Wrong. At least it is if you’re Kim Hébert at SkepticNorth.com and her crack team of skeptical reviewers. When Bryce Wylde responded to an article on Skeptic North with a list of 21 of his “favourite” papers supporting homeopathy, Kim took him to task.

The result is a thorough review of all 21 papers and a short analysis as to what they actually show, and the subsequent complete humiliation of Bryce Wylde. You should go read it for yourself. It’s awesome.

Evidence Check: Bryce Wylde’s 21 Favourite Papers

There are two things that I firmly believe about politics.

1) No matter who ends up getting elected, it doesn’t really change things all that much. Especially if you’re only talking about the person at the very top, and ignoring the larger decision making bodies (city council, house of commons, congress, etc.) and bureaucratic institutions.

2) Politicians should be judged by the decisions they make, their policy proposals, and how they guide political discourse. Not by whether you think they’re stupid, or bigoted. I find it all too convenient when a politician’s efficacy is pre-judged based on whether their political leanings match yours.

But that’s not going to stop a bunch of parents in Barrie from raising a ruckus with their local school board. Nor will it stop the CBC from picking up the article and credulously running with it. To show how patently ridiculous this issue is, I’m not even going to comment directly on any of the things said or people quoted — I’m just going to quote word-for-word a bunch of things said in the article, with my own emphasis added at some points:

They believe the Wi-Fi setup in their kids’ elementary schools may be the problem.

The parents complain they can’t get the Simcoe County school board or anyone else to take their concerns seriously, even though the children’s symptoms all disappear on weekends when they aren’t in school.

…

“I’m not saying it’s because of the Wi-Fi because we don’t know yet, but I’ve pretty much eliminated every other possible source.”

…

“They are culpable and … they have the gall to go on the record and say they haven’t had any doctor’s notes. Well what doctor has been schooled about the rate of microwave infections?“

…

Wireless technology also wastes energy, is less secure than wired connections, could be violating a student’s right to a safe environment and should be turned off in schools, Clarke added.

“The simple solution is plug back in the wired, ported system that’s already there and unplug the wireless,” she said. “It’s real easy and it costs nothing. In fact, it will save money.”

…

“Within a few months of Wi-Fi being installed, stories start coming forward with kids complaining about headaches, neurological effects, loss of balance and problems with fine motor skills,” said NDP health critic France Gelinas.

“There is enough anecdotal evidence from parents that this is worth looking into.”

Lastly, shame on you, CBC, for your irresponsible journalism. You could have looked for an opinion outside of the one scientist in the world who seems to be on a crusade against all EM radiation.

I have legitimate questions about this law. Not questions as in the “this law is complete bullshit” sense, but legitimate questions that I feel weren’t adequately answered based on what I’ve read about this law. I’m not saying the answers aren’t out there (in fact, they almost certainly are) — I’m just saying that I’m too lazy to go out and find them. And really, I feel like the politicians proposing the law should have answered these questions.

1. Is this law actually solving a problem?
   It’s already illegal to drink and drive, so this issue isn’t about drunk driving. New drivers (non-fully licensed drivers) in Ontario also aren’t allowed to have a BAC above 0, so this isn’t an issue about new and inexperienced drivers. So is there a real problem with 19-25 year olds, driving around with a BAC of less than 0.05, causing accidents? I have no reason to doubt the claim that young drivers are involved in more accidents involving alcohol (it makes sense, to me), but are these accidents being caused by people who are under the (old) legal limit? I don’t know, but I’m sure there’s statistical data that could answer this question.
2. What’s the average relatively level of impairment caused by a BAC of 0.05 or under?
   How impaired are you if your BAC is between 0 and 0.05? I have no doubt that there’s a measurable effect, but is it more serious than any number of other factors that can affect/impair a driver? (Drowsiness, distractions, medications, etc.) Or, basically, should we be sending out the message that having a beer or glass of wine with dinner significantly impairs your ability to drive?
3. Are drunk driving laws effective?
   Maybe the goal of this law isn’t what I assumed in the previous question. Maybe the goal is to normalize the idea in young people that you shouldn’t drink and drive. In that case, I’d like to know what the effectiveness of laws against drinking and driving actually are. How do harsher punishments and more strict regulations correlate to instances of impaired driving and related injuries and fatalities?

Those are my thoughts on the issue.

Maybe I’ll rant about the G20 at a later date. Probably not, though.

I wonder how long it takes for the sense of urgency about my readings and essays to fade?

Pictured: Chicken Hearts

Meats Consumed

• Boar Pâté
• Quail Pâté
• Duck Pâté
• Prosciutto
• Escargot
• Duck Salami
• Spicy Bison Curry
• Chicken Hearts
• Rabbit Stew
• Venison Stew
• Horse Sirloin

Total: 11 Meats Consumed

Animals Consumed:

• Boar
• Quail
• Duck
• Pig
• Snail
• Bison
• Chicken
• Rabbit
• Deer
• Horse

Total: 10 Animals Consumed

Pictured: Horse Sirloin

Better quality (and more detailed) photos will be posted later.

Of course, being somewhat inconveniently located in the middle of Canada’s biggest city, the main campus thoroughfares are never too empty.

Occasionally, even the stars can be seen over the city’s light pollution.

I love the city at night.