Peter Krupa

A best-to-worst ranking of 200 careers is making the rounds. Number 184 on the list is Newspaper Reporter, ranking just below Seaman and Machinist but just above Stevedore and Sheet Metal Worker. Glad I went to college.

This fascinates me. From the New Yorker:

The gradual devastation of the Amazon—the felling of thousands of square miles of forest, the clear-cutting of the jungle—has produced, paradoxically, one of the greatest archeological discoveries: a vast and complex ancient civilization. In cleared-away areas of the upper Amazon basin, researchers, using satellite imagery, have recently pinpointed a vast network of monumental earthworks, including geometrically aligned roads and structures, constructed by a hitherto unknown civilization. According to a new report published in the journal Antiquity, the archeologist Martii Pärssinen and other scientists have documented more than two hundred and ten geometric structures, some of which may date as far back as the third century A.D. They are spread out over an area that spans more than two hundred and fifty kilometers, reaching all the way from northern Bolivia to the state of Amazonia in Brazil.

Probably not the best way to make such amazing discoveries. Anyway, it reminds me of the Guayabos site in Costa Rica. In general, Costa Rica doesn’t have much – no monuments, few artifacts, no large indigenous population – to suggest that any ancient civilization beyond the hunter-gatherer variety ever lived here.

But there it is, out in the middle of the jungle, a stone road 10 feet thick and wide enough for two cars, along with a system of aqueducts and a few houses. Clearly (and delightfully), there is still much we don’t know about our world.

The New Yorker’s James Surowieck interviews David Cutler, a health care economist.

I find it deeply disturbing that members of a mainstream American political movement are arguing that the 5th Amendment should be suspended when dealing with certain kinds of criminals. Says some knucklehead over at National Review’s Corner blog:

A terrorist like Abdulmutallab is not a common criminal who should be told he has the “right to remain silent.” He is an enemy combatant, who tried to commit an act of war against the United States of America. He possesses vital intelligence about the terrorist network that deployed him to attack America, and may be planning still more attacks. The Obama administration has a responsibility to make him give up that information. Treating him like a criminal is an abdication of that responsibility, and puts our nation at risk.

Noted conservative luminary Sarah Palin also stated that:

It simply makes no sense to treat an al Qaeda-trained operative willing to die in the course of massacring hundreds of people as a common criminal. Reports indicate that Abdulmutallab stated there were many more like him in Yemen but that he stopped talking once he was read his Miranda rights. President Obama’s advisers lamely claim Abdulmutallab might be willing to agree to a plea bargain – pretty doubtful you can cut a deal with a suicide bomber.

Lest you assume these opinions are limited to the right wing’s intellectual elite, small-town newspaper publisher and Browntown City, Minnesota, Councilman Chuck Warner had this to say:

“…perhaps action should be taken to reverse the decision to charge the alleged bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, in a civilian court, rather than a military tribunal. His is an act of war against this nation. It is asinine to give these terrorists the benefits reserved for American citizens.

The time has come to remove the silk gloves and treat international terrorists for what they are.

I laughed when Bush declared war on an abstraction. Now it’s not so funny. It appears people believe we are at war, and that therefore our enemies in the War on Terror (even suspected enemies) do not have rights under the U.S. Constitution.

This is quite the slippery slope. What about the War on Drugs? Can the U.S. government suspend habeas corpus for drug traffickers, just because the executive has declared “war”? What about the soon-to-be-announced War on Irresponsible Journalism? War on Sexual Predators?

I’m being facetious, but only slightly. Spooked by a few ounces of explosives that threatened a couple hundred lives, a large segment of American society is willing – clamoring, even – to tear at our most fundamental civil rights. I take this as an early warning sign that the United States is one major terrorist event away from becoming a very ugly, very dark place.

Ever notice how zoo animals have the uncanny ability to do something really gross/hilarious right when the junior high class walks up to the glass? Yeah.

It’s that time of year again, the time when New York Times columnists write cloying, un-fact-checked columns repeating something some tour guide told them on their Costa Rican vacation. Last year it was Thomas Friedman (“(No) Drill Baby Drill,” yeah right) this year it’s Nicholas Kristoff, of all people.

There’s something about Costa Rica that makes otherwise intelligent, skeptical people start grinning and nodding like idiots, chanting “Pura Vida” like it actually means something. All of them parrot what are essentially Costa Rica talking points about the environment, peace, social justice, solidarity, etc.

It is, of course, a fantasy, but one that Americans absolutely adore. This is what vacations – and to a lesser extent parachute journalism as practiced by columnists – is all about. Find what you expect, and don’t poke it too hard.

The AP is reporting that the Nigerian underpants bomber has been indicted on charges of “trying to use a weapon of mass destruction.” (Indictment PDF) Which is really weird, because I thought he tried to set off explosives (specifically, PETN). Aren’t weapons of mass destruction chemical, biological, or nuclear in nature, and therefore capable of, you know, destroying things en masse?

But nope, there it is, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 113B (TERRORISM), Section 2332a: “the term ‘weapon of mass destruction’ means… any destructive device as defined in section 921 of this title.” Which is to say, basically anything that goes boom, including guns with a bore greater than a half inch (shotguns exempt).

If I were a betting man, I would bet this is a recent (dare I say “post-nine-eleven”?) change in the criminal code, designed to make terrorists appear more sinister/dashing. And indeed, the Web site I cited indicates that Section 2332a (“weapons of mass destruction”) of Title 18 was modified by Congress on January 5, 2009.

I have no idea how one would go about digging up old versions of Title 18 to find out if this is a recent definition. The take-away, though, is that now you can build a pipe bomb (or what the hell, a cannon) and go around bragging that you’re hiding WMD. (Although you might have to be a Muslim for it to count.)

Excellent Fresh Air interview with author Bob Sullivan on how to avoid getting screwed by banks, credit card companies, and cell phone contracts.

A writer at BoingBoing decided to lob a grenade into the blogosphere by asking, “Is parenthood a lifestyle choice?” You have to live in a peculiar kind of bubble to even consider asking that question. It appears to assume that non-parenthood is more prevalent than parenthood, giving the latter that status of a steampunk obsession, vegetarianism, or a commitment to Linux.

It’s an especially weird question coming from a Web site that is predominantly secular humanist. Evolution-believing, science-loving, socialist-leaning secular humanists, of all people, should know that in this confusing, godless, short existence, pretty much the only thing a species shoots for is reproduction. That’s what “survival of the fittest” is all about: adapting and surviving so you can pass on your DNA, not so you can have Sunday morning brunch with your friends for the rest of your life.

That said, I would never say anyone has an obligation to have kids. I’m not the Catholic Church. I would simply reverse the question posed. “Is childlessness a lifestyle choice?” Yes. And it’s a fine lifestyle choice. But consider this if you’re an artist or filmmaker or a writer or someone who wants to help humanity while remaining barren: You are missing out on an essential, crucial part of what it means to be human.

This has huge implications for how you experience art, civic participation, and social interaction. There is a whole range of emotions and responsibilities that you will never experience, I don’t care how many dogs you have. So get out there and procreate. It’ll be fun.

(via BoingBoing)