Feds Poised to Take Huge Real Estate Bath

Or so this article would have you believe. It sounds bad, no doubt. I checked with a friend of mine in real estate, and his comment was:

In short, probably true but a bit misleading. It's frustrating but not nefarious. They just have a lot of crap to move and no great system for it. Similar stories abound in bulk for FDIC sales. I know one smart, wealthy guy who tried repeatedly to bid and [was] repeatedly shut out.

Still, I can't help wonder if that smart, wealthy friend of a friend just wasn't politically connected enough.

More Global Warming News

The headline "Cloud formation may be linked to cosmic rays" may not sound like much, but it is actually yet another blow to the standard model of anthropocentric global warming.

One of the problems with computer climates models is modeling clouds, which provide negative feedback. As the air heats up, the theory goes, more clouds form, which raises the Earth's albedo (a measure of how much light is reflected) and reduces heat absorption. The CLOUD experiment, which has been confirmed to have positive results, verifies that cosmic rays also cause clouds. Cosmic ray flux is inverse to solar flux, so when solar flux drops, cloud formation rises, and vice versa. This has implications for climate models, and hence for AGW theories.

For "settled science", there sure is a lot of new science coming out. Before we spend billions of dollars on climate change mitigation, it's pretty important that we understand our climate.

James Wilson, the Forgotten Founder

I've long been a big fan of the musical (and, later, movie) 1776. It's a terrific (but of course, somewhat fictionalized) account of the political horse-trading that went on in the Continental Congress in the days leading up to the signing of the Declaration of Independence on (well, approximately on) July 4, 1776.

The climax of the story centers around the Pennsylvania delegation, which supposedly is split 2-1 against independence. The one in favor is Ben Franklin; those opposed are John Dickinson and the feckless James Wilson. Dickinson and Franklin carry on the debate, while Wilson sits helplessly in the background, voting "nay" when required by Dickinson but otherwise keeping his mouth shut. Only when the rest of Congress has voted for independence (a measure which must be approved by all the states, not just a majority), and Franklin asks that the Pennsylvania delegation be polled individually, does Wilson get singled out.

After Dickinson and Franklin vote "nay" and "yea" respectively, Wilson is asked for his vote, and pressure is applied by each side. Wilson changes his vote, explaining to Dickinson that while others were opposed, his nay vote would be just one of many. But now, if he voted nay, he would be remembered as the man who opposed independence. "I just didn't bargain for that," he complains, and votes yea. Wilson becomes the deciding vote in favor, but hardly heroically. He is manipulated at every turn, and his greatest desire is anonymity.

The truth, it turns out, is miles apart from the story. James Wilson was actually a Scot who arrived in America in 1766 at the age of twenty-four, and during the ten years between then and the events portrayed in 1776, he earned sufficient accolades through lecturing to be awarded an honorary degree by the University of Pennsylvania, studied law and attained the bar, opened a successful legal practice, joined the Pennsylvania State Militia and rose to the rank of Brigadier General, and wrote the influential pamphlet "Considerations on the Nature and Extent of the Legislative Authority of the British Parliament". Hardly the career of one meek and anonymity-seeking.

His later career proceeded from highlight to highlight. After the Revolution, Wilson was such an eminence during the Constitutional Convention that he is considered second only to Madison among its framers. He was one of the first appointees to the Supreme Court. Through his real-estate dealings he became one of the wealthiest men in post-Revolutionary America.

Sadly, his final years were unhappy. After the Panic of 1796, his debts overtook him and he lost everything. He was imprisoned for debt in 1797, and died of a stroke in 1798. A bright flame, too quickly extinguished. Nothing like the character from the musical. Wilson's memory deserves rehabilitation.

Cooling on Warming

This is sure to annoy the radical greenies. A key passage:

Scientists on all sides of the global warming debate are in general agreement about how much heat is being directly trapped by human emissions of carbon dioxide (the answer is "not much"). However, the single most important issue in the global warming debate is whether carbon dioxide emissions will indirectly trap far more heat by causing large increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds. Alarmist computer models assume human carbon dioxide emissions indirectly cause substantial increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds (each of which are very effective at trapping heat), but real-world data have long shown that carbon dioxide emissions are not causing as much atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds as the alarmist computer models have predicted.

Book Review: The Wonder of Boys

The Wonder of Boys is an interesting book about raising boys by Michael Gurian. The author, a self-styled feminist, attempts to correct some misconceptions about boys that were created by radical feminists. Along the way he takes a few swipes at radical conservatives as well, trying for a moderate line. The book is good evidence for the end of the Culture Wars.

Some of the myths Gurian corrects are (1) that the difference between boys and girls is a social construct that can be "corrected" by proper upbringing; (2) that male culture is the root of all evil and should be thwarted at every turn; and (3) that the particular family structure isn't important as long as the boy is loved. The emphasis the author puts on these corrections will inevitably waste the time of those readers who already agree with him.

Luckily, there is still much to glean from the book about the nuts and bolts of boy-raising. From sports to discipline to learning styles to the teaching of morality, Gurian covers all aspects of this important task. Both the father's and mother's point of view are considered. The author is clearly an expert in his field. Still, while the book's advice is good and, I think, worth applying, his reasoning is often muddled.

For example, Gurian refers often to primitive tribes as archetypes for how we should be raising boys. He uses the Hillary Clinton line "it takes a village to raise a child" unironically, even giving it the authority of unnamed "anthropologists". (As in, "[A]nthropologists have generally agreed that it takes a whole village to raise a child." They have?) This line of reasoning is odd considering that in other places Gurian discusses what modern America has lost in terms of community as we have become more mobile. Wouldn't a better archetype, then, be pre-modern America rather than primitive tribes who have very different methods of child-rearing than Americans ever did?

I'll end the review with this thought-provoking extended quote from near the end of the book:

By focusing so obsessively on the safe ascension of women in the workplace and neglecting the work role of men, we are teaching most boys that they don't really have a clear path to self-respect anymore; their job is to make sure women and girls have a clear path to those things. Herein lies a bitter irony. Boys and men have always, in whatever culture, known that their primary job is to sacrifice themselves so that women and girls can be safe. The last thirty years of feminism, for all its good, has not noticed that feminism is preaching the same old message to male culture when it asks male culture to see how victimized women are, and make sure women are taken care of. Male culture has been biologically and socially based on this principle for millennia.

Tau+3

I'm a few days late on this, but Tau Day (6/28) was earlier in the week. Tau is a new idea to replace pi (the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter) with the more natural constant tau (the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its radius). Seems crazy, but there's a pretty good case to be made for this.

The problem is that pi is so entrenched, I can't see it ever being changed. But it's interesting nonetheless. If I were still in the habit of writing mathematical papers I'd try to insert tau here and there (appropriately footnoted) and see if it caught on.

The Boys of Pointe du Hoc

On this 67th anniversary of D-Day, I was reminded of Reagan's speech on the occasion of the 40th anniversary. Here it is:



A few observations. First, the Soviets never really stood a chance once Reagan was elected. His rhetoric was so powerful and persuasive, it's hard to imagine it emanated from the same office that produced Carter's accommodationist "inordinate fear of Communism" speech a mere seven years earlier. Speak softly and carry a big stick, Teddy Roosevelt said. And boy, did Reagan take that lesson to heart. Speak peacefully but prepare for war: in the hands of a master rhetorician the combination was unstoppable.

Of course, it's easy to see that in hindsight. Reagan's genius was that he intuited the right strategy against almost all of the experts.

Second, this speech really illustrates how second-rate was George W. Bush. Bush tried but never could really convince that Islam was not the enemy, and that conciliation was possible. Reagan did make that clear, even while condemning the "evil empire". Reagan managed to convey that the Soviet regime was the problem, not the Soviet people. With Bush a similar message vis-a-vis Muslims and Islamic regimes was never clear.