John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt 🇮🇱🇺🇦

All right I feel like crap this morning but I guess we're doing this: a thread on my thoughts on immigration.

The New York Times Reads My Mind | @NoahCRothman nationalreview.com/corner/the-new…

The Olympic ban on men in women’s sport is a long-overdue recognition of biological reality. For almost a decade, the IOC was prepared to let men punch women in the face and steal their places on podiums. What a shameful episode, says Janet Murray buff.ly/KZRqRYc

Imagine if the USA had done this. The entire world would've heard about it by now. Instead? A footnote.

Here's the funner part: the US produces about 5,000 ton of samarium each year, and 10,000 tomahawk missiles combined likely contain less than 2 tons of samarium in them. the problem is US isn't manufacturing enough missiles, not that we don't have enough raw materials.

Just remembering the ease with which women’s sport was given away in 2015 off the back of a few aging trans males running a bit slower…. ….compared to the time, effort and scientific rigour required to wrestle it back.

In just a few days, we'll be sending humans on a flight around the Moon. Have you watched our documentary series on the mission? Watch Moonbound before Artemis II lifts off: plus.nasa.gov/series/moonbou…

The New Atheism failed not because more people are traditionally religious, but rather because discourse is *less* rational than it was in 2002. The optimistic case for New Atheism was that eradicating religious superstition would lead to a more reasonable world. It hasn't.

Introducing the Moon Mascot for the Artemis II mission! The zero gravity indicator for the Moonbound crew was selected from thousands of submissions from over 50 countries and is named “Rise.” The design was inspired by the iconic Earthrise moment from the Apollo 8 mission.

This South African man won two women's 800m Olympic gold medals, two 800m World Championships in Athletics gold medals and two Commonwealth Games gold medals — all in the women’s categories. Those who raised ethical concerns were called racist at the time.

It's easy to forget that this year marks the 250th anniversary of the USA's independence. Around 20 years ago, such a milestone would be celebrated with a year-long blitz of TV specials, movies, decorations, books, exhibits, etc. Today, it barely registers as a footnote.

The war's not even a month long, we haven't taken a casualty in the last two weeks, we're systematically destroying Iranian military capabilities, and they are down to playing their final card (closing the Straits), and people are panicking? Relax folks!

No entity should have a monopoly on any kind of accreditation. That a biased activist group like the ABA has that power over law schools is ridiculous.

I've written a lot about the loss of trust in public health during Covid in various articles and threads over the years, but I'll attempt to consolidate my thoughts here... For me, my trust in public health was tested early on with the complete lack of consideration for the risks and benefits of lockdowns, masks, school closures, etc. Prior to March 2020, cost-benefit analysis was a major component of developing public health policy, and then suddenly... it wasn't. The one main exception to this, of course, was public health bending over backward to support George Floyd protests. As a parent of a middle schooler, my main concern was for children. I started identifying significant errors in data from the CDC and other doctors and scientists, particularly around exaggerating the risks of Covid to kids. The strong age gradient of Covid harms was known early on, but it was consistently downplayed by public health. I spent a lot of time pointing out often blatant errors in Covid data, mostly being ignored by those responsible. And I argued extensively in support of school reopening. My own daughter was back in person in early August 2020, along with much of Georgia, so I knew it could be done. Then came the vaccine, which was delayed by the left for political purposes. During the vaccine rollout, we witnessed the denial of natural immunity, a refusal to prioritize the elderly for vaccines, dishonesty about vaccine effectiveness, efforts to downplay and deny myocarditis risks, the rush for vaccine approval to enable mandates, vaccine mandates being pushed for the young and healthy (those least at risk), and more false claims from CDC and others about the risk of Covid to children (including faulty mortality statistics on the CDC's data tracker and the "top 5 killer of children" falsehood). Overall, it was clear to many of us that studies and data were being published to push a predetermined narrative, rather than to test a hypothesis and then come to an objective conclusion. That's not how science is supposed to work, and yet we were being beaten over the head with the mantra "follow the science." Meanwhile, public health was feeding journalists all of this propaganda, and the media for the most part was all too happy to help by parroting the official public health position and attempting to discredit anyone who dared to offer another perspective.

Congestion pricing makes life worse for people who paying $9 matters to. It makes life easier for people like me who don’t care about $9 and can get around more quickly. There’s no free lunch and in blue cities it’s almost always normal people that get screwed.

Literally the last time I’ve seen the country come together like this was on 9/11

This should be the biggest story in the country right now. Barksdale is the HQ for our B52 nuclear bombers, it's where Bush sheltered on 9/11, and the drones are reported as "far more sophisticated than anything seen in Ukraine ... and well beyond Iranian capabilities."

@glosswitch @GirlScout27 @suzanne_moore Truly, how can female prisoners locked in with rapists ever understand the agony of going to a private all-girls' school? Thank God women like Zoe are here to explain to state-educated plebs like me how male sexual predation is NOTHING to Lavinia pulling your pony tail in Latin.

Women were not allowed to run in the Olympic marathon until 1984, almost 100 years after the men's event was established. Women’s pole vault was added only in 2000, and women’s boxing not until 2012. Men have always been able to compete in the Olympics and remain able to do so.

The IOC just announced their policy on DSD and trans athletes in the female category. Let's skip the outrage and go with the scientific facts: The modern debate started almost 20 years ago with the rise of DSD athletes who were winning world/Olympics (See: Semenya and others). It came to a head when DSD athletes swept the podium. The had the single biggest performance boost we can get, androgenization. Something that none of their competitors could ever have. So debates commenced... It's important to put in context how big a boost males get from simply being males. It's a larger boost in performance than if you were Lance Armstrong or Barry Bonds and hopped up on all the performance enhancing drugs known to man. That's how large it is. It's why from 100 meters to races hundreds of miles long, the performance differential is generally 10-15%. Even larger in some strength events. Every male gets this boost. It doesn't men all men beat all women, of course. There's significant overlap in performance. My wife is going to better than 99% of men in distance running. But...that boost gives each male a 10+% jump in performance that no female ever gets. We can see it in the athletic data and the progressions of men and women at puberty. So...governing bodies and experts debated what to do about it. Women were losing millions of dollars in total to folks who had a male androgenization advantage. We went from doing nothing, not much of a real policy to eventually instituting testosterone rules. THe thinking was, testosterone can be a surrogate marker. It also gave DSD athletes a venue to still compete in the male category. They could lower their T to typical female levels, and still race. There were a few problems with this. First, it obviously only took into account CURRENT T levels. A large part of the boost comes from androgens through a lifetime. Second, this was challenged in court by DSD athletes. It was a long process that led to some strange policies along the way (for instance, rules only applied to certain event groups). It was tricky to regulate and be fair, and telling someone they had to have a medical intervention to compete came with ethical issues. So that was eventually scrapped. I'm simplifying and summarizing years long backs and forth, obviously. Track and field moved to the policy the IOC just adopted a year ago. Using the SRY test as a screener. Why? It was simpler, straightforward and applied to all females, so their wasn't a separate DSD and trans policy. It also put the dividing line for segregating sports by sex instead of a surrogate marker. It's a one time screener, and then with specific follow up if potential DSD. There's an exception for CAIS athletes because androgenization has little to no effect on them. So they do not have an advantage. So what? I've seen this policy framed as immoral, fascist, and even nazism...which is crazy... But the point is...it's a result of 20 years of debate, research, and trying to figure out a solution to a tricky problem. There's a lot of people who don't know or are ignorant to the decades this has been going on. Why is it important to separate sports based on sex? Because it's the biggest performance boost we could get. If we didn't, there would be zero professional women athletes in an open category. That's how big the gap is. And I for one value and think women deserve the spotlight to compete and show off their hard work and talent. I've spent my life coaching women at the elite level to do so. You might here people say it's a ban. It's not. Every athlete still has a place to compete. You can do so in the category that matches your biology, in open events, or recreational events that this does not apply to. A rough analogy: Longevity guru Bryan Johnson can't compete in the under 18 category no matter what age score his crazy metrics say he is. We have categories and classification to ensure everyone has a chance to compete. Yes, we pick what categories are important. But it's hard to argue that sex isn't a very important one. So there you have it. It's been 20 years in the making. It started with DSD athletes with an androgen advantage winning championships and has evolved from there. It's not perfect. Nothing is. We've debated, shifted policies, etc. But lots of smart folks and researchers have been trying to figure out a just and fair solution for a long time.

An all male podium at the 2016 Olympics. Lynsey Sharp who came “6th”, missing out on a bronze medal said she wished today’s policy was in place at the time. ‘Sometimes I look back and think I could have had an Olympic medal, but I gave it my all that day and that was the rules at the time,' ‘Obviously, I wish I was competing nowadays, but that was my time in the sport and that's how it was.'