Boy, this has become kind of an internet version of a kid in a well, but I’ve had so much interest and well wishes in the situation that I’ll provide an update.

I just got a call from the vet, and the short answer is that she doesn’t know what’s going on, except that the red cell count is down to ten percent, which is below the level at which they normally transfuse.

There’s no fever, and in fact she’s hypothermic, so they’re keeping blankets on her. No problems with kidney or liver function. She’s wondering if it’s some kind of parasite, but won’t know until they do an outside lab test. She’ll probably need blood, and at least an overnight stay tonite, neither of which are available at her current facility, so I’ll have to move her (or have them do it).

That’s all she knows for now.

Lileks has a devastating case against those who say that Bush had a plan to invade Iraq before 911 (hint, he wasn’t the first, or only president…)

?If Saddam isn?t stopped now,? the AP story said, quoting Clinton,?He will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And someday, someway, I guarantee you, he?ll use that arsenal.?? Thus spake Clinton in 1998. He went on to note that the strikes planned could not possibly destroy Saddam?s arsenal, because A) they didn?t know where everything was, and B) they didn?t want to kill Iraqis by unleashing clouds of toxins. And it gets better: a sidebar noted that this war plan ? Desert Thunder ? had been prepared weeks before, in case Saddam stiffed in the inspectors.

Bill Clinton had a plan to go to war before the crisis flared! What does that tell you? Obviously, he was looking for any excuse! Halliburton! We all know about the ties between Clinton and Halliburton ? he gave them a sweet no-bid contract after his Balkans war, you know.

You’ll have to scroll through some blogging about (potentially apocryphal) ancient racist popular music first, though.

Maybe some of my smart readership can help.

It quit working the other day. I went in and looked at it, and the wiring from the thermostat had lost all its insulation and was extremely oxidized–it looked like a long, anorexic green worm. I figured the problem was that it had quit conducting, and replaced the bad sections with new wiring.

No joy.

I’ve an electronic thermostat (about ten years old or so), and it indicates that it’s working (the temperature LCD flashes when it’s supposedly telling the furnace to burn). I’ve always thought that the voltage on these things is supposed to be 24VAC, but when I disconnected the wiring and measured it, it was only fourteen. Is this indicative of a problem? Is it possible that the wiring was OK, and that I have a different problem? Like a bad thermocouple?

Does anyone have any theories, and experiments I could run?

Alan Boyle has a review of the Great Debate, and publishes some emails from his readers. I found this one amusingly (but also sadly) wacky:

The only viable reason for space exploration or study is to learn as much as possible about the stars and planets without man physically interfering. There is no rational justification for manned space exploration! None! Neither does man (American or otherwise) need to colonize the planets. The only reason this country is pursuing space exploration is to locate minerals and natural planetary wealth for private American conglomerates to exploit! Scientists are being used; they are positively stupid and unintelligent if they think for one minute President Bush is promoting space exploration for true scientific study.

Yes, those exclamation marks sure make the argument more persuasive…

Would that his paranoid ravings were true. I’d love for us to be “locating minerals and planetary wealth for private American conglomerates to exploit” (with or without exclamation marks), but I certainly heard nothing about that in the president’s plans.

It’s a little frustrating to be blamed for something that isn’t happening, when we’d like to see it happen–we get all the bad press with none of the benefits.

And why do these loons think that just because they value only “pure science” that everyone does? I wonder where he thinks that the computer into which he typed this monumental ignorance came from, if not by “exploiting minerals and planetary wealth”?

Alan Boyle has a review of the Great Debate, and publishes some emails from his readers. I found this one amusingly (but also sadly) wacky:

The only viable reason for space exploration or study is to learn as much as possible about the stars and planets without man physically interfering. There is no rational justification for manned space exploration! None! Neither does man (American or otherwise) need to colonize the planets. The only reason this country is pursuing space exploration is to locate minerals and natural planetary wealth for private American conglomerates to exploit! Scientists are being used; they are positively stupid and unintelligent if they think for one minute President Bush is promoting space exploration for true scientific study.

Yes, those exclamation marks sure make the argument more persuasive…

Would that his paranoid ravings were true. I’d love for us to be “locating minerals and planetary wealth for private American conglomerates to exploit” (with or without exclamation marks), but I certainly heard nothing about that in the president’s plans.

It’s a little frustrating to be blamed for something that isn’t happening, when we’d like to see it happen–we get all the bad press with none of the benefits.

And why do these loons think that just because they value only “pure science” that everyone does? I wonder where he thinks that the computer into which he typed this monumental ignorance came from, if not by “exploiting minerals and planetary wealth”?

Alan Boyle has a review of the Great Debate, and publishes some emails from his readers. I found this one amusingly (but also sadly) wacky:

The only viable reason for space exploration or study is to learn as much as possible about the stars and planets without man physically interfering. There is no rational justification for manned space exploration! None! Neither does man (American or otherwise) need to colonize the planets. The only reason this country is pursuing space exploration is to locate minerals and natural planetary wealth for private American conglomerates to exploit! Scientists are being used; they are positively stupid and unintelligent if they think for one minute President Bush is promoting space exploration for true scientific study.

Yes, those exclamation marks sure make the argument more persuasive…

Would that his paranoid ravings were true. I’d love for us to be “locating minerals and planetary wealth for private American conglomerates to exploit” (with or without exclamation marks), but I certainly heard nothing about that in the president’s plans.

It’s a little frustrating to be blamed for something that isn’t happening, when we’d like to see it happen–we get all the bad press with none of the benefits.

And why do these loons think that just because they value only “pure science” that everyone does? I wonder where he thinks that the computer into which he typed this monumental ignorance came from, if not by “exploiting minerals and planetary wealth”?

Clark Lindsey also has an interesting analysis of how well Dwayne Day’s prognostications for Mircorp and commercial manned spaceflight from a few years ago have turned out (see February 8th entry).

Clark Lindsey also has an interesting analysis of how well Dwayne Day’s prognostications for Mircorp and commercial manned spaceflight from a few years ago have turned out (see February 8th entry).

Clark Lindsey also has an interesting analysis of how well Dwayne Day’s prognostications for Mircorp and commercial manned spaceflight from a few years ago have turned out (see February 8th entry).

In a “Battle of the Bobs,” Adam Keiper and the Ethics and Public Policy Center hosted a debate between Bob Park and Bob Zubrin. I didn’t think that we’d hear much in the way of new perspectives or new arguments from either of them, and I was largely right, as one can see from the transcript. Clark Lindsey thinks that Dr. Zubrin had the upper hand (see February 7th entry), and I agree. Dr. Park remains firmly in the “science uber alles” camp, which is an unuseful position to take when trying to determine what the nation’s space policy should be. Dr. Zubrin made several good points:

Here’s one that I’ve made before:

I wonder what Dr. Park would have said if he had lived about 50,000 years ago in Kenya, along with the rest of the human race, which lived in Kenya at that time, and received a proposal from someone who thought maybe humans should colonize Europe or Asia. “Those places are impossible to live there. It?s much too cold.” The — you know, if they had robotic probes, “our robotic probes show you could not survive a single winter night in Europe.”

Well, people were able to colonize Europe by technology: clothing, houses, fire. That?s why people can live where I live right now, Colorado, which no one could survive a single winter night in without such technology.

It is on the basis of our technological ingenuity that humans have left our native, our natural habitat, the Kenyan Rift Valley, and transformed ourselves into a global species with whatever, 150 nations, 100 languages, hundreds of literary traditions, traditions of heroic deeds to inspire the future, technological contributions, ideas on human social organization.

On Park’s irrational robophilia:

You mentioned Lewis and Clark. Okay, here we are, 200 years after Lewis and Clark. There is not a robot on this planet that you can send to the grocery store and pick up a bag of unbruised apples, let alone perform the Lewis and Clark expedition. So, if they can?t do a trip to the grocery store, how?s it going to explore a planet?

Now, I?m not putting down the robots. I think that it is excellent to do robotic missions. But, I completely contest the notion as fantastical that a robot explorer on the surface of a planet can duplicate what a human explorer can do.

And along the same lines, I loved this zinger at the end:

ADAM KEIPER: The man who believes in sending robots to space, you can get his book via machines at Amazon.com for $15. Fifteen dollars, Voodoo Science, Amazon.com. So, that?s great.

DR. ZUBRIN: Or just send a robot down to the bookstore to get it for you.