But, but, but ...

Hillary will win  in  a landslide - trust us

Hillary will win  in  a landslide - trust us

Day before

Prediction: Oscars set for record viewership because Donald Trump

"Oscars ratings have slumped over the last decade but tonight it's believed they will surge…all because of The Donald.

Members of the Academy have linked a predicted ratings rise to Trump bashing as it's expected that A-listers will make huge political protests during the ceremony."

Last year only people [sic - apparently a number was meant to be included here] watched the 88th Annual Academy Awards but according to the Daily Mail it's believed that a whopping 200m more people will tune in for tonight's awards.
A member of the Academy revealed: "The collective hatred of Trump and the idea that some of the biggest stars are going to meltdown on primetime television should be cat-nip for viewers.
"People normally tune in to look at the dresses.
"This year they want protests and drama."

Day After

 Oscar ratings hit nine-year low

Now That's Entertainment

And combining the two posts below, here's science politicized

With a huge assist from the media, of course

With a huge assist from the media, of course

Transgender "medical" conference kicks out the only skeptic present - by threatening violence.

It was intended as political theater to begin with, but the mere presence of a token dissenter, invited, presumably, to demonstrate that the organizers were serious about actually examining the issue, proved intolerable.

The conference, held February 2-5, 2017 in Los Angeles, drew more than 600 medical clinicians and scientific researchers active in caring for gender non-conforming, gender-confused, and transgender adults, adolescents, and children. They met to “affirm our dedication to transgender health” in light of “uncertainty due to the change of leadership in Washington, and concern over what the consequences may be for trans health and trans rights.”
Kenneth Zucker, a psychologist with years of experience treating gender confusion, was slated to speak on several panels at the conference. He was a token, actually, a voice representing politically disfavored but scientifically weighty research that cautions against labeling gender-confused children as “transgender,” in part because the majority of these children later “desist” from cross-gender identification.
... Karasic admitted that he’d intervened on another occasion with the American Psychological Association to prevent Johns Hopkins researcher Paul McHugh, an outspoken opponent of transgender reassignment surgery and medical interventions for gender-confused children, from presenting: “When Paul McHugh had an accepted proposal at the APA,” Karasic said, he (Karasic) had “intervened with the scientific committee” and “got them to revoke their acceptance” of McHugh’s paper. (Apparently the test of whether a paper “advances” transgender care is ideological, not evidence-based.)
The conference moved ahead, minus its lone cautionary voice, leaving the medical zealots free, at the urgings of transgender adults, to embrace ever-earlier medical and surgical intervention for confused and gender non-conforming adolescents.
So they did, giving presentations on a variety of topics ranging from social transition for young children (“what do we know?”), puberty suppression (“lessons learned and unanswered questions”), puberty suppression and loss of fertility (“puberty suppression…effects on fertility…and the associated ethical and legal ramifications”), to double mastectomies for teen girls (“impact of male chest reconstruction on chest dysphoria in transmasculine adolescents…a preliminary study”).

This is exactly how global warming became "settled science". Papers questioning the theory were suppressed, scientists who dared question the hypothesis were denied funding and driven from their universities, until almost no one in the scientific community dared publicly debunk it. We're seeing that process unfold again on this particular mental illness. 

Sad.

Well that didn't take long

Plenty of water back then - if only wicked man hadn't ruined the climate

Plenty of water back then - if only wicked man hadn't ruined the climate

With California's global-warming-caused "permanent" drought declared over on Friday after just five years, "scientist" have shifted their alarmism and now say that Colorado and its southwestern neighbors face catastrophe because of a thousand-year drought that, of course, can only be ended by eliminating global warming.

There's no question that there's a drought in the Southwest, though that doesn't seem all that surprising for a desert climate; after all, it became a desert, presumably, from lack of rainfall. But there's no mention by these objective scientists of the population growth in, say, Phoenix, Las Vegas and Los Angeles since 1922, when the waters of the Colorado were first divvied up, nor do they discuss the centuries-long drought that began in 1200 AD.  We all know, of course, that those wicked Pueblos were ruining the atmosphere back then with their fleet of millions of cars and trucks, but you'd think these experts would at least pay glancing reference to it.

If you're interested, there's a real article, published by a real scientist at the University of New Mexico in 2003, before global warming became a religion, here. The author discusses the droughts of 1000 AD, 1200 AD, 1500 AD, and 1950 AD, all of which lasted far longer than the current one, and writes this:

What could cause precipitation to remain lower than normal for months, years, or a decade or more? The dendrochronological record shows that droughts have occurred in New Mexico for centuries, long before people were plentiful enough to disrupt the climate system.  
• The 1950s drought was very substantial, but previous droughts (e.g., around A.D. 1000 and in the late thirteenth and sixteenth centuries) were both longer and drier.
The 1980s and 1990s were years of plentiful rainfall by comparison. Precipitation failed to exceed 12 inch- es only one year in those two decades. These were decades of explosive population growth in the state. It is imperative for policy makers to understand that recent climatic conditions in the 1980s and 1990s were not “normal” by any standard. The 1980s and 1990s were just as anomalously wet as the 1950s were anomalously dry. 
• The late twentieth century wet spell is truncat- ed by the smoothing function, but it is clearly a wet spell of historic proportions. 

Global warming may be happening, and human burning of CO2 may be contributing to it, but the lies and hysteria of proponents of the hypothesis cast doubt on that: why lie, if proof were available? 

Contracts reported

44 Calhoun Drive

44 Calhoun Drive

44 Calhoun Drive, $3.385 million. Purchased for $4.0415 in 2008, it started off in 2014 at $3.875 and it's taken nearly three years to find a buyer. Very nice house and grounds - we have clients who were tempted by it, but ultimately decided they wanted a different neighborhood. 

207 Valley Road

207 Valley Road

207 Valley Road Cos Cob. I thought this was a terrific house, right on the Mianus River, but it took 230 day to find a buyer, which surprised me, a little. Owners paid $2.070 for it in 2005, when it was just two years old, and priced it this time at $2.3, which seemed, to me at least, as a very reasonable starting point.

94 Pecksland Road

94 Pecksland Road

94 Pecksland Road, $3.999. I wasn't impressed with this property when it came on the market (briefly) in 2012 at $4.175 million, and I remained unconvinced when it returned in 2014 at the same price. My opinion is irrelevant, of course, but the general market shared it, and it sat unsold for 707 days, its price as immovable as the structure itself; $3.999 isn't really a price cut, no? In any event, their obstinacy has apparently paid off, and good for them. 

I am - I've downloaded a new book on my Kindle

If only Marlon could be here to mumble some inanities himself

If only Marlon could be here to mumble some inanities himself

WSJ: At the Oscars, be prepared for politics

To be fair, I don't believe I've watched the show ever, but this is certainly not the year to start. The entertainment event I'm looking forward to is on Tuesday night, when Trump delivers his State of the Union address. That should be worth putting down a book to watch.