Quote: Carl Sagan, Cosmos Chapter IV: Heaven and Hell

The end of chapter IV. 40 years ago the scientists were already warning about the perturbation of the planet’s climate.

Our lovely blue planet, the Earth, is the only home we know. Venus is too hot. Mars is too cold. But the Earth is just right, a heaven for humans. After all, we evolved here. but our congenial climate may be unstable. We are perturbing our poor planet in serious and contradictory ways. Is there any danger of driving the environment of the Earth toward a planetary Hell of Venus of the global ice age of Mars? The simple answer is that nobody knows…

A few million years ago, when human beings first evolved on Earth, it was already a middle-aged world, 4.6 billion years along from the catastrophe and impetuosities of its youth. But we humans now represent a new and perhaps decisive factor. Our intelligence and our technology have given us the power to affect the climate. How will we use this power? Are we willing to tolerate ignorance and complacency in matters that affect the entire human family? Do we value short-term advantages above the welfare of the Earth? Or will we think on longer time scales, with concern for our children and our grandchildren, to understand and protect the complex life-support systems of our planet? The Earth is a tiny and fragile world. It needs to be cherished.

The book and TV versions of Cosmos overlap considerably but are not exactly the same. The book expands on many topics, of course, without the time limits of a 1-hour TV episode. Yet the TV shows indulged in visuals that aren’t easily captured in print. In this case, Episode IV of the TV series ends with a montage of how “Everything changes eventually” — images of storms, volcanoes, fires, burning of forests, climatic catastrophes… Huge trucks. Eventually the damage becomes irreversible. Pollution. Short term profits, or long-term habitability.

And so the last few minutes of this episode look like a trailer, or perhaps an inspiration, for the famous Godfrey Reggio/ Philip Glass film Koyaanisqatski (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koyaanisqatsi), which I saw in a theater upon first release, and have rewatched several times over the years on videotape and DVD. Its thesis has been challenged, but after all these years, I think it’s as valid as ever.

I’m rewatching the Cosmos TV series, one episode a week or so, in part because when I saw it as originally broadcast in 1980, I must have watched it on the 12 or 15 inch black and white TV set that I had at the time. I’ve never seen it in color, until now.

Posted in Science | Comments Off on Quote: Carl Sagan, Cosmos Chapter IV: Heaven and Hell

Links and Comments: Coronavirus, Conservative Propaganda, Vaccines, Flat-Earthers, the view of the US from around the world

NYT, Paul Krugman: The Cult of Selfishness Is Killing America; subtitle: The right has made irresponsible behavior a key principle.

So we’re failing dismally on both the epidemiological and the economic fronts. But why?

So what was going on? Were our leaders just stupid? Well, maybe. But there’s a deeper explanation of the profoundly self-destructive behavior of Trump and his allies: They were all members of America’s cult of selfishness.

You see, the modern U.S. right is committed to the proposition that greed is good, that we’re all better off when individuals engage in the untrammeled pursuit of self-interest. In their vision, unrestricted profit maximization by businesses and unregulated consumer choice is the recipe for a good society.

Support for this proposition is, if anything, more emotional than intellectual. I’ve long been struck by the intensity of right-wing anger against relatively trivial regulations, like bans on phosphates in detergent and efficiency standards for light bulbs. It’s the principle of the thing: Many on the right are enraged at any suggestion that their actions should take other people’s welfare into account.

This rage is sometimes portrayed as love of freedom. But people who insist on the right to pollute are notably unbothered by, say, federal agents tear-gassing peaceful protesters. What they call “freedom” is actually absence of responsibility.

\\

The Week (my favorite print magazine): Conservative propaganda has crippled the U.S. coronavirus response

Why does the United States have the worst coronavirus outbreak in the developed world? Part of the answer is surely that our basic state functions have been allowed to rot, or been deliberately destroyed, over the years. State capacity and competence have been shown around the world to be a key factor in whether nations can get a handle on the pandemic.

But another reason is conservative media. A small but nevertheless very loud and angry minority of Americans have had their ability to reason dissolved in a corrosive bath of crack-brained propaganda.

\\

Business Insider: A 20-year study on dozens of vaccines finds they are safer than ‘almost any other modern medical intervention’

The trouble is, some people just don’t “believe” evidence; their minds are made up for reasons not based on evidence.

\\

Boing Boing: Strap in for a detailed explainer on flat-earthers’ beliefs

It’s a video that I haven’t watched more than a part; the site that linked this characterized the subject as “a proxy for a much larger paradigm that mistrusts anything that you can’t touch and feel.” In other words, the very bottom level of my awareness hierarchy. Or maybe (they overlap) the understanding hierarchy.

\\

Salon: A field guide to the pandemic deniers.

Every day there is more data to prove the dangers of the coronavirus. Yet, bizarrely, the more proof we have of the damage of the pandemic; the more vicious and hysterical its deniers. It is hard not to be overwhelmed by the sheer volume of uninformed, deluded ideas covidiots spew on a daily basis. We mourn not just the lives lost and the bodies damaged, but the collective intelligence of our nation. With international news consistently depicting the United States as the dumbest nation in the developed world, it is as if news of the covidiocy is almost as depressing as news of the virus’s spread itself.

With discussion of The Eye Rollers, The Shoulder Shruggers, The Narcissistic Hedonists, The Self-Proclaimed Scientists, and The Conspiracy Theorists.

\\

The Guardian [a UK newspaper]: Europeans’ trust in US as world leader collapses during pandemic; subtitle: “Many citizens appalled by Donald Trump’s handling of coronavirus crisis, study finds”

More than 60% of respondents in Germany, France, Spain, Denmark and Portugal said they had lost trust in the United States as a global leader.

In almost every country surveyed, a majority of people said their perception of the US had deteriorated since the outbreak. Negative attitudes of the US were most marked in Denmark (71%) Portugal (70%), France (68%), Germany (65%) and Spain (64%). In France, 46% and in Germany 42% said their view of the US had worsened “a lot” during the pandemic.

\\

And a video at New York Times: ‘That’s Ridiculous.’ How America’s Coronavirus Response Looks Abroad. Subtitle: “From lockdowns to testing, we showed people around the world the facts and figures on how the U.S. has handled the pandemic.”

You’ll never see this on Fox News.

Posted in Conservative Resistance, Politics, Science | Comments Off on Links and Comments: Coronavirus, Conservative Propaganda, Vaccines, Flat-Earthers, the view of the US from around the world

Links and Comments: Wackadoodle Coronavirus Advice from the Right

Vox: How Trump and his son helped make a Covid-19 conspiracy theorist go viral in a matter of hours.

A quack doctor with claims about alien DNA, belief in demons, that scientists are making a vaccine to stop people from being religious, and how the US government is partly run by lizard people, says masks are worthless and hydroxychloroquine is the cure for the virus. So Trump, who has no moral compass or understanding of the real world, and his son, promotes a video of her on the Capitol steps.

Slate: Caught Lying About Baseball Invite, President Calls Twitter Criticism “Illegal” and Endorses Demon-Sperm Doctor and Social Media Companies Take Down Trump-Shared Viral Video of Coronavirus Conspiracies.

Washington Post reports. “Immanuel says she previously worked as a doctor in Nigeria and also calls herself a ‘Deliverance Minister’ who is ‘God’s battle axe and weapon of war.’ She has given sermons attacking progressive values and promoting conspiracy theories including, in her words, ‘the gay agenda, secular humanism, Illuminati and the demonic new world order.’ Another doctor shown in the video, a noted Trump supporter, called Immanuel a ‘warrior.’ ”

Promoted by Brietbart. Defended, of course, by Fox News (Tucker Carlson …) and Rush Limbaugh (Rush Limbaugh defends COVID-19 conspiracy theorist doctor who believes in alien DNA), who think science and reason are a liberal conspiracy.

Seriously, is the right-wing so clueless about how the world actually works — demons? lizard people? — that they would promote this twaddle? As if there weren’t so many other reasons, here are reasons to dismiss anything said by Trump, his son, Fox News, Breitbart, Rush Limbaugh, and all their cohorts, forever. Unless they post retractions and apologies. Which I’m guessing they never do.

A broader subject for later: why are Republicans, and conservatives, unconcerned that the politicians they support are so consistently dimwits (Reagan, the Bushes) or morons (Sarah Palin, Donald Trump)? Can they not tell? Do they not care? (The occasional respectable Republican, like John McCain, never made it to high office.) That is: Is that the best they can do? If the evangelicals need the despicable moron Trump to stay in office indefinitely to ensure that their values — primarily, I gather, their anti-gay, anti-abortion, pro-Christianity — endure via judges on the Supreme Court and in judiciaries on down — then maybe those values aren’t worth preserving.

Posted in Lunacy, Politics | Comments Off on Links and Comments: Wackadoodle Coronavirus Advice from the Right

Links and Comments: Graphics and Lists

In thinking about Andrew Sullivan’s old Daily Dish blog, a few posts ago, I dug into my archive directories and found text file saves of bookmarks from various old computers, as far back as 2008, including one from my work PC in 2014 (when I was still contracting). They accumulate differently and never match (just as well) and I was startled by how many bookmarks there were for sites I found regularly interesting and followed sometimes for years, before letting it them fall away. There are, after all, only so many hours in the day.

Among those old bookmarks were a few rather cheeky ones on religion and pseudoscience, which I don’t think I’ve linked anywhere on this site before. But let’s start with one I saw just today on Facebook, partly because I’m wondering if WordPress here will display the image if I simply enter its URL:

History of Religion (by Paul Kinsella)

I guess it does display it! This is, as it says, from a cartoonist named Paul Kinsella, who doesn’t seem to have a personal site, except for his Facebook page. Another, one-panel, cartoon, seen while Googling:

Person #1: “What’s it like being an atheist?”
Person #2: “Do you think Zeus is real?”
Person #1: “No.
Person #2: “Like that.”

Which brings us to this refound link from an old bookmarks page: Gods We Don’t Believe In.

You can click to the webpage, but for consistency in this post I’ll show part of it as an image:


The full lists are quite long (12 page-down screens on my laptop) of the names of various ancient and current gods from every religion imaginable. The two columns are exactly the same except that the right one has one more name at the bottom: Yahweh. (I wish I could find a better-sourced such list — there are, of course, lists of various ancient gods on Wikipedia — but the point is valid nonetheless.)

My thought about this issue has always been that if the question is, do you believe in God?, the answer isn’t yes or no, it’s, which one? Or perhaps the question should be, who’s your favorite god, and why? The Old Testament is frankly polytheistic. “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” not “Pay no attention to those false gods worshiped by other tribes…”; the commandment presumes that the gods of other tribes are as real as the god who supposedly issued the commandment. Remnants of polytheism lie in the Catholic church’s over 10,000 saints (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_saints), one for every subject imaginable it seems, echoing the Greek and Roman pantheons of specialty gods; and for that matter the Christian god who is really three gods but actually one. (Not to mention all these angels and demons that many Christians apparently believe in.)

I imagine the impatient Christian would say, but I believe in the *one true God,* the same one all believers believe in, even if their religious practices vary. We’re all worshiping the same true god.

And my response is yet another bookmark that I saved years ago: The Dummy’s Guide to the One True God.

From here you can right-click (on a PC) to “view image” and see it full screen. Again, I don’t have an original source for this; it was linked from some blog I was reading in 2012, without a credit to the original author. The point is valid nonetheless: they’re obviously *not* all the same. This is the primary point of Stephen Prothero’s book God Is Not One.

Finally, to expand the scope from religion, here’s “The Venn Diagram of Irrational Nonsense”:

Again, right-click to view image full-sized. It originally appeared here, on a prototypical “some guy on the web” blog, inactive for a year now, but nevertheless makes a couple valid points. I’m not particularly interested in the accuracy of his Venn overlaps. The main point is that the scope and extent of human belief in things that are psychologically appealing but have no verifiable basis is vast. And second point, much as in the world of conspiracy theories, is that followers of one of these beliefs, including the religious ones, would likely be indignant to be included on a chart with all those other obviously nonsensical beliefs. And the others all feel the same about them.

 

Posted in Lunacy, Religion | Comments Off on Links and Comments: Graphics and Lists

Link and Comments: Personal Liberty and Seat Belts

As I was saying: Washington Post: How mask fights echo seat belt fights: ‘The right to be splattered all over their windshields’

As transportation secretary in the Reagan administration, Elizabeth Dole pushed for mandatory seat belt laws. The idea created angry divisions among the public as some Americans said their rights were being infringed. Stephen Teret, a public health expert at Johns Hopkins University, recalls the era.

“We are a country that very, very much values personal freedoms,” Teret said. “And there are always some people who see their personal freedoms as being more important than the common good. And that’s the fight public health has always had.”

Dole appeals to college students:

Lecturing to a college classroom, Dole says, “How many of you think it’s important to buckle your safety belt every time you get into a car?”

Not everyone raises their hands.

“Do you know that every 10 minutes someone is a killed in car accident?” she asks. “Do you know that every 10 seconds someone is injured?”

The students look startled.

Dole wasn’t finished.

“Do you know that each of you in this classroom can expect to be in a car crash at least once in your lifetime?” she says.

Then the camera zooms in on her face.

“Now,” she says, “is there anyone here who doesn’t think it’s important to buckle up every time you get into a car?”

But this misses part of the point. Sure, you’re free to jump off a bridge if you like, or drive over a cliff, with or without a seatbelt; but car safety, like pandemic protection, is a matter of social responsibility. In the case of seat belts, the more people who die in car crashes not having worn seat belts raises the insurance premiums of everyone, even those who did wear them; the responsible people pay a price for the selfishness of the irresponsible people. Just as people who don’t wear masks because PERSONAL LIBERTY could well be spreading the virus and infecting other people. The anti-mask zealots don’t seem to understand that — or more likely, don’t care.

And from direct and indirect experience: cars of the 1940s and ’50s were deathtraps. If your car went off the road and flipped over, you were gone. This is common in movies of the era, and I saw it in a newspaper clip in a scrapbook of my grandmother’s, about some incident in the ’50s, in which some enormous car of that era (something like a 1956 Buick perhaps, https://www.google.com/search?q=1956+buick), had run off the road and flipped over, and killed three of her cousins.

Posted in Politics, Social Progress | Comments Off on Link and Comments: Personal Liberty and Seat Belts

Link and Comments: Federal Deficits and Pandemic Relief

One of the themes of my blog here is that reality is complex. While many if not most people (especially conservatives) cling to simple, black and white, alternatives to every issue, and think the right answer is always white, the truth is almost always gray, sometimes circumstantial.

Thus the H.L. Mencken quote: “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.”

Today’s example comes from an op-ed by New York Times technology columnist Farhad Manjoo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farhad_Manjoo) who contributes both to NYT and NPR (and who lives in the Bay Area, I think, but can’t find a confirming source at the moment).

Today’s essay: America Looks Hopelessly Broke. It Isn’t. Subtitle: “For 40 years, both the left and the right have been unnecessarily obsessed with deficits, to the detriment of the well-being of citizens.”

Print title: “How to Fix America: Spend, Spend, Spend”

This sounds intuitively suspect, because Republicans are always worrying about the federal deficit, when it comes to social services and pandemic relief, except when they’re not, when it comes to cutting taxes for the wealthy or to expanding the military budget. (These last two are always priorities of Republicans, no matter what the state of the economy or the world.)

The point, as Paul Krugman and others have made, is that the government is not like your household. The federal deficit is not like your mortgage and car loan. (Actually, the point there is that many households carry such debt for years, decades, and don’t consider it a moral failing, as Republicans feel about the federal deficit.)

This point dovetails with recent posts about the idea of Universal Basic Income, or the economic theories in that early Heinlein novel, which suggest that the government’s role in the economy is, literally, to simply print enough money to grease the economy, to keep it going, because the innovators and inventors keep creating new potential wealth. The idea that money should be tied to the gold standard, say, is a fantasy: it implies that cumulative wealth is fixed, a non-zero sum game. But that can’t be true, otherwise cumulative wealth would never have increased since we were all living in caves. OK, or all living as farmers and herders. But it does increase, and the government’s job is to facilitate the spread of that wealth throughout the economy. By literally printing money if necessary.

But let’s hear from Farhad Manjoo, who’s read a couple recent books, by Carter and Kelton:

And whenever anyone is brave enough to suggest that the government itself should provide useful services to Americans — whether big-ticket items like health care, child care and college education, or smaller things like an upgraded electric grid or a national broadband service — the first reaction from many on the right and the left is one of defeat and resignation. “How will you pay for it?” they ask. And, often, the whole conversation stops right there, because with a trillion national debt, America looks hopelessly broke.

It is not. Kelton argues that our government’s inability to provide for citizens isn’t due to a lack for money; instead, our leaders lack political will.

Kelton — who has worked as an economist for Democrats in the Senate and as an adviser to Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaigns — is one of the leading proponents of Modern Monetary Theory, or M.M.T. The theory argues that because the government is in charge of its own currency, it cannot “run out” of money the way a household or a business can, and it therefore does not need to raise taxes to fund government spending.

And

M.M.T. is controversial even among left-leaning economists — Lawrence H. Summers, who once worked as Barack Obama’s director of the National Economic Council, has called it “a recipe for disaster” — and it’s easy for non-economists to get lost in the many technical debates surrounding the idea.

But one doesn’t need to buy into everything about M.M.T. to see Kelton’s fundamental point — that in the 40 years since Ronald Reagan won the White House, both the left and the right have been unnecessarily obsessed with deficits, to the detriment of the well-being of citizens.

(I see here the text online has been revised form the version in print today!)

He follows up with a dig at Obama’s 2008 stimulus after the Great Recession—because he “lowballed” it; it wasn’t enough.

Posted in Conservative Resistance, Culture, Economics | Comments Off on Link and Comments: Federal Deficits and Pandemic Relief

Skiffy Flix: Rocketship X-M

Now the fun starts. Having dutifully watched the precursors of science fiction films in the mostly horror films of the 1930s and ‘40s (with just two SF films from before 1950, Metropolis from 1927 and Things to Come from 1936), I’m now beginning rewatches, or perhaps in a few cases first watches, of the principle science fiction films of the 1950s. There were half a dozen a more a year (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_science_fiction_films_of_the_1950s), more than a dozen in some years. (I don’t plan to watch them all; perhaps the best 2 or 3 from each year. Planned list here.) What triggered this eruption? No doubt studies have been done; offhand I’d speculate that the film industry took a few years to recover after the end of World War II, and with the use of rockets (the German V-2s) in that war, and speculation about using rockets to launch into space, ideas for Hollywood films emerged. Also, print science fiction anticipated these themes by decades, but at the end of the 1940s, and early ‘50s, stories and novels about building moon rockets became more plausible, and were more realistically depicted. (e.g. Heinlein’s “The Man Who Sold the Moon”; Clarke’s Prelude to Space, reviewed here, https://www.blackgate.com/2020/06/18/we-have-launch-arthur-c-clarkes-prelude-to-space/ )

But Hollywood has never been full of scientists or engineers who strive to depict space flight realistically; it is full of entertainers who seek audiences, and so who depict things in ways that are intended to be dramatic, that appeal to audience’s sense of adventure and danger, but that are scientifically illiterate, even nonsensical. (This is a consequence of most people being stuck at the first stage of my hierarchy of awareness, projecting intuitive, even infantile, notions of how the world works, into environments and on to scales where those notions don’t apply.)

And this is the reason I’m watching all these old movies—really, my primary motive. I’m fascinated to see exactly what ideas Hollywood producers, and unschooled scriptwriters, had about how spaceflight would work, or, if there’s a way to tell, what shortcuts and cheats they took, despite knowing better, to appeal to audience biases. (A typical one: how spaceship make swooshing or roaring sounds as they pass. I’m sure many people still don’t understand why this is nonsense, but anyone writing any kind of science fiction should.)

So here we are. My plan is to watch these 30 or so principle SF films from the 1950s in chronological order. There were just two in 1950. The big budget one was Destination: Moon, with a script by Robert A. Heinlein (based somewhat on the story mentioned above), but a lower-budget one was finished and released first, by a month. This was Rocketship X-M, released in May 1950.

The film was written, produced, and directed by one Kurt Neumann; it starred Lloyd Bridges and several others including Hugh O’Brien; it had a musical score by Ferde Grofe. Neumann did the 1958 film The Fly (the first version, with Vincent Price and David Hedison), but otherwise has had no enduring reputation. Ferde Grofe is still known as the composer of the “Grand Canyon Suite,” a piece I grew up listening to (and still hear occasionally on my local classical music FM station), but which today strikes me as 3rd rate Beethoven’s Pastoral. I found his music in this film simply noisy, or sappy; but standards and styles of music change, as I noted about the music in Things to Come. Of the actors, Lloyd Bridges was popular in the ‘60s in a TV series called Sea Hunt, and later featured in the 1980 parody film Airplane! – he was the one in the control room who, increasingly stressed, kept saying things like, “I sure picked the wrong time to give up smoking!” or “to give up crack cocaine!.” And so on.

To the film. In this case it might be easier to summarize the plot relatively briefly, and then make comments.

Gist

The first manned rocketship launches, with four men and one woman, on a mission to the Moon. A rocket malfunction sends them far off course, and they reach Mars instead. There they find evidence of a ruined civilization, radiation suggesting nuclear war, and savage natives who kill three of the five. The other two return to Earth but run out of fuel and crash. Despite this, the mission director is confidant a second spaceship will be built.

Take

The film has modest special effects and decent acting, but is marred by typical Hollywood fantasy physics, a dated sexist theme about the woman scientist, and a cliche romantic subplot. The lesson on Mars about the danger of species self-destruction is a bit heavy-handed, but apt for its time.

Summary

  • The film is about the first manned spaceship—and not just that, but the first to attempt to reach the moon. It’s a rocket crewed by four men and one woman. The rocket launches on schedule, and heads for the moon. The name means Rocketship Expedition Moon.
  • Along the way there is a thump that indicates the engines have stopped; and then a streak of meteorites goes by. An error in calculation, to restart the rocket, leads them to keep accelerating, with everyone falling on the floor…
  • When they wake up, they realize they are way off course, but, as it happens, are approaching Mars! (The captain justifies this coincidence by supposing that “something infinitely greater has taken control” of their mission.)
  • And so they land on Mars. There’s atmosphere here, so no need of pressure suits, just gas masks. They emerge and walk outside, in a land obviously filmed in Death Valley—and here the film, otherwise in black & white, is sepia toned—as they walk over sandy, rocky hills.
  • They come to sand dunes, and see a ruined structure, circular and with a tower in the middle, evidence of a past civilization. They detect radiation. They conclude that the civilization here exhibits the tendency of advanced culture to self-destruct. [Remember this was 1950, just after nuclear bombs ended World War II, and the threat of complete nuclear destruction hung in the air.]
  • They rest in a canyon, but then returning to their ship, they encounter primitive people, like cave men, on the ridges above them, tossing rocks and throwing spears. Only two of the five survive and make it back to their rocket, and take off.
  • The two are the pilot (Lloyd Bridges) and the one woman, Dr. Lisa Van Horn (Osa Massen). She realizes that they don’t have enough fuel to land successfully on Earth. She manages to contact Earth, to send them the message about what they found on Mars, and the two of them embrace as their rocket crashes into the Earth.
  • The director on Earth faces the press, and insists the mission was not a failure—it proves that rocket travel is possible. And the message about what happened on Mars is information that could prove the salvation of the world. And that work on RX-M 2 will begin the next day.

Comments

  • The launch is set at White Sands, in New Mexico, and the last medical check the five astronauts undergo is to have their blood pressure taken.
  • With just 17 minutes before launch, the launch director, Dr. Fleming, holds a press conference with the astronauts sitting at a table in front of a roomful of reporters. Fleming invokes flying saucers and robot missiles to explain how a base on the moon would enable the control of world peace.
  • He goes on to describe the ship’s flight path: it will launch straight up to a height of 300 miles, then turn 90 degrees to a direction parallel to the surface of the Earth -! He doesn’t use the word orbit. Indeed, this is how the launch plays out; when the rocket reaches a certain height, it pivots somehow, the astronauts holding on as if tilting. How is this done? We see bank and gyro indicates as in a plane. (And an altimeter, and an “air speed” dial.) No mention of, say, retro-rockets. This bizarre flight-path, with no explanation of how the rocket makes its 90 degree change in flight path, is the most bizarre anti-scientific conceit of the film.
  • In the press conference at the beginning the issue of women’s roles immediately comes up. Does Dr. Horn have any comments, “from a woman’s angle?” She’s coolly professional, at first. As the film proceeds, this theme expands, with remarks by the male astronauts about the stress she must feel, and so on. There’s a scene in which the ship’s captain, and she, independently make elaborate calculations (with paper, pencil, and slide rules) for adjusting their course, and get different answers. The captain rejects her answer, and you think she’s about the break into tears. At the end, when she realizes they don’t have enough fuel to safely land on Earth, she does break into tears.
  • And there’s romance! As the two survivors, pilot Floyd Graham and Dr. Horn, return to Earth, he waxes about walking at night along a Lake Locarno in Italy, and how until now he hadn’t thought of her as a woman… They embrace, and realizing they have only minutes to live, claim to sense the long life they might have had together. It’s sappy, even though the romance is doomed, and it’s gratuitous, like the weddings that ended so many early era space opera novels.
  • The rocket is multistage, though the first stage is seen to be still firing when it drops behind the main ship. The main ship then lands on its tail (on Mars) and takes off again without that first stage. (That’s plausible; the trip had been planned for the Moon, with its lesser gravity, and Mars’ gravity is also less than that of Earth.)
  • We see the usual misunderstanding of gravity and orbits; we’re told the rocket will accelerate until it reaches the “equilibrium” point between Earth and Moon, and then let the Moon’s gravity draw them onward. Later, as the ship returns to Earth, Dr. Horn advises that when they see an increase in speed (how are they measuring speed??) that will mean they’ve reached Earth’s gravity. (Argh.)
  • The most egregious error is the central thesis of the story: that having lost control of their rocket on its course to the Moon, they revive themselves and find themselves approaching Mars. This betrays a mass misunderstanding of the enormous size and scale of the solar system, and ignores the infinitesimal chance that an error in their course would lead to anyplace interesting. (This is the same error Velikovksy, if anyone remembers him, made; cf. Sagan’s book Cosmos p91.) It is as if, having missed one’s freeway exit in LA, one found oneself in Paris. Alas, few SF TV shows or films are much better at this; to casual viewers of all these shows, all those stars and planets are just up there, out there somewhere, all more-or-less equally remote.
  • The astronauts wear ordinary clothes at all times. On Mars they do wear oxygen masks, but no suits.
  • The astronauts experience ordinary gravity aboard the ship, but in scenes when they are supposedly weightless, this is demonstrated by having objects abruptly float into the air (on visible strings), even having to be held down. This is not how weightlessness works. Lost in Space used the same gimmick.
  • The Earth they see has no clouds, of course. There’s odd talk about how the sun still shines on them, until they reach *outer* space (which is entirely dark?) During the flight they look back at Earth, and ahead toward the Moon, and the phases don’t match as they should.
  • The meteorites look like balls of tinfoil—actually like three balls of tinfoil clumped together–and they all look exactly the same. And of course they make roaring sounds as they go by.
  • They do the same ridiculous 90-degree turn before descending to Mars.

Also

  • The 1960s TV series Lost in Space cribbed, or echoed, several things from this film: the floating objects in weightlessness; the stream of asteroids passing the ship; the idea of the ship going out of control and missing its target.
Posted in Movies, Skiffy Flix | Comments Off on Skiffy Flix: Rocketship X-M

Test Post

I’m trying to allow comments to posts, but only for two days. I’ve tried this before, and it hasn’t seemed to work. When I allow comments indefinitely, I get thousands of spam emails. The resetting applies only to new posts, like this one. If you see the post, please comment, anything at all.

Posted in Website Issues | Comments Off on Test Post

Link and Quotes: Frank Bruni on the pandemic and freedom

I saw this via Facebook, and I can’t just now find a cleaner URL:

NYT: Frank Bruni, So This Is Your Idea of Freedom?

He’s says more eloquently what I was trying to say a couple days ago.

What does the abject failure of the United States, the richest country in the world, tell us about ourselves? In the mirror of Covid-19, how is America reflected?

Before I share my answers, I want to make clear: I remain deeply in love with America and fiercely proud of it, for reasons that would take several newsletters to do justice to.

But right now I’m just as deeply and fiercely worried. Our struggle with this pandemic has convinced me that somewhere along the way, we went from celebrating individual liberty to fetishizing it, so that for too many Americans, all sense of civic obligation and communal good went out the window.

Somewhere along the way, we also developed an immature definition of freedom, conflating it with selfishness, convenience and personal comfort. That’s writ large in the freak-out over masks. In reality, they’re “a ticket to more freedom,” Gov. Jared Polis of Colorado said a few days ago when he instituted a requirement that Coloradans wear them in many circumstances. “It makes it less likely that businesses will be shuttered. It makes it less likely that people will die. It makes it more likely school will return.”

In other words, important freedoms for all sometimes require slight adjustments by individuals. That’s not tyranny. That’s responsibility.

Posted in Culture, Science | Comments Off on Link and Quotes: Frank Bruni on the pandemic and freedom

Andrew Sullivan: Inspiration for this Blog; essay on Pandemics

[draft]

Trying to look away from all the stories about crazy protesters who object to wearing masks and who think the pandemic is all a conspiracy theory they can blame on people they don’t like…

To look at long thought-pieces by the adults on the planet about the effects on society of past pandemics, and the possible effects of this one.

Today, Andrew Sullivan—

—With an aside about Andrew Sullivan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Sullivan). He’s a political commentator and blogger, whose blog The Daily Dish launched in 2000 (according to Wikepedia) and which I discovered later that decade. Sullivan claims to be a conservative, and he’s Catholic, but he’s also gay, and so his takes on many topics have always been unpredictable. Again according to Wikipedia, he broke with the conservative movement in the George H. Bush era, because of the Republicans’ rightward shift on social issues.

His Daily Dish blog migrated to other sites, and then he stopped blogging in 2015. But in recent years he’s been writing weekly columns for New York Magazine (https://nymag.com/, not to be confused with The New Yorker), which I haven’t followed because there are only so many sites (or newspapers or magazines) one can follow every day or week. But one site I do follow, Jerry Coyne’s Why Evolution Is True (https://whyevolutionistrue.com/, which is only occasionally about abstruse recent discoveries in evolutionary science, much more often about cats, or issues of the day), has followed and occasionally posted about Sullivan’s NYMag columns. And today, about Sullivan’s last column for that magazine, before he moves back to a personal website, to be called The Weekly Dish, a subscription site. (It’s his living.)

This is pertinent because Sullivan’s Daily Dish was the inspiration for this blog.

Previously, as sole editor of Locus Online beginning in 1997, I posted occasional editorials (as Charles N. Brown did in every issue of Locus Magazine), about website or science fictional topics, such as convention reports, and then in 2003 created a “blog,” as everyone was doing in those years, in Blogger, a then popular blogging hosting site, which was linked from the Locus Online homepage (That was Views from Medina Road). This ran for a decade, but was confined mostly to, again, website or SF topics, or other topics loosely relevant or interesting to a science fiction audience. That decade-long blog migrated at some point to WordPress, and then to a directory of my current blog; the entire earlier blog is at http://www.markrkelly.com/Views/.

Having been laid off from work in late 2012, and inspired by Sullivan’s Daily Dish – and also, to create a repository for family history and photos – I created my own domain name, markrkelly.com, using WordPress, to create a blog on general topics, as Sullivan’s did. Sullivan’s mode was to link to some current newspaper article or magazine essay, quote a paragraph or two, and then make his own comments. Exactly like my “Links and Comments” posts. Sullivan also allowed comments, which I haven’t done; he could check comments and accept or reject daily, because that was his full-time job. Since I’ve never had the following that Sullivan has, virtually all of the comments I’ve gotten, when I’ve allowed them, have been spam. Thousands and thousands of spam comments. So I turned comments off.

The problem with posting everything on my own domain, of course, is that once I’m hit by the proverbial bus, or have an Afib-derived stroke, my entire site will exist only for another two or three years until my registry of the domain name expires. The content will all still exist, on the Locus server, but no one will be able to find it. I don’t know if there’s a solution to this problem; likely, no one will care.

—So, back to Andrew Sullivan on the pandemic. A Plague Is an Apocalypse. But It Can Bring a New World. The meaning of this one is in our hands.

A long, well-researched essay.

Plagues have been major movers of historical events. They appeared once humans settled down…

Our species seems never to have experienced epidemic diseases for the vast majority of our time on earth, encountering them only when we settled down, formed stable, concentrated communities, and started farming and domesticating animals for food. Plagues were usually a function of diseases that jumped from precisely those animals in close proximity and spread through concentrations of the human population in settlements, villages, towns, and cities as civilization began. Humans lived in more intimate relations with animals; their settlements compounded filth, infected water, fleas, and excrement human and animal. We were unknowingly creating a petri dish and calling it home.

…Plague is an effect of civilization.

The fall of Rome….

And plagues drive people crazy. You might call them mass-disinhibiting events. It’s not hard to see why. When the plague returned to a fast repopulating Europe in the 14th century, in the Great Mortality known as the Black Death, up to 60 percent of Europeans perished in an astonishingly short amount of time. When normal life has been completely suspended, and when you don’t know if you’ll be alive or dead in a week’s time, people act out.

A cultish sect, which had first arisen earlier in Italy, emerged in Germany, for example, called the flagellants. These half-naked protesters traveled from town to town on foot in pilgrimages, atoning for the sins they believed had caused the plague, and whipping themselves bloody and raw as penance, in bizarre public rituals that drew big crowds. They rejected the established Church, claimed to have direct access to Jesus and Mary, disrupted Masses, and, as time went by, radicalized still further, becoming increasingly populated by the poor and ever more anti-Semitic. Forbidden to take a bath, shave, or change clothing on their pilgrimages, they also doubtless became unwitting spreaders of the disease as they moved from place to place and masses of panicked penitents greeted them.

Plagues do not usually unite societies; they often break them apart in this way. Around the turn of the 20th century, for example, Asian immigrants were blamed for an outbreak of bubonic plague in San Francisco and Honolulu; in 1918, enterprising xenophobes settled on Spain as the source of the new and deadly flu and called it “the Spanish Lady,” to add a soupçon of misogyny. In the polio outbreaks at the beginning of the past century, immigrants from Southern Europe were scapegoated. In general, the wealthy escape from cities in plague times, minorities are blamed, the poor revolt, families are torn apart, and cruelty abounds.

Trump: “Chinese virus.”

And with a literally existential event taking place all around them, 14th-century Europeans shifted in their spirituality as the Romans had done before them. Just as the sixth-century plague had finished off the old religion of the Roman gods and brought the final triumph of Christianity, so a newly personal and mystical variety of that religion replaced the more institutional one. Sects from the lower classes began to emerge — like the Lollards in England, who rejected key Catholic doctrines and translated the Bible into English. In these rebellious religious subcultures, the seeds of the Reformation were sown.

Key passage about the benefits of a world-shaking event:

Paradoxically, the Black Death also reshaped and rebuilt the rural economy to benefit the poor. With half the population suddenly wiped out by bubonic plague, food became plentiful and cheap as soon as the harvests returned, because there were so many fewer mouths to feed, and the price of labor soared because so many workers had perished. Day laborers suddenly had some leverage over the owners of land and exploited it. A manpower shortage also led to innovations. With fewer people on higher wages, for example, the cost of making a book became prohibitive — because it required plenty of scribes and copiers. And so the incentive to invent the printing press was created. Industries like fishing (new methods of curing), shipping (new kinds of ships both bigger and requiring less manpower), and mining (new water pumps) innovated to do more with fewer people. The historian David Herlihy puts it this way: “Plague … broke the Malthusian deadlock … which threatened to hold Europe in its traditional ways for the indefinite future.”

There will be more pandemics as humans fill up the planet the destroy more and more of the natural habitat (as Brazilians burn down the Amazon jungle).

And finally:

Knowledge of a brutal new virus does not prevent its spread. Only a much more profound reorientation of humankind will lower the odds: moving out of cities, curtailing global travel, ending carbon energy, mask wearing in public as a permanent feature of our lives. We either do this to lower the odds of mass death or let nature do what it does — eventually so winnowing the human stock that we are no longer a threat to the planet we live on.

That’s the sobering long view. It is hard to look at the history of plagues without reflecting on the fact that civilizations created them and that our shift from our hunter-gatherer origins into a world of globally connected city-dwelling masses has always had a time bomb attached to it. It has already gone off a few times in the past few thousand years, and we have somehow rebounded, but not without long periods, as in post-Roman Europe, of civilizational collapse. But our civilization is far bigger than Rome’s ever was: truly global and, in many ways, too big to fail. And the time bomb is still there — and its future impact could be far greater than in the past. In the strange silence of this plague, if you listen hard, you can still hear it ticking.

Posted in Culture, Science | Comments Off on Andrew Sullivan: Inspiration for this Blog; essay on Pandemics