nerdgirl

You are misrepresenting both the report’s impetus, which I tried to explain to you, and the report’s findings. Primary data. (1) There is no "summary." There are acknowledgements, a forward, a prologue, introduction, commentaries (one of which I cited), and 11 scientific papers. There isn’t an Executive Summary or even a conclusions section. (2) The quote you pulled is from Otis’ commentary (p. xix). The same author who stated, explicitly: “(1) pain does not elicit intelligence known to prevent greater harm; (2) the use of pain is counterproductive both in a tactical and strategic sense; (3) chemical and biological methods are unreliable; (4) research tends to indicate that 'educing' information without the use of harsh interrogation is more valuable." (3) You are correct about at least one thing: conducting scientific-based research (repeatable, systematic, public/open) on the effectiveness of torture as an interrogation method in the US is very difficult or impossible to do. Imagine trying to get that approved through Internal Review Board (IRB)? That is largely to what Otis’ (culled) comment refers. This is analogous to research & FDA approval process on new therapeutics for smallpox and nerve agents. Just like researchers are prohibited from torturing research subjects as part of an investigatory program, researchers are also prohibited from intentionally infecting a research subject with smallpox or exposing them to lethal doses of sarin or VX. In the quote you culled the precise term “scientific research” is used. Regimes that have done the kind of controlled “scientific research” on human responses to torture are, again, not ones that I would advocate the US emulate. Would you? (I assume not, but making assumptions is rarely safe in SC). The quote, which references Chapter 5 & 6 in the report, does not refer to historical accounts, historical analysis, lessons learned, scientific research on methods that are legally permissive, or the body of evidence, briefly highlighted in post #32. I will always agree that more research is beneficial - that largely reflects my inclinations - whether sub-atomic physics, nanobiotechnology, cybersecurity, or ancient Sumerian history. (4) Chapter 5 refers to a historical case, CIA’s KUBARK manual, which included some “enhanced interrogation” methods, a la “Jack Bauer & 24.” Here’s the abstract from Chapter 5 (p. 95), which I echoes the excerpts I previously cited: “ A careful reading of the KUBARK manual is essential for anyone involved in interrogation, if perhaps for no other reason than to uncover a definition of interrogation that accurately captures the fundamental nature of interrogation while also concretely establishing what it is not (i.e., a game between two people to be won or lost). A major stumbling block to the study of interrogation, and especially to the conduct of interrogation in field operations, has been the all-too-common misunderstanding of the nature and scope of the discipline. Most observers, even those within professional circles, have unfortunately been influenced by the media’s colorful (and artificial) view of interrogation as almost always involving hostility and the employment of force – be it physical or psychological – by the interrogator against the hapless, often slow-witted subject. This false assumption is belied by historic trends that show the majority of sources (some estimates range as high as 90 percent) have provided meaningful answers to pertinent questions in response to direct questioning (i.e., questions posed in an essentially administrative manner rather than in concert with an orchestrated approach designed to weaken the source’s resistance). The chapter goes on to note: “In an emphatic article, Alfred W. McCoy provides a sweeping review of the development of the KUBARK manual and its disturbing legacy throughout the remaining course of Cold War history. McCoy makes a compelling argument that coercive interrogation methods, such as those set forth in the KUBARK manual, carry a far-reaching negative impact on U.S. foreign policy: a premise with critical implications for current counterinsurgency operations in Iraq.”Also is Chapter 5: “The devaluation of rapport — that is, building an operational accord [italics in original] with a source — as an effective means of gaining compliance from a resistant source is in large measure the product of the misguided public debate over the role of interrogation in the Global War on Terror, one that seems invariably to focus on the ‘ticking bomb’ scenario..” … “A likely factor driving the progressive ‘dumbing down’ of interrogation and interrogation training in the United States has been the ubiquitous treatment of the craft in movies and Hollywood. Viewers are treated to endless examples of the calculating, quick-witted interrogator who can rapidly assess the vulnerabilities of the source/prisoner and instantaneously devise and orchestrate an approach that almost immediately leverages compliance. Of course, what the viewer does not see (or, therefore, remember) is that these five-minute long vignettes are carefully scripted and repeatedly rehearsed. The actors do not deal with a constant chain of unknowns, nor are they asked to remain joined in the intense interpersonal exchange for hours, perhaps days, on end. It is critical that this artificial and often unrealistic view of interrogation not be allowed to influence doctrine for the real world.” The Chapter goes through in detail what has been shown to work from KUBARK and what resembles “Jack Bauer”-style visions of the real world. It also makes some provocative comments w/r/t how directly SERE training transfers to HUMINT and interrogations (or doesn’t). (5) Chapter 6 is half literature review of psychological methods (no torture) and half review of domestic law enforcement (including FBI) SOPs and case studies, including ones from domestic law enforcement in Britain and one from Northern Ireland. (6) By the thinking you are proposing applying to the ISB report the “9-11 Commission Report” is to be interpreted as suggesting the US pursue al Qa’eda-style training & tactics. In the report’s preface (intentionally misconstruing here to be illustrative) it does say “We learned about an enemy who is sophisticated, patient, disciplined, and lethal.” (Now, of course, the 9-11 Commissioners aren’t praising al Qa’eda for those traits or advocating the US adopt al Qa'eda tactics.) Again, since you are advocating that torture as part of interrogation is effective, the onus now goes to you to provide some evidence of that. All in all – thanks for getting me to revisit the ISB report. I love diving deep into a text. Also helped further strengthen the argument against the use of torture as part of interrogation. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

The US is obligated -- via domestic ratifying legislation -- to abide by the treaties, the laws of war, to which we are party. It is true that most of those international and domestic laws reflect wars that were fought as state-on-state battles rather than against non-state actors (terrorists) or prolonged counterinsurgency offensives. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

What was the context in which that quote you cited was culled? It was *not* with respect to the effectiveness of psychological and the types of interrogation methods in Army FM 2-22.3 or the type employed by retired FBI agent Jack Collum. It was looking for any indication of effectiveness of torture, that’s where the ISB found the ambiguity. The terms of reference (TOR) for the ISB study were to assess background and validity of “enhanced interrogation techniques,” such as waterboarding. It was with respect to the lack of evidence to back up the assertions advocating the use of controversial interrogation techniques like waterboarding. “A major stumbling block to the study of interrogation, and especially to the conduct of interrogation in field operations, has been the all-too-common misunderstanding of the nature and scope of the discipline.” “Most observers, even those within professional circles, have unfortunately been influenced by the media’s colorful (and artificial) view of interrogation as almost always involving hostility and the employment of force — be it physical or psychological — by the interrogator against the hapless, often slow-witted subject.” (p. 95). One of the study’s authors (Dr. Paulette Otis, USMC Center for Irregular Warfare and Operational Culture, Quantico VA), summarized the ISB’s conclusions: “(1) pain does not elicit intelligence known to prevent greater harm; (2) the use of pain is counterproductive both in a tactical and strategic sense; (3) chemical and biological methods are unreliable; (4) research tends to indicate that ‘educing’ information without the use of harsh interrogation is more valuable.” Comments from another member (Col. Steven M. Kleinman, USAF) of the ISB study:“The scientific community has never established that coercive interrogation methods are an effective means of obtaining reliable intelligence information.”Did you read Chapter 5 on Kubark (the CIA’s “offensive interrogation manual from the 1960s) and how problematic it was? That’s actually standard & a good thing. It’s not, however, particularly relevant to the ability to perpetuate and to sustain the type of scenario -- (better word) -- you are suggesting. You selectively snipped out long-term foreign policy and domestic security interests. The greatest benefit to uniformed military services members is if the USG’s policy is no torture, i.e., “Keep it Simple S___” (fill in the last “S”). Now if for the sake of argument, you imagine that the US successfully perpetuates a multi-decade façade (historically forgetting about the Church & Pike Commissions for the moment), what happens to the US credibility when it’s discovered? When was John Yoo’s originally classified DOJ memo written? 2002. How long did it take for that to no longer be FOUO? When did Sec of State Rice make the comments (selectively quoted) on extraordinary rendition flights? When were those flights? When were they exposed? For better (my contention) or worse, the USG doesn’t perpetuate grand conspiracies well; individuals within the USG might. One might see as a good thing – keeps ‘em honest at least about some things. And since you are advocating that torture as part of integration is effective, the onus now goes to you to provide some evidence of that. I’ll even start you off: Harvard’s Alan Dershowitz has cited, without specific reference, the use of torture by the Nazi’s against French resistance in his November 2007 editorial in the Wall Street Journal. That’s not the regime I want to emulate for US policy. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Please correct my mis-understanding if it is that: It sounds like you are suggesting that there is some sort of conspiracy across multiple agencies, multiple insitututions, multiple administrations (of both parties in the US), multiple countries, and at least six decades (probably more but WWII is a well-documented place to start) regarding the ineffectiveness of torture as an interogation method? In post #32 of this thread, I intentionally focused on operators, i.e., military, intelligence community, and civilian LEO including those with direct experience (i.e., the USMC Interrogators and the US Army HUMINT collectors). That's a minority of reference/experiences from the operators. There's a whole 'nother literature from historians, political scientists, direct accounts from former torture victims and POWs, etc. What you seem to be suggesting (again correct me if you mean something else), if I understand correctly, doesn't quite reach the level of 9-11 conspiracy theories, but it's firmly in revisionist history. Unquestionably there are normative factors, international law considerations, and US foreign policy interests. I don't understand how the type of conspiracy (I wish I could think of a word with a less pejorative connotation ...) benefits long-term US foreign policy or domestic security interests? E.g., Why does the world not trust the Russians regarding offensive bioweapons? Because they lied about the existence of their program from 1969 to 1992. After the 1979 Sverdlovsk anthrax incident, the world community became suspicious (to put it diplomatically). The CIA head has acknowledged that waterboarding was used against 4 detainees (# of times not specified). It was John Yoo's DOJ that revisited and revised policy to make waterboarding and other "enhanced interrogation" techniques permissable as part of policy. In January 2008, the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Mike McConnell (Vice Admiral, USN (ret)), acknowledged “'If I had water draining into my nose, oh God, I just can't imagine how painful! Whether it's torture by anybody else's definition, for me it would be torture.' McConnell said the legal test for torture should be ‘pretty simple. Is it excruciatingly painful to the point of forcing someone to say something because of the pain?'" VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

That strategy may have been implementable in a traditional military action. In the type of asymmetric warfare and counterinsurgency (COIN) operations that characterize OIF & OEF, that would be highly counterproductive as the conflict is in an urban setting and differentiating combatants from non-combatants is frequently difficult to impossible. See the experience of the French in Algeria. VR/Marg ... Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Thanks for the feedback on the AI video. I think you got to the origin of my mixed response: with the flowing water intro, the music/sound effects, and the slick music video production quality, it made waterboarding seem Hollywood-like. Like a seen from the next Tom Cruise flick or 24. When something becomes "Hollywood"-ified, it can lose its sense of reality and impact. Does the video risk unintentionally lessoning the associated atrocity? VR/Marg ... Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

It is completely reasonable to ask on what I based my assertion w/r/t the ineffectiveness of torture as an interrogation technique for gaining useful intelligence. And since you did ask ... If I did (I don’t) have knowledge of specific classified interrogation methods, I would not post them here. Yes, actually. Soldier-scholars like those who wrote the US Army Field Manual 2-22.3 Human Intelligence Collector Operations (warning large pdf file). Of course they probably had some non-“desk Warrior” advisement. And soldier-scholars who wrote US Army FM 34-52 Intelligence Interrogation (another large pdf file), which states in Chapter 1, under the heading “Prohibition Against Use of Force” “Experience indicates that the use of force is not necessary to gain the cooperation of sources for interrogation. Therefore, the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear. However, the use of force is not to be confused with psychological ploys, verbal trickery, or other nonviolent and noncoercive ruses used by the interrogator in questioning hesitant or uncooperative sources.” “The psychological techniques and principles outlined should neither be confused with, nor construed to be synonymous with, unauthorized techniques such as brainwashing, mental torture, or any other form of mental coercion to include drugs. These techniques and principles are intended to serve as guides in obtaining the willing cooperation of a source. The absence of threats in interrogation is intentional, as their enforcement and use normally constitute violations of international law and may result in prosecution under the UCMJ.” Unilateral, non-ambiguous statement with further detailing what not to do, i.e., don't use torture because it's not effective. FM 35-42 also warns: “Revelation of use of torture by U.S. personnel will bring discredit upon the U.S. and its armed forces while undermining domestic and international support for the war effort.” Scholars like the active duty and retired Marines who are members of the United States Marine Corps Interrogator Translator Teams Association, whose journal masthead reflects their experience and opinion: “…despite the complexities and difficulties of dealing with an enemy from such a hostile and alien culture, some American interrogators consistently managed to extract useful information from prisoners. The successful interrogators all had one thing in common in the way they approached their subject. They were nice to them.” Maj Sherwood Moran, USMCR - Guadalcanal 1942” Maj Moran’s direct experience and advice, which include recommendations like know their language, know their culture, and treat the captured enemy as a human being, was written up in this June 2005 article largely inspired by Marines discussing it on their version of Speakers Corner. Over & over again the psychology behind coercion and cooperation has been shown to be the critical element in effective interrogation techniques. Maj Moran excelled at extracting information from the enemy by appealing to their humanity, rather than by shocking, oppressing, or torturing. Scholars like LTC James Corum, USA (ret), formerly Army Command and General Staff College and also fellow at All Souls College, Oxford University, who has stated “The torture of suspects [at Abu Ghraib] did not lead to any useful intelligence information being extracted." Other scholars like GEN Colin Powell, USA (ret), and the 42 other retired generals and admirals and 18 national security experts, including former secretaries of state and national security advisers, who supported “HR 2082, the "Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008” (the bill that would have required the CIA to essentially use the Army FM 2-22.3 as guidance – & that’s ‘guidance’ in military speak not popular vernacular – w/r/t interrogation operations, which President Bush vetoed. His veto is actually more complicated and reflects large executive branch privilege disagreements, imo). Scholars like: Ray McGovern 27-year veteran of the CIA and was responsible for preparing & delivering PDB’s to President Reagan and President HW Bush. David Becker, DIA John Berglund, DHS Brian Boetig, FBI Michael Gelles, NCIS Michael Kremlacek U.S. Army Intelligence Robert McFadden, CIFA (it’s a DoD agency) C.A. Morgan III, Intelligence Technology Innovation Center (aka ITIC, part of CIA, unless they’re ‘officially’ ODNI now) Kenneth Rollins, Joint Personnel Recovery Agency (another DoD agency) Scott Shumate, CIFA Andre Simons, FBI John Wahlquist, National Defense Intelligence College (part of DIA) And finally scholars like Sen John McCain who has said “I would hope that we would understand, my friends, that life is not 24 and Jack Bauer. [One might argue that "the real world" could be substituted for Sen McCain's use of the "life" - nerdgirl] “Life is interrogation techniques which are humane and yet effective. And I just came back from visiting a prison in Iraq. The army general there said that techniques under the Army Field Manual are working and working effectively [i.e., no torture - nerdgirl], and he didn’t think they need to do anything else. “My friends, this is what America is all about. This is a defining issue and, clearly, we should be able, if we want to be commander in chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, to take a definite and positive position on, and that is, we will never allow torture to take place in the United States of America.” That would fall under one of those “reasons people love America” – we don’t lower the bar, in the past and in the future, America should in establish and maintain the bar. Because someone else does something does not make it “right” or effective. The US should not try to emulate China, Somalia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Sudan, or any other nation that employs torture. In the 1990s, Israel legalized torture. In 1999 Israel’s Supreme Court forbid torture largely because it was not found to be effective and more insidiously what was intended as an extraordinary interrogation method became widespread and routine, and all attempts to put real limits on it failed. Rather than a tool of last resort, in too many situations it was invoked at the first sign of frustration. That experience is hardly unique to Israel; they were just more forthcoming in addressing it. Similar patterns have been observed in other states that employ torture or have employed torture in the past as part interogation. Another problem with torture and interrogation is that when the two are combined they harm the credibility of the law enforcement agents conducting the interrogation if one wants to pursue legal prosecution. Notably (or perhaps more ironically), who have been the most vocal non-governmental claimants of the effectiveness of torture? UC Berkeley Law Professor John Yo, who is the former DOJ official/appointee who was largely responsible for the now-infamous memo that asserted common Article 3 of Geneva does not apply to either al Qa’eda or Taliban detainees. & Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz. No one has made that argument, so it’s something of a red herring. Altho’ based on the experience cited above there may be a credible case for treating enemy combatants and prisoners in that manner. Effective interrogation tactics do not involve torture, please refer to Army FM 2-22.3 or explain why the US Army, the Intelligence Science Board, and all of those other scholars I cited are wrong. Under the notional scenario you posited, I would want the most effective interrogation method used, i.e., *not* torture. Traditional interrogation methods have been shown to work under extreme circumstances, e.g., the real-world “ticking time bomb scenario”: “[Jack] Cloonan [32-year FBI veteran, whose experience included counterintelligence, counterterrorism, the Joint Terrorism Task Force] and a New York Police Department detective secured actionable intelligence from a suspect in the foiled millennium-bombing plot in just six hours on December 30, 1999 -- by following FBI procedure, and by encouraging a suspect to pray during his Ramadan fast. The suspect even agreed to place calls to his confederates, which led to their speedy arrests.” Torture is not a policy that any nation should employ. VR/Marg ... Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

The current issue of Foreign Affairs, which just arrived, asks that question. Fareed Zakaria on "The Future of American Power: How America Can Survive the Rise of the Rest" "Despite some eerie parallels between the position of the United States today and that of the British Empire a century ago, there are key differences. Britain's decline was driven by bad economics. The United States, in contrast, has the strength and dynamism to continue shaping the world -- but only if it can overcome its political dysfunction and reorient U.S. policy for a world defined by the rise of other powers." & Richard Hass on "The Age of Nonpolarity: What Will Follow U.S. Dominance" "The United States' unipolar moment is over. International relations in the twenty-first century will be defined by nonpolarity. Power will be diffuse rather than concentrated, and the influence of nation-states will decline as that of nonstate actors increases. But this is not all bad news for the United States; Washington can still manage the transition and make the world a safer place." [channeling inner nerd] Speaker's Corner 'book' club anyone? [/back to 'normal' nerd] VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

All good questions. Most -- if not all -- are addressed in the primary data, as well as the limitations: - “Understanding international crime trends: The legacy of preschool lead exposure” (full text pdf) - “Validation of a 20-year forecast of US childhood lead poisoning: Updated prospects for 2010” (full text pdf) - “How Lead Exposure Relates to Temporal Changes in IQ, Violent Crime, and Unwed Pregnancy” (full text pdf) - “Trends in environmental lead exposure and troubled youth, 1960–1995: an age-period-cohort-characteristic analysis.” And, no it's not the only factor nor that 'simple.' Nonetheless, there is a significant correlation (perhaps causal). VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Amnesty International has produced a video, purportedly for use in movie theaters, showing a waterboarding as part of its campaign against torture. Parts of the ad can be viewed here along with commentary by the AI campaign coordinator, by retired US intelligence community member and US Navy officer Malcolm Nance (former SERE instructor), by an ex-Guantanamo detainee who reported being waterboarded by representatives of the CIA in Afghanistan, and by a legal scholar (aka an academic, & not John Yoo) who supports the policies of the current US administration. I am unilaterally opposed to torture. Have stated so previously & repeatedly. It’s not effective, it endangers US & allie uniformed service members with the risk of reciprocal treatment (or as GEN Colin Powell (ret) wrote in a letter to Sen McCain on redefining Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions: weakening prohibitions on torture “put our own troops at risk”), it's counterproductive w/r/t pursuit of US foreign policy goals, and it is wrong normatively. Full version of the 1 ½ min advertisement here. It’s high production - has a music video 'feel' initially. My initial reactions/response to the advertisement are mixed. I’m clearly not the audience, however, to whom the advertisement is directed. I suspect it may be very effective in reaching those folks. It will also annoy, to put it diplomatically, some folks. Others will just chomp on popcorn and not care. VR/Marg ... Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Yes & no. Lead is conclusively known to be a particularly pernicous cause or irreversible neurological damage, as well as renal disease, cardiovascular effects, and reproductive toxicity. By removing lead, a major -- if not *the* major -- biophysical cause can be eliminated. And, at the same time, there are non-leaded substitutes available that don't carry a significant cost burden. Arsenic in drinking water is another example. While arsenic isn't associated with neuro-development, it will just kill you. And has been a major problem in parts of Bangladesh and India. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Concur. Presence or absence of liberal gun rights does not correlate directly with incidence of violation. They're independent variables. Otoh, one potential causal factor is lead. There’s been observed a link (definite correlation … possible causation) between increase in violent crime and lead poisoning in US cities in the late 1970s & 1980s and with the accompanying decrease in crime in the 1990s as exposure to lead has decreased (via elimination of lead in gasoline & paint). Similar lag observed in Canada. Lead … not gun availability or gun control. (See attached graphs.) And this is contrasted with violence levels in the UK, which did not begin eliminating lead until the mid-1980s and early 1990s and saw increase in violent crime in the 1990s. Hypothesis is to look for a corresponding decrease in violent crime in UK by 2015. Popular press accounts and links to primary data here. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

O come on Marg you are just throwing up smoke screen impediments to discussion. It is obvious "purpose" is about the reason we are here, not some submicroscopic or microscopic minutia. Alternatively rather than a dismissive response, you could interpret it as an attempt to establish common language? What's wrong with asking questions if the argument is solid? (I recognize that some -- on all sides -- do resort to belittling and sarcasm.) How? What specifically says intelligent design? You have technical training and should be able to speak in non-generalities. I wouldn't expect an artist or an accountant to, but neither would I exclude that possibility. Otoh, I function under the belief that people *are* smart and can understand the technical 'stuff' rather than 'dumbing' down (the latter one can argue is more insulting, eh?) I can look at -- especially while driving at night -- the GW parkway in northern Virginia & the interchanges w/I-395, the Memorial Bridge, the 14th St Bridge, and the adjacent roadways west of the Lincoln memorial in DC and question the evidence of intelligent design in that structure, which we know was intentionally designed. (Alternatively, one may argue that it was intentionally designed to be confusing so as to impede the progression of a foreign invaders, but that's pure speculation.) Yes, I agree incredibly fascinating structures! You seem to be trying to make a teleological argument (whether you know it or not), i.e., that in seeing a purpose in people, phenomena, biology implies supernatural intervention. Supernatural intervention *is* one possible explanation. Supernatural explanations aren't repeatable, predictive, or public; they're supernatural. Otoh, there are other valid, repeatable, public explanations that account for the observations that do not require supernatural intervention. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Im not an educated man. I deeply respect all those who follow their desire in them, but isnt it true that eveything created has a purpose, even if its just expression? I really am not aware of anything that does not have purpose, especially a cell. What do you mean by "purpose"? What do you mean by "expression"? What is the purpose of Hemorrhagic fever filoviruses, like Ebola & Marburg? By "purpose" do you mean shift down a proton gradient to a more favorable energy state? Or more favorable pH? Or by "purpose" do you mean hydrophobicity, i.e., the spontaneous process that drives liposomes (like cell walls) to form in water? When I look at cells -- from genetic though protein through structural levels -- there's lots of evidence for evolution and zero repeatable, public evidence of intentional design. If you [or Mockingbird] can provide some that would be fantastic! Evidence of evolution includes similarities & differences in DNA sequences across species, examples of gene regulation (including at least one in humans) by DNA derived from an endogenous retrovirus (ERV), mutation rates, protein structures, and larger cellular structures (such as mitochondria). VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

That's a great example! The 1969 Levinthal thought experiment --it's just over one page long & there are no actual calculations -- illustrates how these seemingly huge notional mathematical calculations are problematic. They assume linear, stoichiometric (i.e., 1 to 1), static, and non-cooperative processes rather than the parallel, catalytic, dynamic, and cooperative processes that occur in biology. Levinthal's long-time linear path was also someting that most biologists of the time knew to be false. Levinthal sets non-cooperative, random walk up in opposition to the enzymatic, cooperative parallel processes that actually occur. Cooperative binding of hemoglobin (protein the carries oxygen in the blood) was known -- the 1st oxygen bound to iron in hemoglobin is fairly slow, the last one (4) binds something like 5000 times faster due to slight changes in the protein structure. As you may know, the reality of that is very important in human physiological processes, including limitations in low-oxygen environments. Chris Anfinsen, of the NIH, got the Nobel Prize not too many years later for work that resolved the paradox. Anfinsen's work wasn't inspired by Levinthal's thought experiment; he was working on understanding protein structure before 1969. In discussions citing Levinthal sometimes that unambiguous resolution is not included. If all the processes in our brain were linear, stoichiometric, and static, I wonder what the maximum capability of human neural processes would be? Propose using IQ as a metric; speculate that if the same rigid requirements were applied to the human brain, the IQ of the species would never exceed single digits. Welcome more refined analysis on that speculation. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

How does a living cell indicate design? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Great thread! Thanks for starting it! Why? Because myself & others heartily believe (word chosen intentionally) that we have and we can do amazing things – for ourselves, for our fellow Americans, and yes, even for the world. I’m not an isolationist by any means. The U.S. Constitution is the framework for what I see as the greatest experiment in representative democracy that the world has ever seen. While we may disagree vehemently on who we would like to see occupy the Oval Office and the Capitol, very few Americans want to overturn the rule of law by representative democracy as conceived, debated, and put into practice by that group of imperfect men 220 years ago. We have an amazing level of heterogeneity, what used to be called the “American melting pot,” that somehow we’ve made work. It’s been painful at times; truism: more painful for some than others. To closely paraphrase the vice provost for international affairs at Harvard University, the United States has been the leading architect of the international laws and organizations sculpted in the wake of World War II. It built this multilateral framework because it was useful and because it was right. One might speculate that garnered America more respect than any military power victory. To closely paraphrase Archbishop Desmond Tutu: More than anything else, the United States is looked upon fondly for its remarkable generosity. Europe will never forget the charity of the Marshall Plan after the devastation of World War II. America needs to be reminded that its history and example have provided millions with inspiration for their own struggles for freedom, democracy, and a better life. America has in the past and can be in the future President Reagan’s vision of the shining city on the hill. Justice and liberty for all are words and a vision that, to co-opt Sen Obama's words, I cling to. It’s the intangible as much as the tangibles (people, geography, & civil rule of law) that I love about America! VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

What happened to this sentiment? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

I think there was a Simpsons episode that explored that scenario ... Yes, one could imagine that religiously motivated conflict throughout the centuries would not have occurred. (I’m less than convinced to put it diplomatically that all putatively religiously motivated conflict was purely religious in its origin.) Yes, religiously oriented bias, persecution, segregation, etc would not have occurred. (Again less than convinced that humans would not devise some other methods – Star Belly Sneeches anyone?) Otoh, the world would have to give up Handel (im-ever-ho, Handel’s “Messiah” is reason alone to find value (!)), the Sistine Chapel, Notre Dame & it’s Rose window, the Bahamian Buddhas (which the Taliban did destroy … putatively for religious-motivated reasons ), Machu Pichu, the Pyramids, Stonehenge, St. Basil’s Cathedral, the Urnes stavkirke and the other Stave Churches of Norway, the Bhagavad Gita, the Swayambhunath stupa in Kathmandu, every mani stone in Nepal & Tibet, the Kedarnath (Hindu shrine), from the simple Shinto and Buddhist shrines that one finds one (seemingly) every street corner in Kyoto & Nara to the Heian Imperial Shinto Shrine, the Paleolithic Venus figurines … So much of humankind’s creative positive effort has been directed toward reflecting spirituality with some wonderful results! I really don't think I'm that special ... it doesn't have to be one or the other. The human brain is complex enough to be able to do & to appreciate both - religion/sprituality/concept (which includes denial) of the 'higher power' & science. Related: there is evidence (real evidence, not individual subjective observations or perceptions) that scientists who make major & revolutionary discoveries have abilities both in science and in the arts and do not lack cognitive complexity. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Thanks for the links & background. Vr/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

In Georgia, a "Identification Card for Voting Purposes" is free. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Concur with your observation w/r/t many wanting to stay in the past - change is different & the past is known (no great surprise or insight there). And concur with your asserted reason too -- money & power that money brings. Who has the more virtuous (or less virtuous) claim to wanting to hold on to the past or perceived victimhood? Sen Trent Lott lost his position as Senate Majority Leader because he wanted to go back to the past (of Sen Strom Thurmond's time & inclination) & was unwise to say so in front of a camera. Is it better to know that he held those views, which are likely to reflect some percentage of his constiuency, or is it better to not know? Who has the more virtuous (or less virtuous) claim to creating new victimhoods? (Everytime I hear someone claim indignantly a variant on "I didn't get a promotion because they had to promote a minority," etc. I wonder ... goes back to that loss of money/power reason.) VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Concur enthusiastically! Would you direct us, i.e., specify links & citations, to the repeatable, reproducible, physical public evidence "indicating design in the universe" about which you write? Or do you see physical processes that follow physical laws as evidence of design? Thank you. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Last year that was a choice that I had. My 22 year old Scottish fold cat died (non-folded ears). Over those 22 years, I had adopted 4 other adult (sometimes older adult) cats. I love the way the Scottish fold breed looks and the disposition. When I got my Scottish fold, they were a relatively new breed and not as popular. Ones with non-folded ears were free; they’re not free any more. I was willing (& able economically) to pay for the cat I (thought I) wanted and intended to fly to the breeder to personally bring a new kitty home (in the passenger cabin). I couldn’t do it. I wanted a pet – not a show animal or a working animal. Why? Knowing the number of cats and dogs that are abandoned each year, it was a choice I couldn’t pursue. That was the right choice for me; others will choose to buy pets & that’s fine for them. I also donated the money that I would have spent to the cat rescue from whom I ended up getting my lil’ gray tabby ‘mutt’ kitty. Otoh, my aunt has a working ranch in Colorado. She has pure bred dogs: a Caucasian Ovcharka, a Central Asian Shepherd, and a Great Pyranees. Each of the dogs has specific traits that complement the others. They're working livestock guardian dogs; they’re not pets. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Interesting question. While I'm sure both you & I could find individual counter-examples if we looked hard enough, Soviet sale of conventional munitions were driven overwhelmingly by ideology and politics not profit (or substistence). As I'm confident you know, Moscow supplied massive quantities of conventional arms to "rogue" regimes throughout the developing world during the decades of the Cold War. Political suitability, not economic rationality, was the driving force in Soviet arms sales policy. There may be examples from South American or East Asian former communist/communist-leaning states of arms sales motivated by profit. Sales on unconventional weapons – nuclear, CW, & BW – was different. The Soviet Union never transferred truly advanced chemical or biological weapons or weapons technology. It widely assumed that much of Syria's basic CW program was based on knowledge from the Soviet program that was outrightely given or transfered with a wink of an eye and turned back. Albania eventually developed a small CW stockpile while under the Soviet sphere of influence. The USSR violated the BWC incredibly, they just did it all w/in the Soviet States. After the 1974 "smiling Buddha" test, India turned to its Cold War patron for nuclear-related technology. That was about balance of power with China. Subsequently, under President Reagan restrictions on export of sensitive and nuclear technology to China and Pakistan were weakened (even more so than post-Nixon). For the US, it wasn't about 'cash,' it was realpolitik & maintaining balance of power. It's been the capitalist business men, largely of northern Europe, who have been willing to sell nuclear technology (civilian power) for profit, e.g., AQ Khan's acquisition of technology. The DPRK & Syria don't have the same kind of sphere of influence/balance of power relationship. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying