Child Abuse

Posted on by
2

Now the New Orleans government is requiring children as young as five years old to get vaccinated, whether they need it or not, whether their parents want it for their children or not.

Mayor LaToya Cantrell said she is implementing the policy “to keep the omicron variant at bay,” amid surging cases in Orleans Parish.

And

“The vaccine mandate will expand to include children ages 5-11,” she said. “We will require proof of vaccination or negative tests at bars and restaurants and other locations for everyone ages 5 and older.”

(I’m not aware that patrons as young as five years are allowed in New Orleans bars, but that’s another story.)

And, she orders:

Starting in January, you MUST ensure that your children are getting vaccinated!

This too closely approaches child abuse. There is virtually no risk to children—or from them to others—from the Wuhan Virus, especially from the mildest of all the variants, Omicron. It’s also true that the risk of dangerous side effects from the vaccines against the virus seems very small.

However.

We have more than two years of empirical data from a sample size that is the population of children on Earth with which to assess the level of risk to children from a Wuhan Virus infection. We have a much smaller set of data, collected over a much shorter period of time, with which to assess any risk to children of serious side effect from any of the virus vaccines.

Stipulate, though, that the vaccines’ serious side effect risk really is quite small. The comparison of interest is not whether the vaccines have an absolute level of risk in isolation of other factors or risks. The proper comparison is the level of risk to a child from being unvaccinated compared with the risk to the child of serious side effect from the vaccine.

If the two levels of risk are comparable—and they seem to be, even with the so-far assessed optimistic side effect risk—then the risk from the vaccine is not worth the risk to a child from going unvaccinated.

Forcing that second risk onto the child is too risky, to the point of abuse.

Censorship in New York State

Posted on by
Reply

Now the wonders of the New York State Senate want to ban, formally by statute, speech of which they disapprove.

A New York Senate bill if passed would criminalize the promotion of content that “includes a false statement of fact or fraudulent medical theory that is likely to endanger the safety or health of the public.”

This is rank censorship. Whose definition of “likely?” Whose definition of “fraudulent theory?”

Here are just a few items that are threatened by this censorship:

  • Advertising
  • Political ads/speech
  • Satire
  • Comedy
  • Ridicule
  • Exaggeration for effect
  • Irony

This is an all too typical effort by Progressive-Democrats to control our speech.

O brave new world, that has such people in ‘t in this new year of New York.

Training for the New Corporate World

Posted on by
Reply

A new cottage industry (here, the cottages are mansions) is springing up.

US companies are turning to programs aimed at preparing women and people of color for corporate board roles in a bid to comply with calls from regulators and investors to diversify their directors.
Law firms, universities, and current directors of companies have launched new or expanded programs over the past few years to coach prospective board candidates, offering training on topics from corporate governance to committee work. Some programs are free or sponsored by companies, while others can cost thousands of dollars.
Sponsors are hoping to broaden the pool of people who are ready to fill board roles….

What are these folks doing to improve things from the ground up—improving the quality of K-12 education (real education, not CRT garbage or other “equity, diversity, inclusive” claptrap)? That’s where the real preparation for the world occurs, and preparation for the peaks of the corporate world will fall out of that.

Absent any of that basic prep aid, all these wonders are doing is virtue-signaling so they can feel good.

Woke DoJ

Posted on by
Reply

A Portland ANTIFA…person…has had all Federal criminal charges dismissed, with prejudice, after doing a whole 30 hours of “community service.”

Eva Warner of Beaverton, Oregon, who police said was also known as Joshua Warner, was charged in September 2020 with felony civil disorder.

Her deeds, during the Portland Summer of Riots:

Portland Police said Warner directed a high-powered laser into the eyes of law enforcement officers trying to disperse the crowd. Warner resisted arrest, prompting officers to use force, the DOJ said. A laser pointer was found on Warner.
…
About a week later, Warner was arrested again and charged with second-degree criminal mischief in connection with another riot.
…
A week after that, Warner was arrested a third time in connection with yet another riot and charged with interfering with a peace officer and second-degree disorderly conduct.

Each time, too, she was released, with those violent crime charges pending, without bail so she could do those things again.

Then,

Scott Erik Asphaug, acting US Attorney for the District of Oregon, filed a motion December 21, 2021, asking the court to “dismiss with prejudice the indictment against (Warner), in the best interests of justice.” The motion noted that the defendant had performed “at least 30 hours of community service.”

Which the court did.

In the best interests of justice? Whose justice? Where is the justice for the victims of Warner’s actions?

This what Biden-Harris/Merrick Garland are doing to our Justice Department.

A SpaceX Dyson Sphere?

Posted on by
Reply

No, but something related to it. A Dyson sphere is a structure built around a star (our sun, for instance) that captures the star’s energy output for the use of the civilization that built the sphere.

Elon Musk, and his SpaceX company, are building a constellation of satellites—some 42,000 of them by the end game—in Earth orbit for the purpose of producing a global Internet, and one that’s separate from the terrestrial net.

Which brings me to my speculation.

Imagine a similar-sized collection of satellites in higher orbit, say just above geosync, so as to avoid interfering with the satellites already there and which have their own critical purposes. Of course, at those altitudes, there’d be room for a much larger constellation of satellites.

These satellites, though, would be solar collectors, whose purpose would be to…capture our sun’s energy output for our use. It’s straightforward and well-established technology to convert the sun’s output to electricity or to microwave energy or to energy of any wavelength we might find useful; although, it’s always useful to increase the efficiency of the conversion.

It is too early to know we can safely beam all that energy to Earth’s surface for terrestrial uses (even neglecting atmospheric- and weather-related losses). We don’t yet have a good handle on the effects of pumping all that energy through the atmosphere on that atmosphere, much less on what it does to animal or plant life that happen to be in or pass through the transmission beams. We also haven’t assessed the effects of those energy transmissions as they pass through orbiting satellites.

However.

We’re returning to the moon, and that body has lots of industrial potential, which will have lots of energy needs. Might it be cheaper to build such a constellation and beam the energy to the moon’s environs than to build collectors on the moon’s surface or in orbit around the moon?

The concept works for Mars, too, only we’d want the constellations in orbit around Mars.

And the asteroid built….