Research and Scholarship

Unabomber Memorial Ethics Explosions, 5/15-18/25 (PS: I’m Not Dead, but Thanks Neil, Ryan, Jon et al. for Worrying About Me…)

/ Jack Marshall / 18 Comments

Yes, it is I.

My internet went out right before midnight on the 14th, which means my office and home phones also haven’t worked since then until just a little while ago. Neither did my streaming services. Verizon, which I switched back to in November because Comcast was unreliable and cost too much, put me through the usual customer service Hell before I reached what I thought was a competent human being. It took me almost a half an hour of arguing with Verizon’s “automated assistant” to get to said CHB, who immediately contradicted hiscyber-colleague by confirming that yes, there had been an “incident” in my area (the bot had denied it) and a crew was working on the outage. That was the supposedly the good news; the bad news was that I might be trapped in the Stone Age (okay, I’m exaggerating: that statement would go into the Washington Post’s Trump Lie Database if the President said it) until as late as 4:45 pm on the 15th.

But you didn’t read this post on the 15th, did you? That would be because 4:45 pm. came and went, and still I couldn’t communicate with the outside world. Meanwhile, clients were screaming, Ethics Alarms was languishing, “fish is jumpin’” and I was reduced to singing “Summertime” from “Porgy and Bess” for some reason. In a 52 minute phone call with Verizon in which I listened to a very polite, pleasant, customer service representative who spoke relatively clear pidgin English in a high-pitched voice (I couldn’t place the accent), I discovered that the company couldn’t send a technician to my house until Friday afternoon. Next, my phone stopped receiving signals too, so I couldn’t even keep up with comments.

A very nice technician showed up at 1:30 pm and was fooling around with things for an hour. He replaced “the box” and then told me that he had been informed that the problem couldn’t be resolved by him, and that his supervisor told him to tell me that the outage wouldn’t be corrected until 6:45 am yesterday, Saturday the 17th. It wasn’t. Verizon promised to have another technician come by between 11am and 3pm on Sunday. That actually came to pass, and it turned out the previous technician had inserted the wrong thingy in the wrong plug, or something.

Ol’ Crazy Ted, the Harvard grad terrorist, has again been proven right: it’s ridiculous what I (you, we) can’t do without key technology, and one of them is maintaining an ethics blog.

Well, I still could prepare a post on Word and have it ready to go up when civilization reappears, so that’s what I started to do Friday morning and am revising now, as I try to forget that I have God only knows (I switched to singing the Beach Boys because I can’t remember all the words to “Summertime” right now) how many emails to answer that I haven’t seen yet. I don’t have email on my cell phone, you see, because I tell my ethics classes that the less confidential, client-related stuff you have on your phone, the better.

Meanwhile,

Continue reading →

Gee, I Wonder Why Americans Are Losing Trust In Their Nation’s Institutions? It’s a Mystery!

/ Jack Marshall / 2 Comments

Science, Academia, Journalism, Government.

On June 3, 2022, the young protestor above tied her neck to the net during a tennis match at the French Open, with her shirt reading “We Have 1028 Days Left” sending the critical message to the world that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had decreed that if massive de-carbonization was not implemented before that (literal!) deadline, it would be too late to save the planet from a climate change apocalypse.

The 1,028th day was last week, Thursday March 27, 2025. Does that young woman feel ridiculous? She should. Now, she probably is one of those fanatics who won’t procreate because children are bad for the environment, but if she does, her kids will have a ball with that photo. I know I would have, just as if there was a photo of my mother as a teen dressed as a banana, or my father with dicks on his face after having them drawn on while he was asleep.

The Totalitarian Left in the U.S. has been citing “science” to justify irresponsible policies for years, indeed decades, and accountability is at hand. If the science of climate change is so “settled,” why are all the predictions and deadlines proven ridiculously false? Even our currently under-educated, critical thinking deprived rising generations are smart enough to figure out a con when they see, well, when they see the same con over and over again. Here’s an article about how the Great Barrier Reef that we were told was being destroyed by global warming (Science!) has more than doubled in a decade and its size and health is the highest ever recorded.

Continue reading →

Least Shocking Scandal of 2025…

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

Jonathan Turley reports,

“[A] long-withheld report from the Biden Administration directly contradicted the claims of climate change used to limit increased U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. The suggestion is that this was an knowing effort to cap carbon admissions rather than carbon emissions. The impact that new U.S. LNG exports have on the environment and the economy was reviewed by U.S. Energy Department scientists and completed by September 2023. It appears that neither President Biden nor Secretary Jennifer Granholm liked the science or the conclusions. Rather than “follow the science,” they buried the report while allegedly making claims directly refuted by their own experts…The draft study, “Energy, Economic, and Environmental Assessment of U.S. LNG Exports,” found that, under all modeled scenarios, an increase in U.S. LNG exports and natural gas production would not change global or U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. It further found that it would not increase energy prices for consumers. Biden and Granholm reportedly buried the report and then announced a pause on all new U.S. LNG export terminals in January 2024, citing the danger to environmental and economic impacts.”

Gee what a surprise.

But seriously folks, anyone who is even faintly surprised at this development hasn’t been watching, listening or paying attention to either the “science of cliamte change” or the debate over energy policy. What is far from “settled science” is deliberately presented as a consensus. Policies that harm the U.S. economy and consumers have been regularly inflicted on the nation as pure virtue-signaling to the Left, with full knowledge that they can’t possibly have any effect on the world’s climate, present or future. And revealing that the Biden Administration engaged in public deception….well, this is a group that regularly manipulated government employment figures, Wuhan virus pandemic statistics and social media to control public opinion as much as as possible.

Heck, this is a group that hid who was really wielding power in the White House! Hiding a study that doesn’t support a Democrat-Progressive world view? Totalitarianism 101, and the Democratic Party is poisoned by a totalitarian-trending political culture now, as we repeatedly saw during the last four years.

My only problem with Turley’s analysis is that it is thinly sourced, because apparently only Fox News has covered the story so far. I searched for it at the New York Times site: nada. If the story is somewhere in the Times, then the news story is being buried like the study itself…or this is another example of the partisan divide in our unethical “journalism” making it impossible for the public to find out what’s really going on.

That wouldn’t be shocking either.

Friday Open Forum (“Is This a Great Country or What?”)

/ Jack Marshall / 16 Comments

I apologize for seeming to force a topic on participants here, as the Open Forum is for you to write about ethics issues that intrigue you, and not necessarily me. However, I can’t think of anywhere else to use the remnants of a post I did a lot of work on before giving up in disgust.

The impetus for this aborted project was reading more of the increasingly unhinged rants of the formerly rational lawyers, artists, scholars and baseball fans on my Facebook feed, whose Trump Derangement is something to behold. One of them posted a chart purporting to list the nations in order of their “quality of life”; this one showed the U.S. 19th, after, among others, Slovenia, Oman, and Estonia. #1 was Switzerland. “I wonder how much lower we will be after Trump and Musk are through with us?” the poster queried to a flurry of likes. angry faces and the “care imogi. The moronic post moved me to look at the most recent such surveys, most of which seem to conclude that Spain is the best country to live in. Spain is a country where you can be imprisoned for criticizing the king, and where the average household income is around $40,000. On the one that was posted by my friend who is leaking IQ points, Spain finished 15th. Huh! First in one quality of life survey, 15th in another. This is, of course, why none of these “scientific” surveys are worth the paper they are printed on: the rankings will always reflect the biases of the researchers. The reason the U.S. always finishes absurdly low in these things is because our learned class believes fervently in socialism, and any nation that isn’t a nanny state is, by definition, inferior. The U.S. allows its citizens to own guns. It allows “dangerous” speech. It isn’t committed to fighting “climate change.” It hasn’t solved its racial tensions, while Switzerland has done such a bang-up job dealing with the descendants of its African slaves.

Yeah well, the U.S. is still guided by the most aspirational mission of any nation on Earth, and it has Major League baseball too, so bite me. (One of the rankings rated the U.S. low for “climate.” Which climate? Hawaii? Fairbanks? )

Spain is, I’m sure, a great country for someone like Richard Gere to live in (he moved there with his Spanish citizen wife and kids after Trump won the election: he was a big Harris supporter) who had lots of money and has already made his mark in life. For the most part, however, the immediate retort that comes to mind when I read someone on Facebook arguing seriously that Spain is a “better” nation than the United States of America, is “Wow, you really are an idiot, aren’t you? I’m so sorry.”

Anyway…Open Forum!

Observations on a Jobs Graph

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

That provocative graph above is brought to you by Apollo Global Management.

It purports to reveal what proportion of new jobs added each year since 2016 were in the private and public sectors. I have no way of telling whether the numbers are accurate, whether the manner of presenting them is fair, and whether Apollo has an agenda in presenting them this way. I guess that’s the first ethics observation. It is now impossible to trust news accounts, statistics, analysis, surveys, studies and data, no matter where it comes from. We can add this to the fact that photographs, films, recordings and videos are also untrustworthy.

But here are some more observations on the off chance that the numbers are correct and can be trusted:

Continue reading →

Addendum: “Gee What a Surprise: NOAA ‘Adjusts’ Its Historical Weather Data Just As ‘Climate Change Deniers’ Claim They Do

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

As it happens, the day that I posted on NOAA’s inherently ethically dubious “adjustments” to historical climate data, a blog post by The Manhattan Contrarian turned up in my email following up on the same ABC News story that sparked my post. It is well worth reading. His conclusion:

“If the NOAA data adjustments cannot be tied to specific metadata like station moves or instrumentation changes, then they are not really scientific “data,” but rather just opinions of people who are interested in promoting the global warming narrative. They are completely unusable for purposes of making public policy.”

Yes, but the manipulated data does make charts like the “hockey stick” graph above seem convincing, even though all those data points come from after-the-fact guesses about what the real data should be.

Gee What a Surprise: NOAA “Adjusts” Its Historical Weather Data Just As “Climate Change Deniers” Claim They Do

/ Jack Marshall / 2 Comments

Of course, the corrupt news media sees no problem with this. As ABC helpfully points out, NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information “adjusts weather data to account for factors like instrument changes, station relocation and urbanization, and it does so through peer-reviewed studies that are published publicly through its federal website.”

And factors like the need for climate scientists to show that the climate change apocalypse that they constantly predict for us is based on convincing data, when in fact it is based on flawed data, as the scientists admit once you cut through the jargon. For example, traditional glass thermometers have been replaced with more precise digital sensors warranting “adjustments” to accurately compare readings between the two instruments. Sea surface temperatures used to be taken manually from a bucket off of a boat, unlike the network of buoys and satellites that are used to gauge water temperatures today. Then there is the “urban heat island effect”: Cities heat up more than rural areas due to human activity, infrastructure and the concentration of buildings, roads and other heat-absorbing materials, causing higher temperatures in cities compared to surrounding areas. This can distort temperature data, making an area appear hotter than it is. So the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration makes adjustments to account for that too.

Continue reading →

Today’s Unpleasant Ethics Question: How Can We Justify Trusting Today’s Scholars and Academics To Train Our Rising Generations?

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

I want to state at the outset that the ridiculous research paper I’m about to make fun of is only one horrifying example of institutional insanity, and it would be unfair to use it to characterize the entire higher education complex. However, I do believe that a healthy and functioning scholarly sector must have a way to reject, condemn and shun such abuses of position and authority.

I’ll have more to say on this matter after revealing the head-exploding product of University of San Diego professors Diane Marie Keeling and Bethany O’Shea.

These scholars have published a study titled “Conceptualizing Black Humanity Through Geopoetic Intimacy and Resistance: Memory Making-with Geologic Materials” Here is the abstract:

Amplifying the importance of geologic processes in subject formation, the study asserts that geological time is important for understanding memory and memorials. In the Equal Justice Initiative’s Community Remembrance Projects and the National Memorial for Peace and Justice, materials of geologic composition like soil, and those made from earth materials, such as steel and bricks, are employed to trope the bodies of lynching victims and weather racist geologic formations of subjecthood. The holding and eroding of violent memories crafts an intimate and resistant geopoetics of Black humanity.

Oh. What???

Continue reading →

Cognitive Dissonance Scale Lesson For Senate Democrats

/ Jack Marshall / 14 Comments

I have mentioned here frequently that one of two things I learned in college that have been most useful in my life and career is Leon Festinger’s Cognitive Dissonance Scale. The concept illustrated by the scale is also one of the most useful tools for ethical analysis, often essential to answering the question, “What’s going on here?” the entry point to many perplexing situations. Check the tag: it just took me 15 minutes to scroll though the posts that got it. I was surprised to find that I didn’t use the tag until 2014, when the scale helped me conclude that the Tea Party, then in ascendancy, was “doomed by a powerful phenomenon it obviously doesn’t understand: Cognitive Dissonance.” Heard much about the Tea Party lately? See, I’m smart! I’m not dumb like everybody says… I wrote then,

As psychologist Leon Festinger showed a half a century ago, we form our likes, dislikes, opinions and beliefs to a great extent based on our subconscious reactions to who and what they are connected with and associated to. This is, to a considerable extent, why leaders and celebrities are such powerful influences on society. It explains why we tend to adopt the values of our parents, and it largely explains many marketing and advertising techniques that manipulate our desires and preferences. Simply put, if someone we admire adopts a position or endorses a product, person or idea, he or she will naturally raise it in our estimation. If however, that position, product, person or idea is already extremely low in our esteem, even though his endorsement might raise it, even substantially, his own status will suffer, and fall. He will slide down the admiration scale, even if that which he endorses rises. If what the individual endorses is sufficiently deplored, it might even wipe out his positive standing entirely.

The implications of this phenomenon are many and varied, and sometimes complex. If a popular and admired politician espouses a policy, many will assume the policy is wise simply because he supports it. If an unpopular fool then argues passionately for the same policy, Festinger’s theory tells us, it might..

1. Raise the fool’s popularity, if the policy is sufficiently popular.

2. Lower support for the policy, if he is sufficiently reviled, and even

3. Lower the popularity of the admired politician, who will suffer for being associated with an idea that had been embraced by a despised dolt.

This subconscious shifting, said Festinger, goes on constantly, effecting everything from what movies we like to the clothes we wear to how we vote.

Here, for the heaven-knows-how-many-th time, is the scale in simplified form…

Continue reading →

Look! Another Study Showing That What Everybody Knew Anyway Is Probably True…

/ Jack Marshall / 4 Comments

A new study concludes that parents probably do have a favorites among their children.

Parents always deny this, of course. Such a preference would make any parent feel guilty, so they are in permanent denial. The favorite child reaps the benefits of his or her status, and the lesser regarded children are told that they are petty, jealous, and paranoid. Frequently, in my experience, the “Mom likes you best!” accusation works wonders, and the guilt-ridden parent will then bend over backwards to avoid any appearance of favoritism, even to the point of favoring the other child or children.

The study in question, however, seems pretty worthless. Lisa Strohschein, a sociology professor at the University of Alberta and the editor-in-chief of the journal Canadian Studies in Population, thinks that all the study does is confirm what most people already believe. The researchers acknowledged limitations in the study, and write that “the reasons why parents treat their children differently are likely more complex and extend beyond the factors explored.” Oh.

Continue reading →