Recovered!

SpaceX was ecstatic about the landing of the upper stage of Starship after its 13th test flight last month. It was on target in the Indian Ocean, it landed upright, and it was floating in the sea--rather than exploding or sinking, which had happened in all 12 previous test flights. That meant engineers at SpaceX could view and study it for valuable data after its flight.

It kept right on floating for days, and then for weeks. They had not expected this potential bounty of information and were unprepared to bring it back to Starbase TX. Rough seas made recovery difficult, but eventually they managed to bring it into a port about 24 days after it landed. SpaceX engineers will go there to inspect it.

Why was recovery both difficult and expensive for SpaceX? Watch below.

from USA Today

"We're exempt" 3

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

"Compassion" justifies the sanctuary movement in their opinion. Our laws limiting who and how many may enter the US are an outrageous violation of the virtue of compassion, they seem to think. Instead of working to change those laws they consider un-compassionate (as our system allows), they choose to defy the lawfully created rules.

That's very bad policy. It won't work for them and it won't work for America.

Of course we need laws, and of course the laws should be enforced. Citizens who want completely open borders make a claim that is irrational, and they have left common sense behind. No other country's borders are open in that way, and for good reason.

If "no one is illegal [image]," then no one is safe either.

"We're exempt" 2

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

A 32-year-old woman, Kate Steinle, died in July of 2015 while walking in San Francisco. She was with her father and a friend when a man, Jose Garcia-Zarate, shot her in the back. He was in the US illegally and had a long criminal record.

He had earlier been arrested on a drug warrant. US immigration officials asked San Francisco police to hold him for a couple days, but they dropped charges and released him. Kate was shot less than three months later. He said at his murder trial that it was an accident. The jury found him innocent of that but guilty of a minor charge. Then an appeals court threw out that charge. He was only deported--for the seventh time.

How could a man here illegally break our laws, kill one of us, and get home free?

Under our previous president's administration, immigrants illegally crossing our border were set free and told to show up later in court for processing. One example in 2022 from Venezuela went to New York (sanctuary city), was housed at the Crown Plaza hotel, and then requested to be flown to Georgia. Taxpayers paid for his flight, then in Georgia he brutally killed a nursing student, Laken Riley (photo).

from Imprimis

(cont'd tomorrow)

"We're exempt"

Our first president, trusted for his integrity, was elected unanimously. George Washington "was, in every sense of the words, a wise, a good, and a great man" according to Thomas Jefferson. Some thought he was so good that he should be made into a king.

But he rejected the idea then, and we don't want a king today. Why? A king can be a tyrant with power to overwhelm the people. America is a republic. Our representatives are elected by citizens to make laws that govern us according to the people's will--not a king's will. We call ourselves a nation of laws (not men) and we enforce those laws.

That is, we all did respect and enforce our laws . . until recently. Now, segments of this country declare themselves exempt from laws they don't like. That's the "sanctuary" movement (image). It started with the city of Berkeley, California, back in 1971 and now it's that whole state and more.

A long list of cities, counties, and states declare that they refuse to enforce America's immigration laws.

from Imprimis

(cont'd tomorrow)

Unjust

Luigi Mangione murdered a man in cold blood on a street in New York City. He said he did it, and there's video evidence of it, so there's no doubt about it. He's on trial for the crime now.

It's an "open and shut" case of breaking the law, of doing what's obviously and morally wrong. But a substantial group of people disagree. Alarmingly, 41% of registered voters between 18 and 29 say that this murder is ok with them.

How do they justify the killing? The victim was an insurance executive, and they say that insurance companies are unjustly withholding payments from clients who deserve to have their claims paid (image).

"Clear Thinker" Kaizen Asiedu tries to clear up the confusion by saying: "It's not that hard. Murder is bad. Luigi Mangione murdering Brian Thompson is bad. People dying because they were denied healthcare is bad. Murdering someone to fix healthcare does not fix healthcare and is bad." Yes, that's rational thinking.

But we're in trouble when a sizeable number of us think murder is ok as a way to solve a problem.

from Clear Thinker

Bee design 3

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

Bee algorithm 3

(cont'd from last Friday's post) 

If you are open to the idea that God exists, the obvious appearance of design in the natural world -- in honeybee hives and the intricate dance directing other bees to flowers -- makes sense. If you start with a commitment to believing God does not exist, you have to think up something to explain away the design of the natural world. 

Even the famous crusader for atheism, Richard Dawkins, concedes that living animals appear to have been designed and wisely assembled, though He definitely would not agree that the Creator placed an algorithm in the bee's brain to direct its behavior.

Committed atheistic scientists have to mentally fight the ubiquitous appearance of design in living systems. Francis Crick advises them: "Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved." 

If they don't fight hard against their own common sense, they'll conclude that a Creator designed it.

image

Bee design 2

 (cont'd from yesterday's post)

Bee algorithm 2

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

Boston Research Journal was quoted in yesterday's post saying, "The use of hexagonal honeycombs by bees is not a coincidence." They think they know where this "ingenious" design came from. Not from intelligence or a plan, of course; not from an algorithm in their design; but from natural selection working on random genetic variations (evolution):

"Hexagonal honeycombs built by bees showcase nature’s ingenuity and efficiency. Through their meticulous construction, bees optimize space, create sturdy structures, conserve resources, and regulate temperature within the hive. The hexagonal shape has evolved as a result of millions of years of evolutionary fine-tuning, allowing bees to build remarkable architectural marvels that support their survival and collective success."

Isn't a bit of a stretch to assume that evolution made it all happen: optimizing space, regulating temperature, meticulous construction, etc., without any direction or intelligence?

image

These publishers along with most of the scientific world assume that bee behavior--like the "waggle dance" to communicate location of flowers and the building of the ingenious hive--came about solely by chance through evolution, no plan or design or intelligence necessary. 

Like office buildings . . which pop up randomly all the time??!

No, you have to abandon common sense to believe that.

(cont'd next week)

Bee design 1

Nature and the human body, as per yesterday's post, show signs of intelligent engineering design. Consider the honeybee, for example. 

For our many new readers who haven't seen this before, enjoy some re-posts from three years ago.

Bee algorithm 1

You could describe an office building as a complex, functional system designed to enable people to carry out their jobs and accomplish their company's purpose. Well-educated people designed and constructed all the sub-systems (like electrical) that make it work.

You could also say that a honeybee hive is a complex, functional system designed to enable bees to carry out their jobs in this home which provides for their needs while they accomplish the mission to produce honey.

photo

Intelligent, these bees. They start working at their jobs when they're three weeks old. The ones who build the hive don't go to hive-building college, since they're born knowing exactly what to do. How, exactly, do they know that?

Glands in their bodies create construction material: "Wax is an expensive commodity and so comb construction can be quite costly for a honeybee colony. Honeycomb is constructed in such a way to minimize wax consumption." Like a responsible human engineering firm.

Its hexagonal pattern gives optimal strength and stability to its material (wax), while it optimizes space and thermal efficiency for its purpose. "The use of hexagonal honeycombs by bees is not a coincidence" (Boston Research Journal published this week).

from Evolution News

(cont'd tomorrow)

Human body 2

 (cont'd from yesterday's post)

One thing that could go wrong in our bodies would be a failure of sufficient oxygen to get to our living cells. Every one of them (30 trillion cells) needs a supply of oxygen every minute. Our bodies store water and fat, but not oxygen. 

Muscles pull oxygen (O2) from outside the body into the lungs. Molecules of O2 diffuse into blood vessels at a limited speed. 

To maximize how much O2 can get through blood vessel membranes and into the blood, each lung's little air sacs are surrounded with tiny blood vessels. There are so many that the total membrane area of all the blood vessels together amounts to the size of a tennis court. The video pictures it for you.

Engineering--not magic--gets the job done.

We'll come back to these videos of the body's engineering design in a future week. Tomorrow . . design in the honeybee.

Human body

How many kinds of diseases are there? Nobody knows the answer because the number changes. Infectious diseases are caused by pathogens (bacteria, parasites, etc.), genetic diseases are caused by DNA abnormalities; there are degenerative and autoimmune diseases, and the list goes on. Over 7,000 identified diseases are rare, with research discovering more. 

Thousands and thousands of things can go wrong with the human body. It follows that thousands and thousands of things are functioning well in your body if you are not sick. 

Your body is fabulously fine-tuned. It's amazing to non-scientists like me, when I occasionally learn about some complex system. But what about engineers who understand and actually build complex systems? Their opinion would be valuable.

A computer engineer (a problem solver with expertise in changing complex systems to perform new tasks) got together with a medical doctor (who has primary care, hospital, and hospice experience). They both see evidence of a Designer in how our amazing bodies function. We'll take a look at their videos this week.

Yes, they recognize that their thinking is outside the box. Conventional thinking in our culture (and in the field of science) assumes that nothing exists beyond the material world (materialism). They disagree. They are unconventional.

(cont'd tomorrow)

Re-wilding

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

Preserving nature has probably been around much longer than trendy, modern movements might lead you to think. But emphases have changed. "Environmentalism" pushed extreme, irrational claims for years. But "re-wilding" seems more reasonable.

A short description of the process might be just stepping back from human management and letting nature take over. 

Here's another example from Britain. Financial collapse drove property owners of a failing commercial farm to step back from farming their land. They removed their internal fences, broke up drainage systems, and released certain animals to live freely.

Guess what happened over the next 25 years.

Bison return

Picture a British landscape of farms, forests, meadows, gardens. It's beautiful and orderly. There's a "deeply rooted cultural assumption that nature, properly handled, should be visually orderly."

Britain has no genuine wilderness remaining. Every acre is owned. Even forests are managed, and there's a growing cost to it. Some are willing to give up that management to an animal that can accomplish some of their goals for the forests naturally.

European bison were native to the land until loss of habitat and hunting eliminated them 6,000 years ago. They're being brought back and given free range in some places. Bison do not produce a tidy woodland. They make a messy, complex one, but it's a healthy ecosystem.

Human management can't sustain or replicate what these animals do. They call it "re-wilding."

(cont'd tomorrow)

Forced woke 3

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

An extremist ideology behind the new standards teaches students that America is racist and oppressive, that it's their moral duty to "resist" America's evil.

Kindergartners will learn to look for unfair social situations. Sixth graders (age 12) will learn the thirteen principles guiding Black Lives Matter. Children will be trained to see injustice everywhere, inspired to lifelong bitterness.

As a mother and grandmother, I ask - what will their future be like when they've spent their childhood being trained in resentment? Consider also the whole state of Minnesota. What will it be like to live in a society of such people? 

Most of us would rather see our kids grow up in hope and faith and virtue, prepared for a satisfying life. Apparently, the rest of us prefer the vision of children being sacrificed to a political cause.

It's my hunch that most normal Minnesotans just don't know what's about to transform schools in this state.

from American Experiment

Forced woke 2

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

What will the implementation of these standards look like in your child's classroom?

Ethnic studies (under the social studies umbrella) lessons will teach kids to:

• Identity - know their social group and others'
• Resistance - both understand how people "fight for liberation against systemic exercises of power" and take action in this fight
• Ways of knowing - discover "contemporary systems of oppression" and what has worked in the past to fight them

This is an "intentional shift" away from "content" (like facts of history) to a "pedagogy" that tells students to "construct their own meaning."

All these standards need no further action by the legislature. They are official and carry the weight of law, since they were approved by the 2023 legislature to go into effect this school year.

(cont'd tomorrow)

Forced woke

When school starts, in just a matter of days, new state-mandated standards will apply to teachers in Minnesota. If you want to be licensed to teach in this state, you will have to demonstrate that you understand how to be "woke."

Specifically, you must, among other things, do the following:

• affirm students' identities including sex and gender
• understand white supremacy
• mitigate your own behavior in order to disrupt oppressive systems 
• empower learners to be agents of social change

These rules were set by the Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board (PELSB) under the authority of Gov. Tim Walz.

How does it justify such a radical, politically one-sided standard? They say that:

“[A] teacher must have a foundational understanding of how race and racism are embedded in our institutions and everyday life”

If your children go to a Minnesota public school (photo), understand that this is what they will be taught. It's not optional for the school or the teachers. 

Is this what you signed up for?

 from American Experiment