Gasoline prices

Gasoline prices up over 60% - Chart of the Day:

So while gasoline prices are currently well below the record high levels of 2007, this recent rally has brought prices to a level well above what was witnessed from 1984-2004 ñ a two decade span of relative energy price stability.

Why are gas prices increasing? WSJ says it's due to the possibility of increased consumer demand:

Oil prices are jumping on the hopes of an accelerated economic recovery.

The kindling for that flame came from the U.S. Federal Reserve, which talked about the U.S. economy “leveling out.” It was fueled further by euro-zone economic data, as Germany and France are growing again (and a 0.3% growth rate is almost boom-time for those two).

But, as the article notes, this may be "irrational exuberance" -

Never mind that crude oil inventories in the U.S. are still growing (what summer driving season?) or that retail sales are still falling.

One way to curb your enthusiasm - looking into the future:

According to NSWA, by the end of President Obama’s current term in office (2012), restrictions put in place will likely reduce future oil output by 1.32 million b/d (15.4 percent) and natural gas by 8.9 percent annually. By 2019, restrictions and new taxes could have reduced the federal take from oil and gas production by more than $118 billion, or about 4 times the expected yield of the new taxes. By 2030, these proposed policies will have the effect of lowering oil production in the United States by over 3 million b/d (approximately 28 percent) and natural gas by 30 percent.
Also, by 2030 the cumulative reduction in federal tax take from the oil and natural gas industry could be more than $780 billion, under current administration policies.

“The decreased production that will result from the proposed tax increases will have a catastrophic effect upon the American consumer since less domestic oil means higher prices,” said Dewey Bartlett, Jr., chairman of the National Stripper Well Association. “The OPEC leadership will have almost exclusive control over the world-wide pricing of crude oil as well as all products refined from crude oil such as gasoline, jet fuel and diesel fuel. Each of the thirtyplus states that have oil and natural gas production will experience a sharp decrease in tax revenues and significant job losses. A vital domestic industry that today helps fuel our national
economy will become an insignificant creator of American jobs much like the shipbuilding, electronics and clothing industries. The consequences of the demise of our domestic oil and natural gas industry are beyond imagination.”

Lower tax revenue in a time of growing deficit spending, higher fuel costs and an increase in dependence on foreign crude - what a change!

Of course, if the current administration believes that all of the dire warnings of the NSWA chairman will come to pass but the result of higher oil prices will be to unleash a huge increase in demand for alternative fuels, more fuel efficient cars, more green technology - all of which would lead to a decrease in domestic oil consumption and a resultant "energy independence" from OPEC as demand for overseas oil goes down, the result of which will eventually be an increase in tax revenue and more green jobs, then, well, in the long run these tax increases may make some sort of sense. As in "forcing change" from above - by raising energy prices so high that alternatives make economic sense. In effect, "taxing" Americans into going green.

From an environmental view, however, it seems to me that the administration would have to be very naive to believe that global warming, if it exists, would be reduced by reducing U.S. consumption of crude oil. Dumping onto the market large amounts of oil that the U.S. isn't using simply means a lowering of crude oil prices for the rest of the world, and encourages other countries to replace the U.S. as a consumer. The worldwide demand for oil will not decrease. Indeed, with lower prices, there may be more development in countries without the U.S. standards for air and water quality and there may be an increase in "greenhouse gasses" as a result of the U.S. going "green." The law of unintended consequences may rear its ugly head yet again for this Administration.

On the other hand, there are only about 2 years before the next presidential election cycle kicks in, 6 months before Congressional campaigns start - and short term pain at the pump may cause the American people to vote a different vision of the future into place.

Missing ship reportedly found

Missing Ship "Arctic Sea" found:

Reports citing local coastguards now suggest it has been seen some 400 nautical miles from the Cape Verde islands, off the coast of West Africa.

Russian navy ships have been searching for the 4,000-tonne Maltese-flagged vessel, which had been carrying timber.
However, the spokesman said there was a "high possibility" that the ship had been located. French intelligence officials also believe they have found the ship in the same area, he said.
Observers have suggested the ship was hijacked, possibly because of a Russian commercial dispute.

Following the reported sighting, a spokesman for the French defence ministry told the BBC that the Arctic Sea was thought to be in international waters.

The spokesman said his information came from the Cape Verde coastguard, who said the ship was outside their jurisdiction. He was unable to confirm the coastguard's report.

Can't wait to hear the sea stories on this one.

Somali Pirates: Self Help Rescue - 2 Pirates Dead

Egyptians free, pirates dead.

Somali Pirates: Turkish Freighter in Gulf of Aden Escapes Attack

In case you were wondering where the Somali pirates were - Turkish freighter fends off pirate attack in Gulf of Aden:

The vessel, the Elgiznur Cebi, was ambushed by pirates at 02:45 GMT in the Gulf of Aden while en route from the Black Sea to Saudi Arabia. The attack was fought off and the 19-member crew is in good health, the Turkish navy said in a statement.

Friday Reading

Rememberance at CDR Salamander: Fullbore Friday.

Russian Fleet Pursuing Leads in Ship Disappearance

Following up on earlier posts concerning the disappearance of a Maltese-flagged/Finnish-owned/Russian-manned timber ship (see here, here and here), a chunk of the Russian Navy has been pressed into service to locate the missing vessel Arctic Sea, as set out here:

Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky, Commander-in-Chief of the Russian navy, told the state news agency Itar-Tass: “Under the orders of President Dmitry Medvedev all Russian naval ships in the Atlantic have been sent to join the search for the Arctic Sea.”

Russia’s radar systems and satellites are also also searching for the ship amid unconfirmed reports that it was heading towards Africa.

A Defence Ministry spokesman told the RIA Novosti agency: “The main task lies with the patrol combatant vessel Ladnyy of the Black Sea Fleet, which passed through the Strait of Gibraltar on 12 August and is following the set course.”

The large amphibious warships Azov, Yamal and Novocherkassk were also reported to have entered the Atlantic through the Strait of Gibraltar, suggesting that ships on a pre-arranged military exercise have now received a signal from Moscow to join the hunt for the Arctic Sea.

I'm a little unclear about the section referring to "Russia's radar systems" which does not seem to be referring to shipboard radar.

UPDATE: No time to fully explore, but here's an intriguing report:

A Spanish port authority has officially denied claims by Russia’s state-owned news agency RIA Novosti that missing Russian general cargoship Arctic Sea has turned up at one of the ports for which it is responsible.

.
UPDATE2: Fairplay reports Russian questions for ship operator:

THE FINNISH company on record as owning the missing Arctic Sea said its officials have been interrogated by Russian security investigators, Fairplay was told today.

Nikolay Karpenkov, managing director of Solchart Arkhangelsk, said he answered questions from “the special organs who demanded this information from me”.
***

The article also notes that, given the ship's fuel capacity, the ship had better be near its destination or the tank may run dry.

Many have suggested that destination is somewhere along the African west coast.

UPDATE3: Daniel Sekulich on "phantom ships".

Thursday Reading

As always, Thursday Reading begins with Fred Fry's Maritime Monday 174 wherein Fred has photos from a Lithuanian shipyard and linkage galore that cover the waterfront.

Speaking of the waterfront, there seems to be some corruption in the agency meant to control corruption on the New York/New Jersey port area waterfront. Read all about it here. Things are not good when there are accusations like this:

. . . the inspector general alleged the director of audit and control often kept his door closed while running a private tax preparation business at work and accessing pornography on his office computer.

Michael Yon should win awards.

Maritime Security: Missing Ship Shows Holes in System

Late reports on missing Finnish-owned/Maltese-flagged/ Russian-crewed ship here.

Interesting maritime security thoughts reported by Lloyd's List in Russia to launch search for Arctic Sea:

Meanwhile, Anglo-Dutch seafarer union Nautilus International has warned that the case highlights “glaring gaps” in the national and international maritime security regime . . .
***
Nautilus International general secretary Mark Dickinson said: ‘It is alarming that, in the twenty-first century, a ship can apparently be commandeered by hijackers and sail through the world’s busiest waterway with no alarm being raised and no naval vessel going to intercept it.”

He also expressed concern that a ship can sail around for more than a fortnight with no one seemingly knowing its precise location or who is in control.

“We do not believe the authorities would have taken such a relaxed approach to a hijacked aircraft, yet it seems that ships and seafarers continue to be treated with an ‘out of sight, out of mind’ approach that has led to the shipping industry being the Achilles heel of global security.”

The union added that a House of Commons transport committee report three years ago warned that the successful seizure of a ship could serve as example and encouragement to terrorists.

Yes, it may be a simple commercial dispute of some kind with payment being taken in an usual way - but the Union's point is well made. A ship shouldn't become "invisible" this fast. The risks are too great.

Mystery of Missing Ship Deepens (Updated & Bumped)

It all started with a very odd report of a very odd "pirate boarding" of a timber carrying ship, Arctic Sea, off Sweden by men reportedly using rubber boats marked as police boats. Odd, too, was that the piracy report came several days after the alleged attack and after the Arctic Sea had continued on its way.

Then came reports that Russian security forces were scrambling for a hunt for the ship - which was now reported as having disappeared. The reports of a disappearance were odd - no reports of distress calls, no emergency beacons in the water and, as marine expert Fred Fry pointed out in a comment - no signs of large amounts of floating wood (it is a timber ship, remember) that might mark a sudden sinking.

Now, another report here that Arctic Sea may have last been seen off Brest, France and that its position transponder has gone silent or been turned off:

The Arctic Sea was last recorded off Brest in Northern France at 0129h on July 30 and its transponder, which gives its position, appears to have been turned off after that. There is now an international search underway for the Maltese-flagged ship, which is carrying a €1.85 million cargo of timber, and which first hit the headlines after its crew reported that it had been boarded by hijackers on July 24 in Swedish waters – for just 12 hours. To add to the mystery, the case was not reported until days later, prompting doubts about whether the hijack actually took place.

The Dover Coastguard made contact on July 29 as the Arctic Sea was making her way into the Channel from the North Sea, shortly before its signal was lost but the ship was then reportedly seen off the coast of Portugal.

At the time of the last AIS Live record, it was still ostensibly bound for Algeria where it was due to unload its cargo on last week. However, it has not been spotted going through the Straits of Gibraltar.

A spokesman for AIS Live said that the transponders can be turned off – although this is rarely done. She explained that ships going past Somalia often turn off their positioning systems so as not to alert pirates to their presence.

The Malta National Maritime Security Committee is currently collaborating with a number of foreign jurisdictions in the ongoing investigations.

Additional information here:

Mark Clark, of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, said that Dover coastguard had spoken to the Arctic Sea at 5.30am on July 29 as it prepared to enter the Channel from the North Sea.

“We thought we had spoken to a member of the crew but of course it could have been someone with a gun pointed to their head or a hijacker,” he said. “There was no way of telling at the time.”
***
Arctic Sea was last recorded on the AISLive ship tracking system as off the coast of Brest, northern France, at 1.29am on July 30. The British coastguard was told that the ship had later been spotted by a Portuguese coastal patrol aircraft.

“That is the last information we have on the ship,” said Mr Clark. “Where she is now no-one knows. It is a highly unusual situation, no one can recall a hijacked ship being taken through the Channel.”
***
Mikhail Voitenko, editor in chief of the Maritime Bulletin, told the Itar-Tass agency that: “It is absolutely impossible to capture the ship with some criminal purposes in the European waters.

“If the ship is not hidden somewhere in Europe currently it may be anywhere within the range of 3,000-3,500 miles. So, all communication means are switched off or destroyed aboard the ship and it is going in an unknown direction.”

In one of my earlier posts I noted that the wind conditions off Portugal were not unusual. No reports of unusual waves in the area have been found.

Odd.

In addition to hijacking or sinking, among possible concerns would be the diversion of this ship for use by some terrorist group.

UPDATE: A Russian "expert" weighs in here:

A Russian maritime expert said on Monday that "something extraordinary" must have happened to a cargo ship that went missing off Portugal's Atlantic coast.

The Russian maritime journal Sovfracht reported on Sunday that the Arctic Sea dry cargo vessel, expected to arrive at the Algerian port of Bejaia on August 4, was missing.

It said "the vessel literally disappeared on July 28: there has been no communication, and neither the ship-owners nor the relatives [of the crewmembers]...have any information about its whereabouts."

Sergei Gulev, head of the Russian Academy of Sciences Oceanic Studies Laboratory, said he did not believe that the ship could have been momentarily "sucked into the sea" or could have fallen apart: "It's not an airplane."

"If it did not send a distress call, therefore, something extraordinary must have happened to it, which had nothing to do with any meteorological phenomena."

He did not offer any other explanation.

UPDATE2: EU Maritime Security Center note:

Arctic Sea is believed to be operated by Oy Solchart Management of Finland. But that company is thought to be partly Russian owned, with a Russian director who lives in Finland. Fairplay called Solchart today, but there was no answer.

Russian sources suggested that the vessel is in port, in the Atlantic or sunk. The crew's relatives have complained that they have been unable to learn anything from the vessel’s owner.

Hmm. "In port, at sea or sunk" seems to pretty much cover it. You know, except for that "abducted by aliens" thing.

Wonder why my "insurance fraud" antenna is acting up?

UPDATE: 12 Aug 09- Still missing, though probably bound for the African west coast somewhere. Much excitement in Euro press over an act of piracy "off Europe" - see here for example:

But Nick Davis, who runs the private security firm Anti-Piracy Maritime Security Solutions, told the BBC’s Today programme that the relatively low value of the cargo suggested this was a different kind of piracy to that seen off the coast of East Africa.

He said: "Piracy is piracy – if someone’s wanting to take that vessel, and they’re not authorised, and they use a speedboat to go and get it, then it’s no different to what the Somalis do.

"However, I don’t believe they would have boarded that vessel firing weapons in the air, and threatening to kill the crew.

"Whilst it is piracy, it’s not like what we know in Somalia."

If its not the listed cargo that's the target, then it's the ship or an unlisted cargo. The whole "hijack- release-re-hijack" is interesting.

More here :

"Theories include the ship being given a false identity to steal other vessels' cargos, or that Russian gangsters are using it to smuggled illegal arms. But an expert has suggested it may have been seized as part of a commercial dispute."
***
Nick Davis, the chief executive of the Merchant Maritime Warfare Centre, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "It's not carrying a valuable cargo ... [a] small [amount of] timber between the Baltic states and Algiers is not a high-value cargo, so I strongly suspect that this is probably a commercial dispute between its owner and a third party, and they have decided to take matters into their own hands."
***
"I would strongly feel that the vessel is now down off the west coast of Africa, somewhere even further down towards the Nigeria way and the vessel will probably be renamed, repainted and the crew sort of dropped off at a port somewhere, probably safe and well, to then sort of hand themselves in and say 'We were the crew of this vessel and we want to go home'," said Davis.

There are many other, though less interesting, ways to seize a ship in a commercial dispute, which is not to say that Mr. Davis in incorrect in his assessment.

BBC video here.

UPDATE: (13 Aug 09) Operator of ship suspects hijacking.

See Update here.

Indian Forces Chase, Halt North Korean Ship

Off the Andaman Islands, a North Korea "merchant" ship has dropped anchor after being pursued by Indian forces, as reported India inspects North Korea ship:

In this photo released by the Indian Coast Guard on Sunday, Aug. 9, 2009, North Korean cargo ship MV Mu San is seen in Port Blair, India. The coast guard detained the ”suspicious” ship, which had dropped anchor without permission Wednesday, Aug. 5, 2009 in an island in the Andaman and Nicobar group, after a six-hour chase off the country’s southeastern coast, a coast guard official said Saturday, Aug. 8, 2009 but a preliminary search of the vessel revealed it was carrying sugar and not illicit cargo.

More here:

The newspaper quoted K. R. Nautiyal, an officer of the Coast Guard at Andaman and Nicobar Region, as saying that "several things were amiss" about merchant vessel MV Musen, which later declared that it was carrying 16,500 tons of sugar from Thailand to Umm Qasr in Iraq.

The merchant ship shouldn't have dropped anchor in the Indian island in the first place and it didn't respond to signals from the Coast Guard. The ship's log book was found to be vague, the report quoted the officer as saying.

Musen had dropped anchor off Hut Bay island Wednesday afternoon for which it had no permission. When Coast Guard ship Kanakalatha Barua approached it, Musen tried to escape, forcing coast guard men to fire in the air, according to the report.

The ship finally "obeyed", and was brought to Port Blair early on Thursday, according to the report.

Among other odd activity - "fake log books?":

Investigation by Integrated Command of Andaman and Nicobar Island’s officials has revealed that the detained suspicious North Korean Ship MV Mu San made several voyages to China without maintaining proper records. North Korea, now facing sanctions for allegedly building nuclear arms, has been a beneficiary of Chinese material and research.

The Indian Coast Guard detained the MV Mu San with its 39 crewmembers on board late on Friday in the Indian Ocean after it dropped the anchor at Hut Bay, without the permission of the Indian authorities. Indian intelligence agencies also investigating the reason why the ship berthed in Singapore on June 30, though it was not a port of call in the logbook. MV Mu San, which left Laem Chabang port in Thailand on July 27, reached Singapore on July 30 and left for Hut Bay on July 31. But the passports of the crew were not stamped in Singapore, sources said.

Memo to the Mullahs and Kim Jong Il: Dig Deeper

Dear Fearless Leaders:

Hey, boys, got underground "hiddie holes?"

You may want to ckeck their depth because some U.S. military contractors have been working - as set out here:

The MOP is a technology demonstration program funded by DTRA to develop a 30,000-pound conventional penetrating weapon that will defeat a specialized set of hard and deeply buried targets. Designed to be carried aboard B-2 and B-52 bombers and deployed at high altitudes, the MOP's innovative design features include a Global Positioning System navigation system and more than 5,300 pounds of explosives. Measuring 20 feet long, the MOP is designed specifically to attack hardened concrete bunkers and tunnel facilities.

"The weapon's effectiveness against hard and deeply buried targets allows the warfighter to hold adversaries' most highly valued military facilities at risk, especially those protecting weapons of mass destruction," said Bob McClurg, Boeing Advanced Systems MOP program manager.

I don't think the intended end-recipients are Somali pirates . . . got a shovel?

Update: More here:

The MOP is designed to permit carriage inside both the USAF B-52 and B-2 bombers. Although the technology demonstration test drops will be conducted from a B-52, the Air Force Air Armament Center at Eglin Air Force Base (AFB), Fla., issued a sources-sought notice to explore integration of the MOP on the B-2 bomber.

"Rogue Wave" Hotspots?

New research sheds light on freak wave hot spots:

Stories of ships mysteriously sent to watery graves by sudden, giant waves have long puzzled scientists and sailors. New research by San Francisco State professor Tim Janssen suggests that changes in water depth and currents, which are common in coastal areas, may significantly increase the likelihood of these extreme waves.

Published in the Journal of Physical Oceanography, Janssen's wave model simulations show that focusing of waves by shoals and currents could increase the likelihood of a freak wave by as much as 10 times. Although scientists cannot predict the occurrence of individual extreme waves, Janssen's findings help pinpoint conditions and locations favorable for giant waves.

Extreme waves, also known as "freak" or "rogue" waves, measure roughly three times the size of the average wave height of a given sea state. Recorded monster waves have exceeded 60-feet -- the approximate size of a six-story building. Janssen's research suggests that in areas where wave energy is focused, the probability of freak-waves is much greater than previously believed.

Wave focal zones are particularly common in coastal areas where water depth variations and strong currents can result in dramatic focusing of wave energy. Such effects are particularly well known around river mouths and coastal inlets, restricting accessibility for shipping due to large, breaking waves near the inlet, or resulting in erosion issues at nearby beaches. Extreme examples of wave focusing over coastal topography include world-class surf spots, such as Mavericks and Cortez Banks in California. The identification of freak wave hot spots is also important for shipping and navigation in coastal areas, and the design of offshore structures.

Sunday Ship History: Tradition

Saw the younger son off to Naval ROTC Orientation after witnessing him being sworn in as a midshipman.

Forty-two years ago that was me wearing the uniform for the first time.

Twelve years ago it was his older brother.

Honor. Courage. Commitment.

Pirates of the Baltic and a Missing Ship

Interesting, if cryptic, tale of an apparently missing ship Russian Navy Joins Search for Freighter Attacked by Pirates:

Russia’s navy and Federal Security Service, the primary successor to the Soviet-era KGB, are searching for a Finnish ship with a Russian crew that disappeared in the Atlantic Ocean en route to Algeria.

Radio contact with the freighter Arctic Sea was lost on July 28, according to a statement posted on the navy’s Web site today. The ship, which sails under the Maltese flag, had 13 to 15 crewmembers on board, the navy said.

The Arctic Sea, operated by Oy Solchart Management AB, was scheduled to arrive in Bejaia, Algeria on Aug. 4, the Sovfracht maritime news Web site reported yesterday. The ship, built in 1991, has 4,706 deadweight tons capacity, the navy said.

Report of alleged Baltic pirate attack here.

And an earlier report of this ship going missing off Portugal here from reader 1657 from Galloping Ghost who also has a report at "Baltic Pirates? Anyone?"

Very curious.

I wonder who has the insurance coverage?

UPDATE: Healthy but not extreme winds off Portugal:


UPDATE2: I think I got all the kinks out of the links.

Health Care Debate: Tactics

What? There are debate tactics?

Yes, and Intellectually honest and intellectually dishonest debate tactics offers up a nice long list of dishonest tactics - noting there are only two intellectually honest tactics. Here's a list of dishonest tactics - for explanation, go to John Reed's site:

1. Name calling: Opponents are "like Nazis"
   
2. Changing the subject: "Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada accused the protesters of trying to 'sabotage' the democratic process."
3. Questioning the motives of the opponent: "The other side has ties to big insurance"
   
4. Vagueness: Obama's Vague Promise Of Change"
   
5. Claiming membership in a group affiliated with audience members: "Without that commitment, many of us wouldn't be here today. I am one of those people. My grandfather - Stanley Dunham - enlisted after Pearl Harbor and went on to march in Patton's Army."
   
6. Accusation of taking a quote out of context: "Those comments were taken out of context"
   
7. Straw man: "If we do nothing . . ."
   
8. Argument from intimidation: "Only those who are racist would oppose . . ."
   
9. Innuendo: ""Separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of African-American and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately..."
   

Update: No, I am not asserting that those persons cited above have a monopoly on intellectually dishonest debate tactics.

Pirate Fighting: My other boat is a destroyer

RED SEA (July 6, 2009) A visit, board, search and seizure team from the guided-missile destroyer USS Laboon (DDG 58) conducts training in preparation for Operation Allied Protector, NATO's counter-piracy operation. Laboon, along with ships from Greece, Italy, Turkey and the United Kingdom, is actively patrolling the Gulf of Aden area, with a focus on deterring and disrupting piracy as well as protecting vulnerable shipping assests in the region. Laboon is deployed in direct support of Standing NATO Maritime Group 2. (U.S. Navy photo/Released)

Somali Pirates: Everyone has troubles

Some intertribal warfare reported as Fighting kills at least 17 in Somali pirate port causes pirate concern:

Pirates who attack vessels using the strategic shipping lanes linking Europe to Asia through the Gulf of Aden operate from several remote coastal bases including Haradheere.

One pirate in the lawless central Somali port said he was worried the bloodshed would hurt the sea gangs' profits.

"We are afraid our business will stop if the clashes continue," the pirate, who gave his name as Mohamed, told Reuters by satellite phone from Haradheere.

"We are all members of these two clans, and we are worried that this fight might end up being taken out onto the ocean."

Oh, and don't expect warm fuzzies from parts of Somalia any time soon:

Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys, the prominent leader of another insurgent group, Hizbul Islam, issued a statement in Mogadishu on Saturday condemning U.S. policy and vowing to fight on.

"We thought the Obama administration would positively change Somalia's politics, but it has worsened," Aweys said.

"America wants to colonise all the world's governments, particularly Muslim countries, to loot their natural resources. We shall continue fighting until we reach our goal."

Watching the Health Care Debate

To fully appreciate the debate, it might be good to watch for certain debate tricks being deployed in response to an increase in public interest in the proposed health care plans. You can find them here:

Argumentum ad hominem (argument directed at the person). This is the error of attacking the character or motives of a person who has stated an idea, rather than the idea itself. The most obvious example of this fallacy is when one debater maligns the character of another debater (e.g, "The members of the opposition are a couple of fascists!"), but this is actually not that common. A more typical manifestation of argumentum ad hominem is attacking a source of information -- for example, responding to a quotation from Richard Nixon on the subject of free trade with China by saying, "We all know Nixon was a liar and a cheat, so why should we believe anything he says?" Argumentum ad hominem also occurs when someone's arguments are discounted merely because they stand to benefit from the policy they advocate -- such as Bill Gates arguing against antitrust, rich people arguing for lower taxes, white people arguing against affirmative action, minorities arguing for affirmative action, etc. In all of these cases, the relevant question is not who makes the argument, but whether the argument is valid.

It is always bad form to use the fallacy of argumentum ad hominem. But there are some cases when it is not really a fallacy, such as when one needs to evaluate the truth of factual statements (as opposed to lines of argument or statements of value) made by interested parties. If someone has an incentive to lie about something, then it would be naive to accept his statements about that subject without question. It is also possible to restate many ad hominem arguments so as to redirect them toward ideas rather than people, such as by replacing "My opponents are fascists" with "My opponents' arguments are fascist."

Argumentum ad ignorantiam (argument to ignorance). This is the fallacy of assuming something is true simply because it hasn't been proven false. For example, someone might argue that global warming is certainly occurring because nobody has demonstrated conclusively that it is not. But failing to prove the global warming theory false is not the same as proving it true.

Whether or not an argumentum ad ignorantiam is really fallacious depends crucially upon the burden of proof. In an American courtroom, where the burden of proof rests with the prosecution, it would be fallacious for the prosecution to argue, "The defendant has no alibi, therefore he must have committed the crime." But it would be perfectly valid for the defense to argue, "The prosecution has not proven the defendant committed the crime, therefore you should declare him not guilty." Both statements have the form of an argumentum ad ignorantiam; the difference is the burden of proof.

In debate, the proposing team in a debate round is usually (but not always) assumed to have the burden of proof, which means that if the team fails to prove the proposition to the satisfaction of the judge, the opposition wins. In a sense, the opposition team's case is assumed true until proven false. But the burden of proof can sometimes be shifted; for example, in some forms of debate, the proposing team can shift the burden of proof to the opposing team by presenting a prima facie case that would, in the absence of refutation, be sufficient to affirm the proposition. Still, the higher burden generally rests with the proposing team, which means that only the opposition is in a position to make an accusation of argumentum ad ignorantiam with respect to proving the proposition.
***
Argumentum ad misericordiam (argument or appeal to pity). The English translation pretty much says it all. Example: "Think of all the poor, starving Ethiopian children! How could we be so cruel as not to help them?" The problem with such an argument is that no amount of special pleading can make the impossible possible, the false true, the expensive costless, etc.

It is, of course, perfectly legitimate to point out the severity of a problem as part of the justification for adopting a proposed solution. The fallacy comes in when other aspects of the proposed solution (such as whether it is possible, how much it costs, who else might be harmed by adopting the policy) are ignored or responded to only with more impassioned pleas. You should not call your opposition down for committing this fallacy unless they rely on appeals to pity to the exclusion of the other necessary arguments. It is perfectly acceptable to use appeal to pity in order to argue that the benefits of the proposed policy are greater than they might at first appear (and hence capable of justifying larger costs).

Argumentum ad nauseam (argument to the point of disgust; i.e., by repitition). This is the fallacy of trying to prove something by saying it again and again. But no matter how many times you repeat something, it will not become any more or less true than it was in the first place. Of course, it is not a fallacy to state the truth again and again; what is fallacious is to expect the repitition alone to substitute for real arguments.

Nonetheless, this is a very popular fallacy in debate, and with good reason: the more times you say something, the more likely it is that the judge will remember it. The first thing they'll teach you in any public speaking course is that you should "Tell 'em what you're gonna tell 'em, then tell 'em, and then tell 'em what you told 'em." Unfortunately, some debaters think that's all there is to it, with no substantiation necessary! The appropriate time to mention argumentum ad nauseam in a debate round is when the other team has made some assertion, failed to justify it, and then stated it again and again. The Latin wording is particularly nice here, since it is evocative of what the opposition's assertions make you want to do: retch. "Sir, our opponents tell us drugs are wrong, drugs are wrong, drugs are wrong, again and again and again. But this argumentum ad nauseam can't and won't win this debate for them, because they've given us no justification for their bald assertions!"

Argumentum ad numerum (argument or appeal to numbers). This fallacy is the attempt to prove something by showing how many people think that it's true. But no matter how many people believe something, that doesn't necessarily make it true or right. Example: "At least 70% of all Americans support restrictions on access to abortions." Well, maybe 70% of Americans are wrong!

This fallacy is very similar to argumentum ad populum, the appeal to the people or to popularity. When a distinction is made between the two, ad populum is construed narrowly to designate an appeal to the opinions of people in the immediate vicinity, perhaps in hope of getting others (such as judges) to jump on the bandwagon, whereas ad numerum is used to designate appeals based purely on the number of people who hold a particular belief. The distinction is a fine one, and in general the terms can be used interchangeably in debate rounds. (I've found that ad populum has better rhetorical effect.)

Argumentum ad populum (argument or appeal to the public). This is the fallacy of trying to prove something by showing that the public agrees with you. For an example, see above. This fallacy is nearly identical to argumentum ad numerum, which you should see for more details.

I think we've already seen these deployed.
UPDATE: For example, courtesy of James Taranto here:

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman weighs in with strong support for the Democrats’ campaign to discredit voters who dissent from ObamaCare. Even by the standards of former Enron advisers, however, Krugman displays an astonishing lack of self-awareness:

There was a telling incident at a town hall held by Representative Gene Green, D-Tex. An activist turned to his fellow attendees and asked if they “oppose any form of socialized or government-run health care.” Nearly all did. Then Representative Green asked how many of those present were on Medicare. Almost half raised their hands.

Now, people who don’t know that Medicare is a government program probably aren’t reacting to what President Obama is actually proposing. . .
***
The driving force behind the town hall mobs is probably the same cultural and racial anxiety that’s behind the “birther” movement, which denies Mr. Obama’s citizenship. Senator Dick Durbin has suggested that the birthers and the health care protesters are one and the same; we don’t know how many of the protesters are birthers, but it wouldn’t be surprising if it’s a substantial fraction.

And cynical political operators are exploiting that anxiety to further the economic interests of their backers.

Does this sound familiar? It should: it’s a strategy that has played a central role in American politics ever since Richard Nixon realized that he could advance Republican fortunes by appealing to the racial fears of working-class whites.

Many people hoped that last year’s election would mark the end of the “angry white voter” era in America. Indeed, voters who can be swayed by appeals to cultural and racial fear are a declining share of the electorate.

While offering no arguments in favor of ObamaCare, Krugman equates its opponents with birthers, and birthers with racists, thereby reducing dissent to “the racial fears of working-class whites.” If you buy this--a big if--then the merits of ObamaCare are irrelevant. It has to pass, lest the “angry white voter” prevail.

Keeping score? Krugman engages in a little Argumentum ad hominem, doesn't he? With a little Argumentum ad ignorantiam tossed in for good measure.

I love Krugman's inability or unwillingness to connect certain dots - he assumes, for example, that people who are already on Medicare who are opposed to socialized medicine can only be opposed to further socialized medicine because they are too stupid to know Medicare is a government program. But couldn't he also have assumed the opposite - that because they have experienced Medicare they don't want any more of it? And, if they have read the proposed plans concerning "cost benefit" analysis as it relates to potential treatment (or lack thereof) for their future illnesses then they are exactly the people who should be protesting the plan - meaning that they are a helluva lot brighter than Krugman.

Thursday Reading

If it's Thursday, it must be time for Fred Fry's Maritime Monday 173 - a week's worth of sea related links to keep you busy through the remainder of the week and into the weekend. This week Fred covers Mann Lines, a right whale listening network, a burning flagship and much, much more.

I could be wrong, but I swear I heard Jamie Dupree mention on the Neal Boortz show yesterday that the proposed health care reform was setting up a system to cover the medical costs of illegal aliens by reducing coverage of senior citizens and the senior citizens should be unhappy. I hereby notify the White House that people out there are unhappy with the proposed health care plan! My list of "White House enemies" includes Neal Boortz, Jamie Dupree, Rush Limbaugh, most of the Republicans in Congress. Now, what's my reward for ratting out naming these people? What if I self-report my dislike of the plan - is there some sort of camp I could go to get my mind right? Can I get a "lttle red book" with the sayings of Chairman O?

Speaking of health care reform - you might have missed Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan: Betsy McCaughey from February reporting on the book of former senator Tom Daschle, the former proposed "health care czar":

Elderly Hardest Hit

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

A similar provision is in the proposed law. You can explain to your aged parents that their lives no longer matter and they can't get treatment because they are too old. Leaving them on a ice floe is optional. But make sure you hide their car keys and checkbook. You don't want them flying off to India to get the procedure done outside the proposed system...

UPDATE: CDR Salamander (paying attention, White House?) notes a certain "diversity industry" aspect to "medical deform."

I don't know why, but lately I have developed some interest in Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals and here. I was busy when this work was first published, either oppressing anti-colonial forces or protecting a fledgling democracy, depending on your point of view:

Take for example the idea of “truth”. The conservative approaches truth as something that can be verified, tested and believed in and although they understand that “truth” may be flavored by a persons perspective they still believe that there is an independent truth that exist. Thus a conservative who approaches an issue, say the current manufactured lunacy that suggest America never landed on the moon will point to specific facts and provable reality. Like the fact that the Lunar Lander is sitting on the moon right where we left it and it should be viewable through the recent remote moon survey projects being conducted by a number of countries. So to a conservative for any question you should be able to establish some parameters for investigation that could be carried out and proven, one way or the other.

A “realistic radical” of the Alinsky school is completely unconcerned with the verification of “fact”. Alinsky states in respect to a community organizer, “he does not have a fixed truth-truth to him is relative and changing; everything to him is relative and changing. He is a political relativist.” Their concern would be first to determine which opinion would be the most useful to their immediate and long term agenda. That the Lunar Lander is still sitting on the moon or not is of no interest to them. What is critical is the usefulness of stating that the entire moon landing program was a lie by the government and further reason that you should not trust the status quo and to undermine your sense of national pride at having accomplished such a magnificent feat of human science and exploration. The radicals purpose would be to sow discontent, mistrust and shame for attempting to mislead the world so that they could use the moon landings as another wedge issue in the furtherance of their revolution. This willingness to arrogantly disregard verifiable truth in service of a greater revolutionary “truth” is a central aspect of Alinsky’s tactics.

Hmmmm. Wedge issues.

UPDATE: Betsy Newmark sees through some myths of "cash for clunkers. I'm in the market for some car repair on a car that is not eligible for trade in as a "clunker." I think the repairs might, maybe, improve gas mileage and reduce emissions, will not incur the environmental harm wrought by making a new car and will keep my Saturn mechanic employed. I'm looking for a little federal money to help me out here so that I can make you, tax payer, "assist" me in getting this car fixed. We could cut out the middle man and you can just send your share of the money directly to me. I figure your share is $100. Just email me for the address to send the money. In exchange, I will forward your email address to some people in Nigeria who have millions they want to deposit in your bank account.

Question: Can Speaker Pelosi (D. Ca) and the truth exist at the same time in the same place? See this outrage.

Lex does a critique of our education system. "They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time it works, every time."

Murdoc links to a way to cut food costs. First, move to Florida...

Iowahawk: Crisis of Confidence: America's Government Losing Faith in Out-of-Touch Constituents

The political class exposed:

1. iowahawk: Crisis of Confidence: America's Government Losing Faith in Out-of-Touch Constituents

2. Yes, #1 was a satire. But this isn't:

August 05, 2009

House Orders Three Jets
"Last year, lawmakers excoriated the CEOs of the Big Three automakers for traveling to Washington, D.C., by private jet to attend a hearing about a possible bailout of their companies," Roll Call reports.

"But apparently Congress is not philosophically averse to private air travel: At the end of July, the House approved nearly $200 million for the Air Force to buy three elite Gulfstream jets for ferrying top government officials and Members of Congress."

The Air Force had asked for one jet as part of an upgrade program, but the House Appropriations Committee added two more at its own discretion.

Time to throw them all* out and start over.

It's allowed under the Constitution. Under "elections."


*Actually we can only replace the entire House of Representatives and 1/3 of the Senate every two years, the President every 4th year.