Stop the presses! What shade(s) of orange do you suppose extraterrestrial Donald Trumps might be?

"Now we have seven Earth-sized planets to expand our understanding. Yes, we have the possibility to find water and life. But even if we don't, whatever we find will be super interesting."

-- University of Liège "exoplanet researcher" Michaël Gillon

by Ken

So here I was, wrestling with a post that would take off from a cluster of one upcoming and two just-forgotten birthdays, and last night's Real O'Neals and The Middle, so good that you have to wonder how they survived interference by the Disney-ABC network suits, and the whole consuming business of "fitting in" or not.

That combined with -- as an afterthought or maybe overthought -- a piece by Nathaniel Rich in the March 7 NYRB, "Joan Didion in the Deep South" (copyright by the author, curiously; note that the full piece is available only to subscribers or purchasers) about Joan Didion's about-to-be-published book South and West, which apparently consists of her actual notes for never-written pieces gathered during a month traveling the Gulf Coast in summer 1970 and a 1976 visit to San Francisco (in, of course, her native California) covering Patty Hearst's trial for Rolling Stone.

I'd already decided that probably it would have been split into two sure-to-be-riveting posts, when whap!, along comes this breaking news, and naturally all that other stuff has to be put on hold. I know that these seven planets aren't in our solar system, or anywhere near (note that the description of Trappist-1 as an "ultracool dwarf" isn't a value judgment but a description of the 39-light-years-distant star's temperature and size), but still, seven "Earthlike" planets? Get out of here! Just think, somewhere out there in space there could be seven officially extraterrestrial Donald Trumps! Do you suppose they would all come in the same shade(s) of orange?

Speaking of Science
Scientists discover 7 ‘Earthlike’ planets orbiting a nearby star

By Sarah Kaplan | February 22 at 1:00 PM

[SEE VIDEO CLIP ABOVE]
Three planets of the TRAPPIST-1 system resemble Earth in terms of size, mass, and the energy they receive from their star. (Reuters)

A newfound solar system just 39 light-years away contains seven warm, rocky, Earthlike planets, scientists say.

The discovery, reported Wednesday in the journal Nature, represents the first time astronomers have ever detected so many terrestrial planets orbiting a single star. Researchers say the system is an ideal laboratory for studying distant worlds and could be the best place in the galaxy to search for life beyond Earth.

“Before this, if you wanted to study terrestrial planets, we had only four of them and they were all in our solar system,” said lead author Michaël Gillon, an exoplanet researcher at the University of Liège in Belgium. “Now we have seven Earth-sized planets to expand our understanding. Yes, we have the possibility to find water and life. But even if we don't, whatever we find will be super interesting.”

The newly discovered solar system resembles a scaled-down version of our own. The star at its center, an ultracool dwarf called TRAPPIST-1, is less than a tenth the size of the sun and about a quarter as warm. Its planets circle tightly around it; the closest takes just a day and a half to complete an orbit, the most distant takes about 20 days. If these planets orbited a larger, brighter star they'd be fried to a crisp. But TRAPPIST-1 is so cool that all seven of the bodies are bathed in just the right amount of warmth to hold liquid water. And three of them receive the same amount of heat as Venus, Earth and Mars, putting them in “the habitable zone,” that Goldilocks region where it's thought life can thrive.

Still, “Earthlike” is a generous term to describe these worlds. Though the planets of the TRAPPIST-1 system resemble Earth in terms of size, mass, and the energy they receive from their star, there's a lot that makes our planet livable beside being a warm rock. Further observation is required to figure out what the TRAPPIST-1 planets are made of, if they have atmospheres, and whether they hold water, methane, oxygen and carbon dioxide — the molecules that scientists consider “biosignatures,” or signs of life.

“You can bet people will be rushing to take those measurements,” said Elisabeth Adams, an exoplanet researcher at the Planetary Science Institute who was not involved in the study. “That's going to be fascinating to see.”


An artist's conception of the view from the surface of the exoplanet TRAPPIST-1f. (NASA/JPL-Caltech) [Note: Click to enlarge. -- Ed.]

Whatever secrets it may harbor, the TRAPPIST-1 system will surely be a sight to behold. Though the star is small, its nearness to the planets means that, from their perspective, it appears about three times as large as our sun. The outermost planets enjoy the daily spectacle of their neighbors passing across the sky and in front of their shared sun, each world a large dark spot silhouetted against the salmon-colored star. Its dim glow, which skews toward the red and infrared end of the light spectrum, bathes the planets in warmth and paints their skies with the crimson hues of a perpetual sunset.

[There's more, ohsomuch more, which all you astronomy nerds out there can read onsite. -- Ed.]

WHEW! HOW EXCITING IS THIS?

Now, maybe Friday we can get back to the business originally plann for today.

#

Dilbert Watch: Okay, "it's called leadership," but is a manned mission to Mars launched by Dilbert's Pointy-Haired Boss a good idea?

"Two ways to win and no way to lose"? Really?

DILBERT     by Scott Adams
"Volunteers for Mars Trip" (Monday, Dec. 26)

[Click on any strip to enlarge.]

by Ken

I don't think any additional comment is required for this lovely Dilbert sequence, which I first assumed was completed Friday (but see below). The one thing I would perhaps like to note is that the last time I shared a Dilbert strip, I was actually happy that a commenter registered surprise at seeing Dilbert on DWT, given creator Scott Adams's political views. I was happy because it's a discussion-worthy issue.

My test is that I almost always find Dilbert both seriously insightful and seriously entertaining. Which of course is why I so often feel the urge to share a strip or a sequence of them. And I don't see any conflict between that and Scott's politics. I'm sure there are people whose politics would place them beyond the pale for me, but I'm kind of relieved to find that merely disagreeing with someone's politics doesn't make it impossible for me to take in and appreciate what they have to offer.

The "seriously insightful and seriously entertaining" standard, I think you'll agree, is tougher than it may appear at first glance. Take the writing of Ayn Rand, which misses the cut by a country mile on both counts, being not only devoid of insight but, although comedically tinged in a primitively moronic way, isn't anywhere near funny enough to be entertaining.

All of that said, let's proceed with the great mission to Mars.

"Naming the Spaceship" (Tuesday, Dec. 27)


"Picking the Spaceship Staff" (Wednesday, Dec. 28)


"Oxygen Not in the Budget" (Thursday, Dec. 29)


"Boss Doesn't See Email" (Friday, Dec. 30)



NOW HOLD ON A SECOND HERE . . .

My original assumption was that yesterday's strip was a breakoff from the Mars-mission story arc. Then, looking back, I was reminded that the ill-fated Ted was the person who designed the spaceship for the Mars journey. Perhaps I didn't make the connection because Ted has, of course, both died and been fired more times than anyone can count (and in all cases so far has thereafter reappeared as if nothing had happened). So maybe this cheery little, er, postmortem, really does belong with the Mars-mission sequence.

In any case, yesterday's strip in addition strip brought in Wally, and as I've noted (admitted?) so often here, Wally is my guy.

"Spreading Ted's Ashes" (Saturday, Dec. 31)




WHILE WE'RE AT IT, WHY DON'T WE TAKE A LOOK
AT TODAY'S STRIP? ANY POLITICAL DIFFICULTIES?

SUNDAY DILBERT     by Scott Adams
(Sunday, Jan. 1, 2017)

#

Did The GOP's War On Science Make Trump Inevitable For Them?

I readily admit that I don't know what transpired when then-Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy decided who to put on the House Science and Technology Committee. But when names of rabid, crackpot science deniers like Mo Brooks (R-AL), Steve Knight (R-CA), Brian Babin (R-TX), Gary Palmer (R-AL), Bruce Westerman (R-AR), Randy Weber (R-TX), Bill Posey (R-FL)--the Obama-must-provide-his-birth-certificate guy who authored H.R. 5801, a bill to privatize asteroids for the mining companies-- Jim Bridenstine (R-OK), Barry Loudermilk (R-GA), Ralph Abraham (R-LA) and Barbara Comstock (R-VA) show up on the list of committee members, there's no getting around that there were people giggling sardonically how the whole concept of a science committee is just a farce.

Long gone are the days when New York's respected Sherwood Boehlert, a Republican environmental realist, ran the show at that committee. Boehlert used his position to combat acid rain, to urge his party to wake up to the realities of Climate Change and to increase CAFE standards for fuel consumption in autos and trucks. Now, instead of Boehlert, the chair is a notorious hyper-partisan science denier from Texas named Lamar Smith, who uses crucial science-related issues to push far right agenda items. Instead of dealing with the Zika virus crisis, for example, he decided to scapegoat immigrants. And the Science Committee isn't going to get any saner with Paul Ryan as Speaker. The newest committee appointee-- his-- is the lunatic fringe teabagger who replaced Boehner as the Representative from Ohio's Butler County, Warren Davidson, who seems to think Science is part of the insidious liberal agenda against his beloved creed: Greed and Avarice.

Astronomer Phil Plait has a different take on the GOP war against Science-- it's what prepared their hollowed out party for Trump and Trumpism. The GOP has recognized critical thinking as an existential enemy for quote some time-- and now they're stuck with Trump. "We are awash in that miasma," he wrote about climate change deniers, anti-vaxxers, supporters of abstinence-only education and young-Earth creationists, "where people can say almost anything, no matter how ridiculous, and not be confronted, not be challenged. Many of these purveyors of poppycock wind up surrounding themselves with throngs of people willing and eager to suspend their disbelief and support the foolishness. Cults certainly can form in such an atmosphere … and when the person spouting the nonsense is a politician, that’s when things get very sticky indeed. And now here we are, with Donald Trump the nearly inevitable champion of the Republican Party."

This is no coincidence. An interesting if infuriating article in New Republic very clearly lays out how the GOP has spent decades paving the road for Trump by attacking the science that goes against their prejudicial ideology. I strongly urge you to read it, but one section jumped out at me in particular:

There’s another factor at work here: The anti-intellectualism that has been a mainstay of the conservative movement for decades also makes its members easy marks. After all, if you are taught to believe that the reigning scientific consensuses on evolution and climate change are lies, then you will lack the elementary logical skills that will set your alarm bells ringing when you hear a flim-flam artist like Trump. The Republican “war on science” is also a war on the intellectual habits needed to detect lies.

Yes, precisely. This is exactly what I have been saying for years now. When we erode away at people’s ability to reason their way through a situation, then unreason will rule. And not just abut scientific topics, but any topics. We see nonsense passed off as fact all the time by politicians, including attacks by Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, on theNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, claims by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, that there’s been a pause in global warming, the GOP attacks on Planned Parenthood, and more. People will still believe what these politicians say, long, long after the claims have been shown to be completely false.

...The GOP isn’t to blame for Trump existing-- we can lay that at his own feet-- but the path he’s taking was certainly smoothed by them.

The fact is, this is the candidate the Republicans have sown, and so shall they reap. My hope is that the majority of the electorate will see through the nonsense, the distortions, the lies, and use their critical thinking skills on Nov. 8. Reality doesn’t give a damn about our beliefs, and so we must instead give a damn about reality.

One of the first House committee chairs to back Trump's bid for the presidency was Lamar Smith, who represents a district that is less militantly right-wing than much of Republican Texas. The 21st district includes northeast San Antonio and nearby neighborhoods like Fort Sam Houston, Alamo Heights, Olmos Park, Castle Hills and Hollywood Park and a corridor through New Braunfels and San Marcos up to downtown Austin right to the border of the University of Texas as well as the Texas Hill Country off to the west, including Fredericksburg, Boerne. Bandera, and Kerrville. If the Democrats are ever going to really make a play to start taking back Texas, TX-21 is ground zero, but that won't come while visionless hacks like Pelosi and Hoyer are still calling the shots at the DCCC.

Progressive Democrat Tom Wakely won his primary against a conservative Democrat. The DCCC response was to refuse to take his phone calls or work with him to win back the district. Typical of how Pelosi and Hoyer abuse the committee charged with winning back Congress. Wakely, who supported Bernie for president and is running on his platform is a perfect opponent for the clueless and out-of-touch Lamar Smith. "It seems par for the course for Republicans," he told us, "to do the opposite of what's reasonable or logical. Who better to head the House Science committee than a man who's firmly opposed to objective data? Who better to be the champion of science in our House than a man who thinks NOAA scientists are part of some liberal cabal out to trick the people of this planet? Lamar Smith was one of the first congressional leaders to endorse Trump while plenty of Republicans found zero political gains in siding with the presumptive nominee. If there's hardly a reason for members of Smith's own party to endorse their candidate for president than what could possibly be the reason for this alliance?

"With my opponent, I feel there's a bit of a difference. We definitely haven't heard anything of a Lamar Smith cabinet offer. Personally, it's hard to see it any other way than an alliance of policy and personality. And while it's certainly possible Congressman Smith is simply placing party for before country, his rhetoric and actions don't fall far from the Trump tree. Smith wants to build a wall around himself to block out the facts on immigration. He's not that far from agreeing with The Donald that climate change is a Chinese hoax. Trump's words and Lamar's votes both demean women. Sure he's been in Congress for nearly 30 years, and he definitely helped pave the way for a nominee like Trump, but in my opinion they're two peas in a frightening pod."

See that thermometer on the right? If you click on it, you can contribute to Tom Wakely's grassroots campaign and help him accomplish what the DCCC refuses to do-- start the process of winning vulnerable red seats in Texas. We owe it to our friends in Austin!

UPDATE: About Those Asteroids Mentioned Above

Since 1990 mining companies have contributed $55,630,070 to congressional candidates, $44,587,120 of that to Republicans, of course. Science Committee chair Lamar Smith was so happy to see a "bipartisan" variation of Posey's bill-- by mining company shill Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and reactionary New Dem Derek Kilmer (WA)-- that he boasted that "The natural resources of our Solar System have great potential to facilitate and support our human endeavors, both in outer space and on Earth. Commercial space companies in the United States are making significant investments to develop technical capabilities that will allow us to explore and use outer space resources. This bill enables this new industry and provides guidance for future entrepreneurs." He forgot to add-- "and to hell with the American taxpayers who have spent millions on space exploration and technologies." Posey was wagging his tail too: "Asteroids and other objects in space are excellent potential sources of rare minerals and other resources that can be used to manufacture a wide range of products here on Earth and to support future space exploration missions. Americans willing to invest in space mining operations need legal certainty that they can keep the fruits of their labor, and this bill provides that certainty." And, apparently, the fruits of the rest of our labor as well.