility of sources while fearful and anchored to the status quo. 3/10
One comment by Richard at the end really got me thinking about a pet peeve of mine. 1/25 #fafdlstorm
After mentioning seafood as a feed additive could cut the methane emissions in cows by as much as 80% and a commercial feed additive (3-NOP) that could cut methane by 30%, a nitrification inhibitor that could help with managing emissions in crop fertilization ... 2/25
I put laundry in the building's laundry room this morning wearing a mask and just took it out maskless as I saw that the mandate had been lifted in Oregon.
I was unprepared for the jolt of normalcy as one of my neighbors came out of the laundry room maskless as I was going in.
Context is everything. We all stopped wearing masks outside in the neighborhood a month ago, but inside the building, it's still been taboo.
I've seen neighbors in the halls who forgot their masks but it was always accompanied by shame, hunching shoulders, trying to cover their faces with their shirt.
In this podcast, @atrembath's mom talks about the unscientific way that environmentalists wield science --- as an endpoint, a revealed truth that can be cudgelized, rather than a process that uncovers truth in ways that improve over time and self-correct.
It got me thinking about ways that try to replace common unscientific phrasing with more scientific formulations (hopefully without being too awkward).
So I never refer to 'this is proof' or 'the study proves such and such". 'This is EVIDENCE' 'the study DEMONSTRATES ..."