Why Don't We Drop Turkeys Out Of An Airplane?

If you think that was simply an episode out from "WKRP in Cincinnati", think again. It seems that the population of DUMB people are multiplying.

A town called "Yellville", Arkansas is reviving their tradition of, get this, dropping live turkeys out of an airplane. I'm not making this up!

In Yellville (pop. 1,204), they call the turkey drop “an Ozark Mountain tradition” — one that has more or less remained intact for 71 years.

Due to protests and weather concerns, the drops were put on hold from 2012 to 2014. But they’re back and scheduled to resume like old times, and many locals are rushing to defend the practice.

And I almost howled with laughter when I read what the town judge said in defense of this practice:

Terry Ott, a county judge, downplayed concerns about the well-being of the birds during an interview with the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.

“They’re not going to crash,” Ott told the paper. “They’re birds. They can fly.”

I swear, this was the script right out of the infamous episode!



The stupidity of some people can be rather astounding.

Zz.

Could "Schikaneder" Be The Next Must-See Broadway Show?

Right now, it is all about "Hamilton". But in a couple of years, could it be "Schikaneder" next? The latest musical by "Wicked" composer Stephen Schwartz is making waves in, of all places, Vienna, Austria.

Here’s a tip for Broadway’s theater owners: Get yourselves to Vienna to see the new musical by “Wicked” composer Stephen Schwartz.

My Viennese spies say it’s sensational.

It’s called “Schikaneder,” and while the title doesn’t exactly trip off the tongue, one source’s description is enticing: “It’s ‘Kiss Me, Kate’ meets ‘Amadeus’ with a score as lush and melodic as Stephen’s ‘The Baker’s Wife.’ This a major show.”

There ya go!

Zz.

US Congress Is Full Of Stupid People!

... and you, the voters, are directly responsible for putting them there!

In this latest instant, the US Congress overrode the President's veto on being able to sue Saudi Arabia for the 9/11 tragedy. This issue isn't about that, but rather, at how the members of the Congress DECIDED on what to vote on! It seems that many of them (i) didn't read what they were passing and (ii) didn't think BEYOND that at the possible consequences of their actions.

This news report describes what has just happened.

The White House had long raised concerns about the law, warning that it could have a chilling effect on Saudi Arabia's cooperation with the U.S. in fighting terrorism. Senior national security officials also argued that it could trigger lawsuits from people in other countries seeking redress for injuries or deaths caused by military actions in which the U.S. may have had a role.

But top lawmakers said the White House didn't press those warnings until it was too late and the popular bill was already barreling its way through Congress. Other lawmakers acknowledged that they didn't pay much attention to the bill.

That earned McConnell and others a scathing response from the White House, which said lawmakers didn't know what they were voting for.

"What's true in elementary school is true in the United States Congress: Ignorance is not an excuse," said spokesman Josh Earnest.

Now, people, let's think about this just a bit. You are voting on something. Isn't it YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to figure out what it says and what it will do? It is NOT the responsibility of someone else to tell you all these things! And what is scarier is that you guys are voting for something that you didn't "pay much attention" to! Holy cow! How many times has this happen and how many legislation have you guys voted in which you cast your vote in ignorance of what it will do? No wonder we have so many stupid laws!

We elect you guys to do just TWO things: enact sensible legislation, and come up with a yearly budget. You already screwed up the latter many, MANY times, and often come up with a budget LATE (try doing that in an ordinary job). And now, you guys have shown that you don't even pay attention to what you vote on.

How are you able to claim your income for failing to do what you've been paid to do?

PATHETIC!

Zz.

Who Are The Innovators In The US?

This is a rather interesting study that I haven't seen before. It surveys people who are considered to be innovators and the US to see who they really are and what their backgrounds area.

This study surveys people who are responsible for some of the most important innovations in America. These include people who have won national awards for their inventions, people who have filed for international, triadic patents for their innovative ideas in three technology areas (information technology, life sciences, and materials sciences), and innovators who have filed triadic patents for large advanced-technology companies. In total, 6,418 innovators were contacted for this report, and 923 provided viable responses. This diverse, yet focused sampling approach enables a broad, yet nuanced examination of individuals driving innovation in the United States.

I wish the sampling is larger, but it is what it is. What they found is quite fascinating, especially when framed with the current US political climate on immigration:

• More than one-third (35.5 percent) of U.S. innovators were born outside the United States, even though this population makes up just 13.5 percent of all U.S. residents.

• Another 10 percent of innovators were born in the United States but have at least one parent born abroad.

• More than 17 percent of innovators are not U.S. citizens, yet they are making invaluable contributions to U.S. innovation.

• Immigrants born in Europe or Asia are more than five times as likely as the average native-born U.S. citizen to have created an innovation in America.

• Immigrant innovators also are better educated on average than native-born innovators, with over two-thirds holding doctorates in STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics)

I think there's plenty of evidence to show that the US has, throughout its history, depends on immigration of some of the brightest and most innovative individuals around. The question is how to encourage that without abusing the system and replacing US workers, the way the H1-B visa has been abused. That visa program was supposed to bring in high-skilled workers into areas in which there is a shortage of US workers. Unfortunately, that has been used by many companies for what it was prohibited from doing, i.e. replacing US workers with foreign workers that have regular skills not in short supply.

At the same time, we also must keep in mind that dumping the baby out with the bath water isn't the solution either. This survey clearly shows that when it is done right, it has significant benefits to the US economy, even if one take a very conservative approach to the result of the survey. We need a smart, thoughtful, and rational approach to this. Do you think your politicians have such skills to make that type of a decision?

Zz.

Religious Children Are More Selfish?

Well, this is an interesting revelation, no pun intended.

A new study published in Current Biology has found that children who are supposedly brought up in a religious environment are more selfish than children without any religious affiliation.

Decety’s team of psychologists assessed altruism using ‘the dictator game’: each child was given 30 stickers and told to choose how many to share with an anonymous child from the same school and similar ethnic group. This task reflects choices in ecology – allocating limited resources – and the results were used to calculate a ‘generosity score’. The researchers looked at 1170 children aged 5-12 years old, from six countries (USA, Canada, China, Jordan, Turkey and South Africa). Most kids came from households that identified as Christian (24%), Muslim (43%) or not religious (28%). (Small numbers from Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu and agnostic homes weren’t compared.)

The results revealed that secular children shared more stickers. Muslim children appear to be less generous than Christian kids, but this is not statistically significant (labelled ‘ns’ in the bar chart below). All three groups became less altruistic with age, though religious kids had lower generosity, suggesting that longer exposure to religion leads to less altruism.

This result, of course, goes against the prevailing and unproven notion that religion makes one more "moral".

Parents were also asked to score their children according to a sense of empathy and sensitivity to injustice. This subjective self-reporting showed that religious adults think their children have strong moral tendencies, contradicting objective assessments of altruism (generosity and moral sensitivity).

Why are religious people less moral? One factor is a psychological phenomenon known as ‘moral licensing’: a person will justify doing something bad or immoral – like being racist – because they’ve already done something ‘good’, such as praying. “It’s an unconscious bias,” Decety explains. “They don’t even see that’s not compatible with what they’ve been learning in church.”

History backs-up the scientific evidence that secular people are more moral, as reviewed by Israeli psychologist Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi. Most white supporters of the US Civil Rights Movement were non-religious, for example, while the apartheid regime in South Africa was led by devout Christians and opposed by atheists.

All interesting and eye-opening stuff. This again reinforces my point that just because Talking Heads that you listen too says such-and-such, it doesn't mean that it has been socially or culturally verified to be true!

The source paper can be obtained (at least for now) from here.

Zz.

Conversion Therapy Does Not Work!

And now we have the most extensive review of all the evidence that shows this.

The report, released by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, reviewed the scientific evidence on conversion therapy and concluded that the practice is not effective and is often harmful.

An expert panel convened by the American Psychological Association also published in the report a consensus statement warning of the dangers of conversion therapy and confirming that variations in sexual orientation are normal.

The SAMHSA report can be obtained here.

Will this stop all these conversion therapy? Of course not. After all, there are still people  who believe the universe is only 6000 years old, despite all the physical evidence. So why would something like this change their minds? The only way to stop  this is to make it illegal in each state or country. Do you think politicians, or your politician, care about scientific evidence?

Zz.

Chapati With Malaysian Chicken Curry

This is what we had for dinner tonight.

Made the Malaysian chicken curry last night for dinner with rice. And since curry tastes so much better the next day, I decided to have it again tonight, this time, I accompanied it with my own homemade chapati.

The curry used 2 packets of Malaysian meat curry powder. But I added my own touches which, based on my own recollection, is what a Malaysian current should  be. I added whole star anise, whole  cloves, whole cardamon, and cinnamon sticks. These all are cooked with the curry broth for at least half an hour to impart the aroma and flavor.

In some cases, the Malaysian curry has a base made of shrimp paste (belacan). Since I didn't have any, and since someone here is allergic to shrimp, I substitute that with anchovy paste, and then added fish sauce as a finishing touch. The end result is scrumptious, if I may say so myself.

The chapati is 50/50 combination of all-purpose flour and whole wheat flour. I added some salt, about 1/4 cup  of olive oil, and then added some water until I can kneed it into a dough ball. I let it rest of 10 minutes before rolling out golf-ball size dough into flat disk about 1/4 inch thick. Then fry them in some oil on a griddle, and you have chapati.

The chapati went very well with the curry.

Zz.