Never vote for Democrats

So according to NYC and Philadelphia, you may be arrested if you open your restaurant today, but you'll be fine if you break into that restaurant and shoplift some goods. Seems smart.

— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) March 18, 2020

Due to the coronavirus crisis, Philadelphia police will no longer be making arrests for all narcotics offenses, theft from persons, retail theft, theft from auto, burglary, vandalism, bench warrants, stolen autos, economic crimes such as passing bad checks, fraud, & prostitution. pic.twitter.com/R2OZSPMKHO

— Rob O'Donnell (@odonnell_r) March 17, 2020

Free textbooks

https://www.cambridge.org/core/what-we-publish/textbooks

Tolkien and the Film Adaptations

I prefer Lewis to Tolkien as a fiction writer, but this is insightful:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfktLVP4Qr0&list=PLKjwFyELc2Snqt4O6X4VhCm2Pk1k2pXUx&index=19

Till We Have Faces

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Uk-ukf7iaA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCipem2XoG4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMffwQPp2FM&t=1s

Many critics deem this to be Lewis's best novel. It isn't fair to judge a book I haven't read, but at the same time there's a reason I never read it. Watching the lecture is a nice of a cheating. Giving me insight as a substitute for reading the book. I think a lot of Lewis fans haven't read it because:

i) It isn't Christian. It's a reversion to Lewis's lifelong fascination with Greek mythology. So the pagan setting is off-putting, and unlike the Greco-pagan elements in The Chronicles of Narnia, this isn't diluted.

ii) The main characters are women, it's written from a female perspective (insofar as Lewis can get inside a woman's mind), and it seems to have a female slant in terms of all the psychologizing and relational dynamics. This may reflect the influence of his wife reading the drafts. He's not merely adopting a feminine voice or viewing but taking his clues from her critical feedback. 

That's less appealing to the stereotypical male reader than some of his other fiction, with their more externalized focus on exploration and exotic landscape. 

iii) Whether or not I read a fictional book depends on a snap judgment from reading a plot synopsis. If the plot doesn't interest me I don't read the book. Same thing with movies and TV dramas. 

Born lost

In high school, Danny was a loner. He wasn't a loner by choice. He was a military brat. Because his father was so often away on tours of duty, Danny's  mother divorced him. There was a nasty custody battle, but it made little difference because Danny preferred to be with his Dad, so even if his mother got custody, Danny ran away.

The fact that his dad was routinely reassigned to new places, along with Danny's status as a runaway, led to chronic dislocation. They never settled down. Danny never had a chance to make friends. He often lived alone while his dad was on tour, and when his dad was home, he was verbally abusive to Danny. He took his pent-up frustrations out on Danny.

So Danny was torn. He was lonely. Desperately needed good friends, but afraid to make friends because he'd lose them and leave them behind when his dad was reassigned to a new place. Danny was on the football team, but standoffish.

Then a new kid showed up at school. Kevin appeared out of nowhere during midterm. Kevin was a bit mysterious. Aloof. Lived alone, like Danny. No one knew anything about his background. He was both an academic whizkid and very good at sports. Seemed to have a way of reading minds.

Despite being standoffish like Danny, Kevin made a point of reaching out to Danny. Tried to befriend him. And, indeed, they seemed to have a lot in common. But Danny was hard to get close to. 

There were caves in the area that local boys used to explore. For safety they'd usually go in groups of two, three, or more, with flashlights. It was easy to become hopelessly lost in the caves.

Danny explored the caves on his own. One time his flashlight fell through a crevice. He was instantly plunged into pitch darkness. 

Fear immediately swept over him and grew on him. He was lost. Really lost. There wouldn't be a search team to rescue him because no one knew that he was exploring the cave. He told no one. 

So the sense of fear enveloped him, like the enveloping darkness. Smothering, suffocating despair. He was used to being a loner. Used to being lonely. Now he was lost. With nothing but his thoughts. Waiting to die. No one missed him. No one looking for him. He was more alone than ever. He couldn't be more alone. Danny rarely cried, but now he began to cry.

Then he heard footsteps, but he didn't see a flashlight. The footsteps came closer. He shuddered in fear. 

Then a familiar voice spoke to him: it was Kevin. Kevin spoke softly so as not to startle him unduly, but his voice echoed in the caves. Kevin put his hand on Danny's head and stroked his hair a few times to reassure him. Danny was still trembling in fear. He got up. Kevin hugged him until Danny stopped trembling. Then Kevin took him by the hand and led him out of the cave. It was night, with only starlight to see by. 

Danny had no idea how Kevin could find him in the dark. How did Kevin know he was there? How could Kevin navigate the cave without a flashlight? 

Danny was afraid to be alone that night, so he spent the night at Kevin's place. Indeed, he stayed with Kevin for several weeks to rebuild his shattered sense of security. 

They talked about the cave. Kevin said everyone is born lost, as if they were born in a cave. They don't know the way out, and some of them are so used to living in the cave that they're afraid of leaving the cave for the outside world. They refuse to escape even if given a chance. They fear the light. 

After a few weeks, Danny moved back into his dad's house. But he didn't see Kevin at school. So he went to Kevin's house, but it was deserted. Bare, except for a Bible Kevin left behind.

So Danny began to read Kevin's Bible. Kevin was gone. No one ever saw him again. He left as abruptly as he came. 

Who was he? What was he? Maybe he was an angel. 

Should We Be Afraid of Coronavirus?

Why Believe? A Reasoned Approach to the Christian Faith

https://shenviapologetics.com/why-believe-a-reasoned-approach-to-the-christian-faith/

Flattening the curve

Flattening the curve

1. As most know by now, the purpose behind "flattening the curve" is so that hospitals don't get overwhelmed with tons of patients at one time. So that it prevents a surge of sick people requiring medical services all at once.

The basic idea is if there are 100 sick people rushing into a hospital all at once, then it'd overwhelm the hospital. So it'd be better to have 10 people per day spread across 10 days (or whatever). That's the basic idea.

2. Otherwise, if too many people need a hospital at one time, and there's not enough personnel or equipment to help everyone at the same time, then physicians may need to make snap judgments. In worst case scenarios, they may need to make snap judgments about who to save and who to let die. That's what's happening in Italy. However, we're not Italy. Certainly not yet. Far from it so far.

Raising the capacity

Alongside flattening the curve, what about raising the capacity? What I mean is "flattening the curve" is from the perspective of the average American, whereas "raising the capacity" is from the perspective of the hospital or our health care system. Flattening the curve is more about "what can I do to ensure hospitals don't get overwhelmed", while raising the capacity is more about "what can hospitals do to ensure they don't get overwhelmed".

I think capacities can be subdivided into at least three categories: medical facilities, personnel, and medical equipment. I've briefly touched on some of this in the past (e.g. here), but let's elaborate:

You can't trust the weather man

1. Thanks to Steve Hays for sending me this article by Dr. John Ioannidis. Ioannidis is a Greek physician and epidemiologist. He's most famous for (rightly) taking to task academic scientific publications and showing how the vast majority of them are basically bad science and/or bad statistics. Ioannidis' article on the coronavirus is worth reading. As an ID physician said about the same article: "Excellent piece by ⁦@METRICStanford on CFRs, the calculus of social distancing, and how lack of data is compromising decisions."

2. Similarly I earlier pointed out that Nate Silver (whose day job is predicting political elections on his 538 website) brought up some limitations in coronavirus models too.

3. I think epidemiological models might parallel meteorological models. That is, I think epidemiological models attempting to predict how bad the coronavirus will be might be similar to weather reports trying to predict the weather. We can't accurately predict the weather 100% of the time. Let alone in every place in the world. Sure, there may be general accuracy, but weather reports notoriously get things wrong too. Just my general impression, but I'm no epidemiologist or meteorologist or statistician or the like.

Of course, this doesn't necessarily mean we shouldn't bring an umbrella if the weather report predicts it's going to rain, but it also doesn't necessarily mean we should. It depends on a number of factors. Such as the further out the weather forecast is, the more unreliable it is likely to be. It's normally more accurate to predict it will rain this evening than it is to predict it will rain tomorrow or one week from now or one month from now.

4. I guess the only sure thing about predictions regarding the weather, political elections, the future impact of disease on populations, what the stock market will do, and who will win the Super Bowl is that there's bound to be someone in the end who will say: "See, I told you so!" :) And sometimes they might even be right. Sometimes.

What if Grace Community Church defied the state?

Grace Community Church recently said the following on their church website:

We were looking forward to our normal Sunday fellowship and worship. But we have been ordered by the state authorities to limit gatherings to 250 people or less, which means we are unable to meet together.

Steve Hays has already discussed this at length in his post "MacArthur bows down to Caesar" and in his post "Regulating the size of church services".

However, I just wanted to offer a "what if" scenario. What if Grace Community Church had said something like the following instead:

We were looking forward to our normal Sunday fellowship and worship. But we have been ordered by the state authorities to limit gatherings to 250 people or less, which means we are unable to meet together in a normal way for Sunday fellowship and worship.

So, instead of our normal Sunday fellowship and worship, we will do something a little bit different. We will admit the first 251 people to our Sunday fellowship and worship, but we will close our doors after this number has been reached.

One extra person on top of the state mandate is not going to significantly increase the risk of coronavirus transmission. However, what it will do is demonstrate that "We must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29).

This is not a new position. This is what we have maintained over the years. This is in keeping in line with what our pastor John MacArthur has preached over his long and faithful ministry. As Pastor John said in a past sermon:

At the seminary, we put an article up on the seminary website about homosexuality. Within a matter of hours, we received a letter ordering us to cease and desist immediately or face a very severe lawsuit. Could we be sued for taking this position? Absolutely. Insurance companies that provide liability insurances for churches so that we’re protected against lawsuits are beginning to say, “We will not accept responsibility for lawsuits on homosexual or same-sex marriage issues.” The church is out there all on its own.

Now, just to make it clear: We don’t bow down to Caesar. We bow to our king. But the faithful people didn’t bow down. The unfaithful people bowed down to idols. They bowed down to monarchs. They bowed down to godless kings. Faithful people didn’t bow down. Mordecai didn’t bow down. Daniel didn’t bow down; his friends didn’t bow down. Jesus didn’t bow down. Paul didn’t bow down.

And today, brothers and sisters in Christ, we will not bow down.

Progressive crisis management

So progressive NYC Mayor Blasio is contemplating a Shelter-in-Place order:

https://nypost.com/2020/03/17/shelter-in-place-order-could-hit-nyc-heres-what-it-means/

Aside from devastating the NYC economy, consider the unintended consequences. Under the curfew, people are confined to their homes. One thing many people do when homebound is to order out. Delivery pizza and Chinese food, &c. But as I understand it, the lockdown would force all "nonessential businesses" to close. So you couldn't order out.

Of course, you could probably cook your own meals, but then you need to restock, which means leaving home to go to the supermarket. You along with countless others who may be asymptotic carriers.

Keep in mind that families are hotbeds of disease transmission. So if you're confined at home, all your family members may well become infected.

That's is a problem with folks who mindlessly intone the new instant trope about social distancing, as if human existence is capable of being that compartmentalized. 

Virus factories

David Silverman

@MrAtheistPants

If you went to church yesterday, you should feel guilty. You didn't need to go - you should have stayed home and prayed, but instead you went to a crowd when you know it's a virus factory and could lead to people dying (because you could be a carrier). Think about that next week.

Home is a virus factory. If one family member gets sick, that usually infects other family members. Families are contagious. Is that a novel concept for Silverman? Or does he live alone?

A tavern is a virus factory. Why didn't he do a tweet on that?

If you went to the bar yesterday, you should feel guilty. You didn't need to go - you should have stayed home and gotten intoxicated by yourself, but instead you went to a crowd when you know it's a virus factory and could lead to people dying (because you could be a carrier). Think about that next week.

A gym is a virus factory. Why no tweet on that? Why single out churches? 

A supermarket is a virus factory. A drugstore is a virus factory. Bulk stores like Target, Costco, Walmart, and Fred Meyer are virus factories. Dollar stores and 7/11s are virus factories. Fastfood joints are virus factories. Passenger planes, with folks crammed in, breathing recirculated air, are virus factories. 

Suppose you're infected, so you stay home and order delivery pizza or delivery Chinese food? At least, that's what you were going to do until the governor/mayor ordered a mandatory lockdown on "nonessential businesses," so now you're out of luck. 

Church attendance is voluntary. Keeping churches open doesn't put a gun to your head. It doesn't force you to go. It simply gives you the freedom to do so. 

It's natural for an atheist like Silverman to view churches as nothing other than danger zones, but that's hardly a Christian outlook. Worship services save lives. Not just "salvation" in the spiritual sense, but saves many people from self-destructive or suicidal behavior. They need the fellowship. 

David Silverman

@MrAtheistPants

I look out my window at the normally busy but now empty street. The ice cream store is open, as is the take out seafood place. Nobody is there.

I've decided to go have some take-out seafood and ice cream for lunch. Gotta patronize.

But he might be an asymptomatic carrier. He might infect the waitress, cashier, or ice cream scooper. He didn't need to go, but he went there even though it could lead to employees dying. He should feel guilty. Will he think about that next week? 

Parsing the tree of knowledge

9 The tree of life was in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil...17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” (Gen 2:9,17).

Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” 2 And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3 but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” 4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” 6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. 7 Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths (Gen 3:1-7).

1. This is rather cryptic. Commentators puzzle over it due to lack of definition or explication. Unlike psychological novels, biblical narrators often refrain from telling the reader what characters are thinking, so the reader is like a bystander who sees and overhears the action. It remains on the surface.

2. What is meant by the knowledge of good and evil? What was lacking in the experience of Adam and Eve prior to eating from the tree? In what sense were their eyes opened? Did the Tempter lie to them?

3. Some commentators focus on word-studies, but you can't get much milage out of that to answer these questions. Some commentators speculate that Adam and Eve were morally immature, in a state of diminished responsibility.

4. It's possible that the tree of knowledge doesn't confer the knowledge of good and evil. Rather, they discover or experience what evil means by doing what's forbidden. It's not so much about the nature of the tree, but the nature of their defiant action. When they violate the prohibition, they discover or experience the nature of evil through their wrongdoing. 

They are now in a different mental and moral state than before they transgressed the prohibition. They can't turn back the clock to their prior inexperience. 

5. So their eyes are opened, not in the sense that the tree in itself confers knowledge of good and evil, but because they now know what it feels like to do something forbidden. That's a change. The contrast between respecting the prohibition and defying the prohibition. 

6. In addition, they find out what it's like to be deceived. In a sense, the Tempter didn't lie to them, but he tricked them. He told a half-truth. What happened was a letdown. Not what they were expecting or hoping for. In a sense he held up his end of the bargain, but they were too naive to appreciate what they are in for. They gain insight through hindsight rather than foresight, at which point it's too late to recross the line. 

7. In itself, their action changes next to nothing. They now know what it feels like to do something forbidden. That's all. But that's disappointing. That's very thin. Like running a red light at a deserted intersection.

8. However, violating the prohibition is punishable. So their action fosters a sense of dread. Knowledge of good and evil instills foreboding about what awaits them. And, indeed, retribution is swift, as they are banished from the garden. Shut off from access to the tree of life. From hereon out they must struggle with inhospitable conditions, aging, and death. 

The limitations of coronavirus models

Nate Silver makes a number of good points about the limitations of epidemiological models in attempting to predict how bad the coronavirus will be:

If you see a lot of different coronavirus models producing a lot of different outcomes, that's not a surprise. It's a challenging problem, and here are some of the reasons for uncertainty. pic.twitter.com/RwWYfStd16

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) March 17, 2020

Planned Parenthood coughs on pro-lifers

HORRIFIC!

A Planned Parenthood worker intentionally coughed on pro-life people praying outside.

It's bad enough PP kills babies, now it's trying to infect people with the Coronavirus.

Hey @ppact

FIRE this employee NOW and apologize to the victims.https://t.co/rtUzi0pUYx

— LifeNews.com (@LifeNewsHQ) March 17, 2020

Coronavirus overview

A good basic overview of everything about the coronavirus pandemic. People should be more or less up to speed with the broad facts after watching the video.

Faith in the face of coronavirus

I agree with the first half more than the second half:

"Is Faith Futile In the Face of the Coronavirus?" (Erik Manning)

How do I know if I have coronavirus?

The following is not medical advice. I'm posting it for myself or self-reference.

Why hand-washing?

Nina Shapiro, a professor of medicine at UCLA:

What is it about soap that gives it such superpowers?

Plain old hand soap, no, not antibacterial soap (remember, this is a virus devastating us, not a bacteria), contains molecules that are actually called “soap molecules.” They contain a hydrophobic (water-hating, or water-fearing) end and a hydrophilic (water-loving) end. When mixed with water, the components of a soap molecule line up so that the water-loving ends are facing out, and the water-hating ends are facing in.

When dissolved in water, the components in soap form circular “micelles,” exposing all of the water-loving ends outward. The coronavirus is coated with lipids and proteins. The hydrophilic (water-loving) component of soap acts to dissolve the lipids and break down the proteins, both of which actions help prevent the virus from entering the cells on the skin. Hand sanitizer containing at least 60% alcohol also has effects on this virus. The alcohol acts to disrupt RNA molecules in the virus, preventing viral replication (in other words it blocks the virus from making copies of itself). But soap is slightly superior, as there is the scrubbing part that comes with hand washing with soap and water.

The World Health Organization (W.H.O.) has provided a now highly viewed poster about hand washing technique, which emphasizes not only coating the hands with soap and water, but also includes rubbing the soap into the skin for at least 20 seconds (with the song, meme, or Shakespearean monologue of your choice these days). The duration is critical, as it ensures a more thorough cleansing, as opposed to just a surface once-over one tends to do with hand sanitizers or wipes. Unlike hard surfaces such as tables, door knobs, or computer screens, skin has a more irregular, variant texture, whereby a light coating followed by a three-second rinse just won’t do the job.

Just wash your hands. With soap. And after that, dry them. With a towel (disposable these days). Towels enable one to continue to use a bit of friction on the skin, which helps remove dirt and pathogens.

Bathroom hand dryers are a big “no” these days. In 2018, a study published by the American Society of Microbiology found that these dryers literally suck up bacteria from fecal matter in the bathroom air, and spray it on each user.

(Source)

Catching up with the coronavirus

Just some of my recent if disjointed thoughts on the coronavirus (i.e. SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19):

1. It's been a public health disaster in Italy. Maybe it would have been regardless of what Italy did. At the same time, it might be worth keeping in mind what Johns Hopkins infectious disease specialist and critical care physician Amesh Adalja pointed out nearly a week ago when Italy first began its lockdowns, etc.:

I think this will be the wrong lesson for the world https://t.co/0othGh3cp1

— Amesh Adalja (@AmeshAA) March 10, 2020

2. However, the good news for us is we're not Italy. Not yet. I've posted in the past about what measures our physicians and hospitals are undertaking. For example, "How are physicians preparing for coronavirus?". Also, "How to treat coronavirus in the ICU". And "Plasma therapy for coronavirus".

3. By contrast, some of the Asian nations seem to be doing well. For instance, it looks like Singapore is doing really well (source). Likewise it seems South Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong. In fact, Dr. Scott Gottlieb tweeted today: "South Korea continues to show signs that its epidemic is abating".

4. I think that's due to several reasons, though I could be mistaken since I haven't closely followed things: