THIS from the globe and mail is unacceptable. I had issues with his nomination to the post given his employment history, but the fact that he won’t come clear on his position on evolution, when that is the central tenant of biology says enough.

Gary Goodyear must step down. He is not competent to fill the role of science minister and must be removed immediately.

I shall be writing a dead-tree letter to Parliament as soon as I find the appropriate people to write to (aside from my MP).

The bottom line, you should see this movie.

Last weekend Kathy and I went to see An Inconvenient Truth, starring Al Gore. I wanted to see it on opening day as I feel that it is an important enough message that I felt that I should support the film.

I did not expect much to be honest, as it is mostly just Al Gore speaking in front of a slide show presentation. It started off a little slow, but built from there. I was especially impressed that Gore stuck to the facts, and just presented the science. Of very important note was the peer reviewed journals. Of over 900 articles in peer reviewed science journals - not one - contradicted global warming.

Of a similar sample across articles in the popular media, 53% of those articles were of the opinion that the scientists were still arguing amongst themselves.

It is an important thing to note. The scientific community agrees that global warming is a real threat, but popular media does not. Often “scientists” disagree with the evidence, yet they never publish these disagreements within scientific journals - only popular ones.

The movie is just graphs of hard data, and simple explanations of that information. It is well laid out for a layperson to understand the issues surrounding global warming. So, for me, it was not much of a surprise, but it was incredibly well done, and surprisingly funny in parts.

Everyone should see this movie so that they know the hard data, and know that things can be done. But there is an even more important reason to look at the data that Gore presents. You will be able to shield yourself from those media stories that are biased against the evidence.

The pirate bay is back online, althought it appears that their MySQL database is under heavy load. They have changed their title to: “The Police Bay” in an ironic twist.

Data circulating amongst the internet seems to indicate that the large raid on the Pirate Bay was orchestrated by the MPAA contacting the department of foreign affairs in the U.S. Which in turn, contacted the department of foreign affairs in Sweden, and they mobilized the equivalent of the Swedish F.B.I. to arrest the members of the Pirate Bay.

However, what the MPAA does not apparently realize is that many people in Sweden have become galvanized over this issue of a corporation based in the United States interfering in copywrite law in Europe. Indeed, an “Pirate Bay” political party has formed in Sweden around this very issue. That, and according to Swedish law, the Pirate Bay is not actually violating any laws for running a bittorrent tracker, as they do not host any of the files on their servers.

It seems that there will very likely be a big backlash against the Swedish Police, who may even have to pay damages in this matter, and that despite publishing a document about their “victory” the MPAA will be worse off in the long run. The Pirate Bay was well known before this raid, and it will become even more well known after it, as it seems that it is very unlikely that any charges will actually be levied.

This does not work out in favour of the MPAA. But then, I don’t feel sorry for either the MPAA or the RIAA or any similar companies. They make their income off of controlling an effective monopoly on the film and music industries respectively, and their presence is not required for the distrobution of either movies or music. Indeed, they siphon profits off of artists, and damage what would otherwise be a free market solution to aquiring movies and music. Consumers would be better off without them around, and ironically, so would the artists.

Attacks such as the ones on the Pirate Bay will only serve to hasten their demise.

10 people according to news sources were captured during a police raid in Toronto. According to the press, these people were Muslims (but not of Arab descent) and according to the CBC, they apparently have connections with al-Qaeda.

The raids occurred at the same time as similar raids in the U.K. previously. Known to be involved were the RCMP, CSIS, Border Services and others. An unsubstantiated claim suggests that the group was planning to detonate a large explosive device somewhere in Ontario.

If these claims are true, I am glad that the RCMP, CSIS and others are doing their jobs, but I am also disturbed that a terrorist group would chose to target Canada. Granted, we have sent troops to Afganistan, and that has understandably angered many groups. However, it is my understanding that most Canadians are for a less aggressive position in the world and otherwise feel that we have done little to merit notice by al-Qaeda.

Of course, apparently al-Qaeda probably feels differently as Usama Bin Laden has mentioned Canada as being a target in previous broadcasts. This is, to me, a highly disturbing turn of events.

Globe and Mail Story.

Joe Volpe Censors .ca domain

Joe Volpe apparently had a .ca domain (just like this one you are reading) pulled down, with, it appears, no just cause. The website youthforvolpe.ca was a spoof site, pretending to encourage children to sponser Volpe with money from their parents credit cards.

Mr. Volpe’s campaign shutdown the site, even while being unaware of who put it up. Hint here Mr. Volpe, there is this internet tool called “whois”. A whois of the youthforvolpe.ca domain reveals:


Subdomain: youthforvolpe.ca
Renewal-Date: 2007/05/31
Date-Approved: 2006/05/31
Date-Modified: 2006/06/01
Organization: Mike Hunt
Description:
Admin-Name: Mr Mike Hunt
Admin-Title:
Admin-Postal: 868 Main Street
Belleville ON K8N2Y8 Canada
Admin-Phone: 905-338-XXXX (Obscured by me)


So, I was able to determine fairly easily who registered this domain, Mr. Mike Hunt, and indeed his administrative contact information is available in the whois. We can also see that the domain was registered on May 31 2006. Now, according to The Globe and Mail:

"My Office has had the website suspended through CIRA [Canadian Internet Registration Authority] and CDNS [Canadian Domain Name Services] and it will be down as soon as 6 p.m. I think the issue with the website has been dealt with. . . .”

Further information will no doubt be forthcoming, however, if I read this issue correctly this is a blatant misuse of power on the part of Mr. Volpe. Having politicians interfere with unfavorable websites is at the very least unethical, and possibly illegal.

Globe and Mail Story.
Boing Boing discussion of the same issue.

Changing Political Views.

I personally detest being crammed into a political mold where I am called such things as a “Liberal” here in Canada, or a “Democrat” as in the US. While I would categorize myself as having been a “Liberal” once, I have through various readings become exposed to the “Conservative” ideal. Then again, I don’t agree with everything that that view substantiates either. I think that Chris Rock said it best in one of his comedy routines. If you make up your mind on an issue by a political party, before even hearing the issue, you are an idiot. Rock hits the punchline with: “On crime I am conservative, on prostitution I’m liberal.”

And that leaves me with probably no real affiliation at all. If there were one for me (and again, I refuse to support a party, only issues) it would be a Libertarian position. At least that is where I stand as of this post. Who knows, with more information I could change my position. Indeed, I would be a fool if I maintained my position when new information comes along that proves that my position is untenable.

And that brings me to Milton Friedman’s movie, Free To Choose. This is an excellent PBS series from the 1980’s on economics and freedom. The point that I think that Milton makes so well is that economics is about finding out what works - not what you may or may not like. Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner do the same in the currently popular book Freakonomics as well.

Economics, like science can produce conclusions based on data. Simple enough. But what bothers people is that sometimes those conclusions disagree with what they feel to be right, and there is a huge difference between knowing and feeling. Thus, Free to Choose challenges a good deal of assumptions that people have about how the world works, and they don’t want it to work the way that it does. This creates a problem, because despite how much they may want the world to work differently than it does, it keeps on working that way. So, you have a choice, either keep hoping that the world will change, or, you can change and realize how things really work, and work within those constraints. With science and economics, it is not about liking the answer, but understanding that the answer is just the way it is, and you have to interpret how you react to that.

Check out the PBS series Free to Choose, it is very good. Just put your feelings aside and listen to the facts. And if you enjoy it, check out Freakanomics too.

Didn’t you get the Memo? So much has been going on in the press about the NSA phonetapping database and the blogworld is more concerned about the results for American Idol. Where is everyone? Where have the bloggers gone? What is going on here?

I wrote before about how the blogs were discussing to Impeach Bush after the Katrina disaster, but they are silent, oh so silent about the cover story on USA today. The press has “woken up” and is doing its job, and the blogs have gone to sleep. Regardless of your political position, what is going on here is a massive issue. You need to pay attention to the NSA wiretapping. This issue is huge. The irony is that this is the same thing as the Watergate Scandal, except on a much larger, and much more frightening scale.

Having said that, despite your political opinion, and despite your opinion of Bush, you must be willing to give the current administration the chance to defend itself fairly, however, you must also support the investigation of these charges. As was pointed out (but the bloggers seem not to have noticed…) in many news articles the United States Justice Department ABANDONED their attempt to investigate the warrentless spying of United States citizens because the NSA - the very people they were supposed to be investigating would not give them security clearance.

There is a storm coming, and all those people who were blogging to Impeach Bush, this is a larger story than Katrina was. This story is huge. It rocks the United States down to its very foundations, down to the fourth amendment.

The question is bloggers. What are you going to do?

Last week, there was an uproar in the blogsphere about the Stephen Colbert and his roasting of Bush not being aired in the media. Now, we have a story that is appearing in the media of the apparent authorization of the NSA to monitor and log the calls of millions of United States citizens without a court order…

And the top 10 searches on Technorati yield silence.

What gives? We were so good, we protested the lack of coverage on Colbert, now, a big story breaks in the press, and we seem more concerned with:

1) American Idol

2) Chris Daughtry

3) Lost

4) Myspace

5) Immigration

What gives? What happened to the outrage? Do bloggers in the U.S. not read their own constitution? Do they not know what is going on with the NSA spying? Do they not care!? Hell, I am Canadian and I care about what is going on with the bloggers (and everyone else) in the United States. Could the press have been right about Colbert not being a big story, and that irate bloggers just blew it out of proportion? What are people to think when the bloggers don’t even react to a story of this magnitude? Daily Kos has coverage of course, but then, it always does, (despite the unfortunate Ad Hominim attacks it often levies).

Are all the bloggers asleep? Do American Idol and a fictional T.V. show “lost” matter more to the people of the United States than the basic freedoms? Do bloggers even read the U.S. Constitution? I have read it, and I am Canadian! What gives? U.S. Bloggers, where are you? Where is the outrage when we need it? Stop voting for American Idol and wake up!

By now, everyone who as a Blog is familiar with the Press dinner where Colbert roasts Bush to a “Respectful Silence” as Colbert put it on his show. And sure, you can sigh a few things over at thankyoustephencolbert.org. But what have you done about the media? As you have no doubt noticed, the media is remaining fairly quiet about the Colbert sketch, other than to make passive mention of the chatter in the blogs. However, mainstream media outlets have hardly reported the story at all. You can change that.

However, before you try, there are a few things you need to understand about the lack of story, and Colbert’s performance. Why should you care about these things? Because understanding them will help you give the media a kick in the rear, and make the story a little more likely to get noticed. Thats why you should care.

First, take notice of these two links: CNN Colbert Search and this BBC story. These are big media outlets, and the BBC and CNN barely even touched on the performance, and are hardly touching the explosion in the blogs.
Now, if you understand a few things about the medias reporting this, you can help to elevate the notice of the story. First, you need to understand that the mainstream media is afraid of blogs due to the distributed power that they have. This is information that is being dissemated, and it is not under their control. These companies make money by displaying the news. Simple enough.

Now, understand that it was not some grand conspiracy by which the media did not publish the story about Colbert. No, the mainstream media did not pick up on the Colbert story because of human nature. Indeed, Colbert hit the nail on the head with his comment: “Let’s review the rules. Here’s how it works. The president makes decisions, he’s the decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Put them through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know — fiction.”

This zinger is not too far from the mark. A reporter only wants to write as much as they have to, and no more. It is due to human nature, not some malicious conspiracy. Second, when you observe Colbert’s audience, and not his speech, from the perspective of an audience reaction alone, one might assume that Colbert was not funny. Of course, he was speaking to an audience that he probably knew would not laugh, and as many people have pointed out, the president was comfortable with the imitator, and he got big laughs with that - but Colbert was speaking to “truthiness”. Colbert was basially spouting facts, that were also jokes. Due to the proximity of the president, and his obvious discomfort, the audience did not find the sketch funny. The reason that this audience did not find it funny is the human nature.

So, for the press that was there, you notice, they did not laugh. They did not laugh because they felt uncomfortable. While everything Colbert said was true, in the scene of the dinner it was impolite and that made the reporters uncomfortable. You can feel uncomfortable just looking at Bush’s reaction. Now, before you lambaste me for that comment about the terrible things that the Bush administration has done, I want you to take very careful note of my point. The reporters are human, despite what the administration has done, the incredible speech by Colbert made them feel emotionally uncomfortable. For us, separated from the crowd, we are released from the impolite nature of the speech, we can laugh openly, and take jabs at the administration behind its back. Colbert was brave for doing that openly.

So, because the reporters felt uncomfortable, and no doubt some shame and chagrin at not having truly done their job of reporting, they felt far more comfortable reporting on the Bush imitator. From their perspective, it was an easier story to write about. However, once the video hit the blogs, it became a story, and a story that the Mainstream Media could not really hide from. The reason is that the media fears the bogging community because there are many of us doing this for free and challenging their position.

So, what can you do to improve this scenario? Contact the press. Complain. However, remember to do it in a constructive fashion. Take that emotional argument into account, remember the press felt uncomfortable with Colberts speech, and if your email to them makes them feel uncomfortable, or you send them a flame, you are just making matters worse. Send them a polite simply written email, asking them why they did not report the story, and why they are not challenging the administration.

Remember, the media wants you to watch, if enough constructive emails go out, they will change because they want to keep their customers. I wrote the BBC, and to my delight they replied to their lack of coverage on the Colbert story, and I think that their reply was appropriate:

Dear Mr Walford

Thank you for your e-mail.
We focused our light-hearted story on George W Bush's appearance at the
dinner because, from what could be seen from the reports coming out of
the event, it seemed more unusual than a comedian criticising the White
House and the news media. While the Colbert speech has since become the
focus of much attention on the internet, at the time we wrote our report
Mr Bush's double act appeared to be the prime event of the evening.
Thank you again for your e-mail and your interest in our coverage. With
best wishes BBC News website