JLRed

@MrDavidAngelo True of books as well.

@_The_Prophet__ Agree. Students used. Equity broken.

⚡️This is the collapse of institutional reality-contact inside education. The test was never the real enemy. The test was the mirror. UC removed the mirror because the reflection was politically uncomfortable. The gaps were real: weak K-12 math instruction, unequal preparation, grade inflation, broken incentives, and large differences in readiness by school, class, family structure, district quality, and student exposure to serious math. Removing SAT/ACT did not repair any of that. It only made the gap less visible at the admissions gate. Then reality reappeared in the classroom. That is the part institutions keep forgetting: reality cannot be abolished administratively. You can remove the metric. You can rename the standard. You can soften the requirement. You can change admissions language. You can declare access. But calculus still requires algebra. Physics still requires mathematical fluency. Engineering still requires quantitative discipline. AI still requires people who can understand systems deeply enough to judge machine output. The faculty letter is basically reality filing an appeal. The most damning part is that UC replaced a flawed hard signal with softer signals that are now more corruptible. GPA is inflated. Essays can be coached, polished, or AI-generated. Extracurriculars reward parental strategy and money. Recommendations vary by school quality and social capital. Test scores had problems, but they at least forced a confrontation with readiness. The new system often rewards narrative management over capacity. That is how prestige institutions rot. They start optimizing for moral optics over functional truth. Then the frontline professionals, the people actually teaching the courses, become the first to experience the contradiction. Administrators can talk about access. Professors have to watch students fail derivatives because they never mastered fractions. The cruelest part is that the students get used as the place where the ideology meets consequence. The institution gets praise for expanding access. The student inherits the hidden deficiency. The professor absorbs the remediation burden. The prepared student loses course pace. The credential loses signal. Employers eventually lose trust. Everyone pays for the lie except the people who benefited from saying the lie in the first place. That is why the “equity” frame breaks here. Real equity would mean brutal investment in preparation before admission: stronger K-12 math, serious diagnostics, bridge programs, summer intensives, transparent placement, tutoring, early intervention, and honest pathways. Fake equity means admitting people into an advanced track while pretending unreadiness is just a social construct. STEM is especially unforgiving because it is cumulative and external. The system can inflate essays. It can inflate grades. It can inflate institutional language. It cannot inflate mathematical readiness forever. Eventually the bridge falls, the code fails, the model breaks, the lab result is wrong, the patient is harmed, the chip does not work, or the student quietly leaves the major. The deeper signal is that America is trying to maintain elite outcomes while weakening the filtering mechanisms that produced elite competence. That cannot hold. A civilization can democratize access to preparation. It cannot democratize readiness by decree.

@BrianMcDonaldIE True. We did not shut down schools and businesses during the Hong Kong nor Asian flu epidemics.

Russian futurologist Sergey Pereslegin says Covid was a critical turning point for humanity, insisting that the pandemic response amounted to a vast social experiment rather than a normal public-health intervention. Pereslegin claims Covid was “a flu like any other,” more serious than the Hong Kong flu but less severe than the Spanish flu, and that previous pandemics never led governments to “shut down the whole world” or confine people to their homes. He says the lockdown era revealed two things: first, that new industries such as remote work had become powerful enough to make mass shutdowns physically possible; and second, that many freedoms associated with the industrial era, including democratic rights and freedom of movement, could be suspended “with one stroke of the pen.”

@EthicalSkeptic The censorship during the Age of Covid was scarier to me than the virus!

You could not even mention my name in the comments on YouTub. This is how evil and fearful these people were, and are...

As many of you know, I am a devout Catholic and a computer science professor. The views expressed here are my own and do not reflect those of my university. Today, I’ll be slowly working my way through Pope Leo’s encyclical on artificial intelligence. I intend to offer reflections from the perspective of a cautious, yet AI-forward, computer scientist who has been working to understand this technology within the bounds of the Catholic ethical framework. I’ll be posting my thoughts and commentary here later today or tomorrow.

University of California STEM professors want standardized tests back due to severe math deficiencies among students: “We now observe preparation gaps so severe that instructors must reteach middle school mathematics” “The current admissions metric, based primarily on GPA & essays, can no longer reliably distinguish readiness for university-level STEM majors in an era of severe grade inflation & AI assisted application essays”

California's governor candidates were asked if truck drivers should be able to read road signs. Most of them said no. Anyone who believes truck drivers don't need to understand road signs is a moron. I go through their answers so you don't have to.

"Current admissions practices do not provide a sufficiently reliable check on mathematical readiness for STEM majors." Over 280 University of California STEM faculty have signed an open letter calling on the Board of Regents to reinstate standardized testing in admissions:

No matter what your politics, every citizen should be concerned about the stunning breadth and depth of fraud across our nation Fraud robs the needy of the services they need, increases deficits, and erodes trust in government. Our social programs were set up based on a high trust society. We trust states to not allow fraud. We trust citizens not to rip off these programs. That social trust has diminished because people set up fake charities and state government officials didn’t mind the store. More guard rails need to be put in place. Very disappointed every Dem AG refused to come to VP Vance’s round table.

Standing with @JDVance and his Anti-Fraud Task Force. The massive welfare fraud Stephen Miller highlighted — hundreds of billions that could literally help balance the federal budget — is stealing from hardworking American taxpayers of every race and background. These programs were meant to lift people up, but instead have fueled dependency and trapped millions of Americans in cycles of poverty. As someone who escaped poverty through hard work, faith, family, and genuine opportunity (not race preferences or government dependency), I know we don’t need more programs that create dependence. We need accountability, merit, and colorblind policies that actually work for everyone. VP Vance is right to crack down on the fraud and the failed race-based systems. Real hope comes from strong families, school choice, entrepreneurship, and self-reliance — not socialism disguised as compassion. For all Americans — and as we approach our nation’s 250th anniversary — let’s choose truth over the equity grift. End the fraud. Restore opportunity. #JDVance #Welfarefraud #CarolSwainSpeaks #Antifraudtaskforce

NASA just officially unveiled their master plan for a permanent Moon Base at the lunar South Pole This is not just about flags and footprints. NASA is moving to establish an enduring, sustained human presence, and they are heavily relying on commercial innovators to build it The roadmap is highly aggressive: • Phase 1: Heavy robotic missions and commercial payload deliveries • Phase 2: Semi-permanent infrastructure, including fission surface power and lunar drones • Phase 3: A sustained, permanent human outpost The most important takeaway is NASA explicitly stated this base is the ultimate proving ground to prepare humanity for missions to Mars While legacy aerospace companies are still struggling to reliably get a small capsule to the ISS, NASA is setting the stage for massive lunar infrastructure....which is exactly the kind of heavy-lift planetary deployment SpaceX’s Starship was designed for The multi-planetary economy is officially kicking off

Events in Numbers and Exodus took place 1400 years before Jesus was born. And no, they do not support abortion. In Exodus both the mother and unborn child are shown be important. Numbers talks about a ritual for adultery. It does not mention killing a fetus. crossway.org/articles/do-ex…

@JLRed5 @bonchieredstate Numbers 5 & Exodus 21 say differently

Jesus never told you not to set your neighbor’s house on fire either. He wasn’t trying to provide a comprehensive list of sins. What heretical, evil way to spin Jesus’ message.

I have been told someone found my lecture persuasive until they spoke to a virologist who said: "lots of viruses have furin cleavage sites". Repeat after me, slowly: SARS-COV-2 IS THE ONLY SARBECOVIRUS EVER FOUND WITH A FURIN CLEAVAGE SITE. OUT OF SEVERAL HUNDRED STRAINS.

Jesus was a Jew. During his lifetime Jews were opposed to abortion and infanticide that were rampant in Roman pagan communities. The Jewish principle of the “sanctity of life” underpins the moral framework of early Christianity. Talarico must surely know this. thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-t…

James Talarico: “The Bible is silent on abortion” “I trust Texas women to make decisions about their own bodies, to shape their own destinies.”

I have written hundreds of published works—articles, brochures, blogs, Web content and a full-length book. I also been at various times in my career a copy editor, newspaper editor, reporter, speechwriter, copywriter and author of a full-length book. What you say is absolutely accurate.

Using AI to copy edit doesn’t mean AI wrote your prose. If you’ve ever read one of my books, you’ve already read prose that was heavily altered by copy editors. That’s literally part of publishing. They go through the manuscript line by line — rephrasing, cutting, tightening, reordering, smoothing transitions, flagging awkward wording, and generally helping the writing become clearer and more readable. Authors get too close to the prose to reliably see many of its flaws. But nobody concludes from this that the copy editor “wrote the book.” The ideas, arguments, structure, voice, worldview, examples, discoveries, and underlying intellectual labor are still the author’s. AI editing tools are often functioning similarly — except faster, cheaper, and more interactive. They can help clean up prose, suggest phrasing, tighten paragraphs, or improve flow. But that’s very different from generating the underlying substance itself. There’s a strange tendency right now to treat any AI involvement as if authorship has somehow evaporated. But by that logic, copy editors, spellcheckers, thesauruses, calculators, Photoshop, and research assistants would all count as “doing the work” too. They don’t.

As a former copy editor, journalist, and writer I can attest that much of what you read is not raw, unedited text by a single person.

SARS-CoV-2 is the only sarbecovirus ever found with an FCS. The idea to insert an FCS into sarbecoviruses in 2018 was inspired by the natural occurrence of FCS in more distant viruses. The dangerous bias of many virologists is no longer surprising. I'm unsure if any scientific field has been as thoroughly disgraced as modern virology, which is deeply tragic given the critical importance of the field to the health of our species. It will take decades to repair and rebuild trust with the public.

Important short thread. 👇

@realDrTT Thank you for your deep dive. Very insightful.

180-181 offers a warning: "if technology becomes the ultimate criterion, the human person risks being reduced to data, a cog in a machine or a commodity. If, however, technology is integrated with a wise perspective, it can become an instrument of growth, justice and fraternity." pp180 And calls for a shared responsibility between institutions, businesses, educational communities and citizens to "cultivate responsibility, moderation, discernment and a sense of truth". pp180 Thus ends the chapter. #MagnificaHumanitas

The Center for Human Equality in Oregon stands firmly against every form of group judgmentalism. Whether directed at race, religion, ethnicity, gender, or generation, collective condemnation of individuals based on shared demographic traits dehumanizes people and erodes the foundational dignity of the human person. Today, we address a particularly insidious and increasingly normalized prejudice: the blanket denigration of Baby Boomers as a group. Labeling an entire generation—roughly those born between 1946 and 1964—as selfish, out-of-touch, economically greedy, or culturally obsolete is not harmless banter. It is a moral failing equivalent in principle to racism or antisemitism. Both reduce complex human beings to crude caricatures and substitute lazy groupthink for ethical judgment of individuals. Group judgmentalism operates through the same psychological and rhetorical mechanisms regardless of the target. It deindividuates. It strips away personal agency, character, choices, and circumstances, replacing them with a monolithic stereotype. A person is no longer John or Mary—parents, workers, veterans, artists, or neighbors with unique life stories—but simply "a Boomer." This shorthand dismisses their contributions, struggles, and moral worth in one sweeping gesture. History warns us of the consequences. When societies accept that entire categories of people can be collectively blamed or scorned, atrocities follow. The Holocaust, chattel slavery, ethnic cleansings, and cultural revolutions all began with the intellectual acceptance that some groups were inherently problematic, burdensome, or morally defective. While anti-Boomer rhetoric has not yet produced violence on that scale, it shares the same corrosive logic: the denial that every human being possesses irreducible individuality.Ethical individualism stands as the antidote. This principle holds that moral worth, responsibility, and judgment must attach to persons as individuals, not as avatars of demographic cohorts. Each human life is defined by personal decisions, virtues, flaws, and contexts—not by birth year, skin color, or ancestry. To praise or condemn someone primarily because they belong to a generational cohort violates this axiom. A young person who works hard, raises a family, pays taxes, and treats others with respect deserves admiration regardless of when they were born. Conversely, an individual who behaves selfishly or irresponsibly merits criticism on the basis of their actions, not their age bracket. Lumping millions together under "Boomers ruined the economy" or "OK Boomer" as a dismissal of legitimate perspectives ignores the vast diversity within that generation—progressives and conservatives, innovators and traditionalists, the wealthy and the working class, the kind and the cruel. This prejudice has become distressingly common in political discourse and cultural commentary. Pundits, social media influencers, and even elected officials casually deploy "Boomer" as a slur implying entitlement, environmental recklessness, or resistance to necessary change. Such language would be instantly recognized as unacceptable if applied to any racial or religious minority. We do not tolerate blanket statements like "Millennials are all lazy" without pushback in polite society, yet generational scapegoating of older Americans often passes without challenge. This inconsistency reveals the selective nature of contemporary equity rhetoric. True equality demands consistency: if group-based condemnation is wrong for protected classes, it is wrong for everyone. The Center for Human Equality rejects the notion that some groups are fair game for collective insult while others are shielded. Human dignity is universal or it is meaningless. The Baby Boomer generation, like every other, contains both profound achievements and regrettable failures. They witnessed and often drove technological revolutions, expanded civil rights in important ways, built economic prosperity that benefited subsequent generations, and raised families under the shadow of the Cold War. Many continue to work into their later years, volunteer in communities, and support younger relatives. Painting them uniformly as villains ignores these realities and fosters unnecessary intergenerational resentment. Younger generations face genuine challenges—housing costs, student debt, cultural fragmentation—but attributing these primarily to the moral failings of "Boomers" is both factually simplistic and ethically lazy. Solutions to societal problems require nuanced policy debate among individuals, not tribal warfare between age cohorts. We therefore call upon all politicians, journalists, commentators, and citizens of Oregon and the nation to abandon "Boomer" as a term of collective derision. Just as responsible voices refuse to traffic in racial or religious stereotypes, they should reject generational ones. Let us model a higher standard: evaluate ideas on their merits, hold individuals accountable for their conduct, and recognize the unique story each person carries. Public discourse gains nothing from lazy generalizations and loses the moral clarity that ethical individualism provides. The Center for Human Equality affirms that every American—Boomer, Millennial, Gen Z, or otherwise—deserves to be seen and judged as an individual endowed with inherent dignity. Group judgmentalism, in all its forms, diminishes us all. By rejecting it, we uphold the principles of a free and humane society where character, not cohort, defines the person. Oregon, and America, can do better. Let us begin today.