McKay Lurches Left

Jeff McKay

by Chris Braunlich

Nothing so epitomizes the Fairfax Democratic Party’s lurch leftward as the last 48 hours.

On the afternoon of Sunday, May 31, the Fairfax County Democratic Committee issued a re-tweet noting “riots are an integral part of the country’s march towards progress.” This came after a night of destruction, with civilians beaten, churches torched and millions of dollars in damages and looting.

Picked up and commented on by Josh Kraushaar, Politics editor at the National Journal, the Democratic endorsement of rioting began gaining steam and triggering a backlash – so much so that the Fairfax Democratic Committee took the post down on Monday morning.

The party chairman, Bryan Graham, blamed it all on a volunteer, deploying the time-honored political tradition of “throwing the volunteer under the bus.” He did not explain why a mere “volunteer” had access to the party’s Twitter account or why there was no adult leadership.

Fine. “The kid did it” has worked before and might even have the benefit of being true.

But what to make of Jeff McKay, chairman of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors?

In a Monday evening newsletter sent to his constituents – a newsletter of some 1,000 words no “volunteer” wrote — McKay noted “I’m angry and disgusted that today, for the third time in as many days, we saw peaceful protesters tear gassed and shot with pellet guns as they chanted for peace and change.”

He then noted his anger and disgust at the tremendous violence by some of the protesters, the millions of dollars in damage to stores serving the black community, the fires set at historic St. John’s church in DC and the AFL-CIO building.

No … just kidding. I made that last paragraph up. There was no anger and disgust aimed at violent protesters or looters.

In a deep bow to the forces that now control his party, McKay was silent. And in silence, he dishonored men like the owners of Waller’s Jewelry store in Richmond, a 100-year-old black-owned establishment that saw itself targeted and its merchandise looted.

Or K.B. Balla, a black firefighter in Minneapolis who invested his entire life savings in opening a sports bar and saw it wiped out and burned down – and then the looters came back for the safe while he was being interviewed by CBS.

He ignored his fellow local leaders like DC Mayor Muriel Bowser, who noted “we do not and we will not allow the continued destruction of our hometown by people who are coming here to protest.” He ignored the history of such violence – that it often results in the destruction of black communities and black properties that take decades to undo.

And he dishonored the residents of those black communities who, as reported in today’s Washington Post, “have struggled to maintain peaceful protests in the face of young white men joining the fray, seemingly determined to commit mayhem.” The Post identified one such young white man, Brian Jordan Bartels, who is “militant about veganism.” This is not a joke.

In full disclosure, I had occasion to work with Mr. McKay when he was chief of staff to his predecessor and I was on the Fairfax County School Board. When he ran for Chairman of the Board, he ran as the “centrist” in the Democratic primary. But he has quickly turned leftward, in a county where nearly every elected official is a Democrat. When there is one-party rule, one needs only to get the nomination of that party to win and in this case it means one needs to cravenly appeal to the ideologues of the Left.

It is not what we need now, certainly not in local government.

The violence of the last several days obscures what should be the real point of the protests: The death of George Floyd at the hands of a white police officer, as well as that of Eric Garner and others that preceded him. There is a serious issue here — when Rush Limbaugh calls for a police officer to be prosecuted for first degree murder one knows there is a problem – and solving it won’t come from wanton destruction.

It requires conservatives to acknowledge that there is a racial dysfunction in America that demands a deep look within ourselves. It requires the Left to stop ignoring or making excuses for violent acts.

It means equally acknowledging the knot in the gut most police officers feel when he or she straps on the belt and answers a call … as well as the fear most law-abiding black men must feel these days when pulled over late at night. It means government should be focusing on lowering economic and regulatory barriers for everyone … not picking winners and losers to give advantages to some over others. It means empowering people to make their own informed decisions, not empowering a government to make those decisions for them and breeding a further dependency that is unhealthy and leads to further inequality.

And it requires those in political office to cease genuflecting to the ideological powers that put them there and instead represent all the people … in a way that deserves the title “Chairman.”

Chris Braunlich is president of the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy. He may be reached at [email protected]

There are currently no comments highlighted.

47 responses to “McKay Lurches Left

  1. re: ” It requires conservatives to acknowledge that there is a racial dysfunction in America that demands a deep look within ourselves. It requires the Left to stop ignoring or making excuses for violent acts.”

    Totally agree and good luck with that……

  2. Wow! When Rush Limbaugh weighs that just settles it, doesn’t it?

  3. Two bylines? Anyway, you’ve got a much bigger problem if you’re relying on…”when Rush Limbaugh calls for a police officer to be prosecuted for first degree murder one knows there is a problem”.

  4. When will Fairfax County Democrats start wearing Jacob Frey for President buttons? He grew up in Reston. BTW, the WaPo has not condemned the City of Minneapolis for failing to fire Chauvin earlier based on his record.

    One of the other officers beat up a handcuffed black man earlier. https://news.yahoo.com/officer-involved-george-floyd-death-181627259.html

    But Frey is a woke Democrat. No criticism for him or his predecessors unless Fred Hiatt can figure a way to blame on PK Petersen the last GOP mayor of Minneapolis who left office in 1961.

    • Frey was on the city council from 2013 through 2017 when he was elected mayor. He won the mayoral election, in large part, on a platform of police reform. Almost two and a half years after being elected mayor a group of four police officers with many excessive force complaints killed George Floyd. What happened to the police reform? I’ll tell you what happened – aspiring politicians for life like Frey figure out just how much political power the police union wields in local politics. He’ll need their money, cooperation and endorsement in the next Democratic primary (which is the election in Minneapolis). And the police union takes care of its own. Bad cops are passed along from one excessive force incident to the next. Teachers unions protect bad teachers and police unions protect bad cops while the “lions of the left” in elected office pay lip service to reform.

      Then we get wingnuts like McKay who have nothing better to do than sling 1,000 word missives on national issues. Here’s what McKay should be discussing – why won’t the same thing that happened in Minneapolis happen in Fairfax County? What has he done to ensure that law enforcement in Fairfax County doesn’t go down the same racist rathole it has gone down elsewhere?

  5. It is rather significant that Limbaugh (who BTW sounds like he is struggling with his treatments) called for a first degree murder charge. For four years now I’ve considered Limbaugh to be Trump’s real spokesman, a mirror into that self-destructive mind, and I think it was that show where Limbaugh went off again on the ill-considered tweets. (“I wish he wouldn’t do it” or some such.)

    Nobody has even tried to defend those four cops. This is not Ferguson with its possible ambiguity, or the recent Georgia event with its shaky and hard to see video and no audio (also a lynching to my mind.) These four cops subdued and then killed that man, looking right at cameras, with a cold blooded disinterest that made it far more horrifying. The condemnation has been universal and an opportunity was there to truly shame anybody who had so far refused to see. The police community itself has been unanimous in its disgust.

    And then the riots, arson and looting started and the message got confused again. That’s the tragedy of the violence – what it really takes away. A hard but important truth was visible. Which is why all leaders need to condemn both the unlawful killing and the unlawful violence. Need to see the transcript because it went by fast, but just a few moments ago Northam seemed to pass on opportunities to strongly condemn the looting, violence and arson. Just like McKay.

  6. I think you’re missing something and that is the actual protestors.

    It’s not just bad police and bad actors that are rioting and looting.

    for some reason, some want to just focus on the police and rioters and not the reason why the protestors are out there.

    Curious.

    • The thing I absolutely dislike about you is you just make stuff up, stuff a straw man to punch. Everybody I know is in full agreement that the protesters have a right to march, wave signs and shout and the killing that sparked it is horrendous. I’ve said it, Jim said it, I know Braunlich feels the same way. What do you think I’m missing? My point is the rioters and looters are removing the focus from the legitimate message. I was moved by Floyd’s brother yesterday with that same point – they are detracting from the opportunity for change.

      • and this is what I dislike about you – that you purposely read something else than what I wrote.

        you went on and on about the bad cops… then about the bad actors in the street and finished with this: ” hard but important truth was visible. Which is why all leaders need to condemn both the unlawful killing and the unlawful violence.”

        So, like Limbaugh and others, you’re ignoring the fundamental reason why the protestors are out – and it’s not about just one incident…

        You’re basically saying that there are bad actors on both sides and we ought to admit it… right? oh and of course that other thing goes without saying…….

        Oh… and let me point out that there were FOUR cops that stood by and watched one of their own kill someone and they have not been charged.. yet all the hooray is about that one cop….

        The protestors are saying that ALL FOUR need to be charged and so the narrative now is about the “bad cop” and the “bad actors on the street” as if whatever it is the protestors are saying is… well, of course, it’s their right to protests.. whatever it is about……..

        • Again, no one else is defending those other Officers either, you’re again making a strawman.

          Those other officers should be charged, perhaps you should ask AG Keith Ellison why they haven’t been charged as accessory.

          • what’s happening is a rejection of the protestors core complaints in favor of a narrative that says that the police have bad actors and the protestors have bad actors – and neither side is legitimate.

            Many Conservatives have rejected the legitimacy of Black Lives Matter – which is at the heart of the protests so they reject it by pointing to the looters and claiming Antifas is involved.

            What is going on in Minnesota on this issue – has gone on in cities across the country – no matter who the Mayor is, or the Governor or the AG… it’s systemic in policing…

            It’s not about this specific killing.. it’s about a pattern across the country.

            Those who refuse to see that and want to make it about this incident are just not dealing with the realities my view.

          • “LarrytheG | June 3, 2020 at 7:58 am |
            what’s happening is a rejection of the protestors core complaints in favor of a narrative that says that the police have bad actors and the protestors have bad actors – and neither side is legitimate.

            Many Conservatives have rejected the legitimacy of Black Lives Matter – which is at the heart of the protests so they reject it by pointing to the looters and claiming Antifas is involved.

            What is going on in Minnesota on this issue – has gone on in cities across the country – no matter who the Mayor is, or the Governor or the AG… it’s systemic in policing…

            It’s not about this specific killing.. it’s about a pattern across the country.

            Those who refuse to see that and want to make it about this incident are just not dealing with the realities my view.”

            Why do you even bother if you’re going to do nothing but make up strawmen?

    • You’re missing something – the liberal mayor of Minneapolis who ran on a platform of police reform. There shouldn’t be any protests because there shouldn’t have been a murder. How was a cop with Chauvin’s record still on the force and patrolling the streets? How many Democratic mayors of Minneapolis does it take to get murderous loose cannons like Chauvin off the force. Here’s a hint – there hasn’t been a Republican mayor of Minneapolis sine before Chauvin was born.

      The reason the protesters are out there is because the liberals who have run Minneapolis for half a century can’t run a police force.

  7. The reason the protestors are out there is because this happens over and over and over..no matter the city and no matter the Mayor.

    Is this not recognized? Do you think the protestors are out there just because of this one killing?

    It’s about a pattern of killings – across the country, and apparently something that not everyone agrees to?

    Apparently not, because at least some who self-identify as Conservative – reject the premise behind Black Lives Matter.

    I’m not sure how anyone looks at the TV and sees thousands of people in many cities carrying signs that say Black Lives Matter and deduces from that – that they are upset with Liberal Mayors… but hey

    • By the way Larry, what happened to the rotten, horrible, selfish people who wouldn’t stay home and slow the spread of COVID19? For weeks you assured us all that going back to work, reopening restaurants and failure to remain locked down were tantamount to murder by virus. Where is your condemnation of the protesters / rioters / looters? Where are your accusations that they are killing people by failing to keep their social distance? Some of the looters are wearing masks but not a lot of the protesters. Where is your invective against them? Is it murder if you get COVID19 from a person who went to a bar but just dumb luck if you get infected by a rioter?

      The liberal fearmongering over slowly reopening the economy seems to have disappeared in the face of thousands gathering in cities across the country. Apparently the liberal mayors and governors who locked people up for going to church or sitting on a beach see no reason to curtail mass protesting.

      What happened to “the science”?

      • re: ” For weeks you assured us all that going back to work, reopening restaurants and failure to remain locked down were tantamount to murder by virus.”

        Bull Crap! No I did not. You’re misrepresenting here , not a good thing.

        What I’ve said from the beginning is that we need to listen to science – with the understanding that science is NOT “settled” with regard to this virus and is still learning about the virus – but to follow the recommendations to reopen – including wearing the mask which for some reason – the biggest complainers defy doing…

        What you have done is attack Northam over and over personally and attack the recommendations.. and question the science… and advocated that seniors and those with health conditions go hide and let the rest achieve herd immunity – and other foolishness that is contrary to almost all recommendations from science.

        There is no question that the protestors are taking risks but the TV I’m watching actually shows quite a bit of mask-wearing…so not sure what you are watching and way more than at the beaches!

        It will not surprise me that we see infection spread as a result of all of this – we’ll see.

    • Black-owned businesses matter, too. They are being burned. Black jobs matter, and their looted employers may leave for good. Yep, Larry, I think the people doing the burning and looting are bad people, very, very bad people. And it is very clear they are not all of one race. The apologists for them have this on their heads, just like any apologists for those cops would.

      • Orientation. It’s all a matter of orientation. If the police lined the sidewalks along the march routes rather than the streets across them, then there would be no area “behind the marchers” to provide cover to loot.

        Take Santa Monica. You could see it play out live. The PD four-boxed an intersection preventing the marchers from passing through. Behind the marchers was vacuum. No cops, no marchers, just looters.

        • Yep – the police are getting the looters calibrated… and recognizing that the protestors and looters are not the same.

          Some of the looters are now going to places where the police are not at because they’re covering the protestors. And the police are catching on to that.

          And finally, those that have rejected the legitimacy of Black Lives Matter are having to decide if they are going to keep that view.

        • So where is the criticism of the mayor and police chief of Santa Monica? Or any other city where this is happening? These problems cannot be fixed at the state or national level. Local authorities are in charge of the police unless the state or federal government imposes martial law.

          I realize that this concept is too hard for the media to understand. But there are smart people in the real world.

          • Nancy_Naive

            Local has the authority to implement changes. Up the ladder is the responsibility to see they do.

  8. Yes they are – and it’s because the bad actors are infiltrating and hijacking the protestors marches and the protestors now get it and realize that they must work to separate themselves from the bad actors or else all of them are going to be cast as the bad actors.

    The legitimate protestors need to leave at curfew. If they do not, it’s going to get worse.

    • Agreed. And with the Minnesota AG in charge now, I’m sure all the former police officers will be charged to the full extent he can devise. Good.

      And agreed, Nancy. There have been good and bad police tactics. I have never agreed with Daryl Gates about theft, but police have to quell arson and assault.

  9. Steve Haner says the message got confused again. I think it is more accurate to say the message got hijacked again. And everybody
    Needs to stop beating up on LarrytheG. It is unfair and unpleasant. You

  10. No need to defend… but yes.. there seems to be those who will go after the person and not the views of the person… seems to be the way it is…..

  11. Madams. I have participated with this blog for about 15 years and really don’t really need help. Thanks anyway

    • Peter, the length of time which you have participated in the blog doesn’t have anything to do with my statement. That’s what is known as a red herring, as on the surface it’s relevant, but ultimately it’s not at all.

      Your complaint about everyone responding to Larry is pointless. Larry feels the need to comment, and as such can expect a reply if someone either agrees or disagrees. If he cannot defend his comment without resorting to strawmen, ad hom or any other various fallacies, perhaps he shouldn’t make those comments.

      I’m new here, that doesn’t diminish what I say or the manner in which I say it.

      • re: ” If he cannot defend his comment without resorting to strawmen, ad hom or any other various fallacies, perhaps he shouldn’t make those comments.”

        these are YOUR views. I AM entitled to mine without anyone attacking me personally.

        You cite what you think are strawman. They’re NOT. They are central to the issue and way more people besides myself citing the same things that I am here.

        There ARE different points of views. You do NOT get to decide if I can defend them or not – or mete out what you think is appropriate ad hominems for views that differ with yours.

        I cite my views. They stand on their own. You can disagree with them but you should not attack personally as an excuse for your disagreement.

        • Larry, I’ve never once attacked you personally. While you’ve on several occasions attacked me for my views.

          I have always addressed the content of your comments and the manner in which you arrived at that conclusion.

          “I cite my views. They stand on their own. You can disagree with them but you should not attack personally as an excuse for your disagreement.”

          Perhaps you should take your own advice, or do you not recall labeling me “anti-government”?

          • You have engaged in ad hominems guy.. You asked me what I did for a living, what kind of pension, what kind of education and you tied that to my fitness to comment… .

            these ARE personal guy and yes I have returned the favor when I felt you were.

            You HAVE engaged in non-stop personal attacks guy..

            and no I do not need “advice” from you either unless you want me to return the favor to you on that also…

            Show me where I called you PERSONALLY anti-govt and I WILL apologize but I suspect what I said was that your VIEWS were anti-govt or people that hold certain views are anti-govt.

          • None of that is an ad hom attack, asking questions are not ad hom attacks.

            Information like environment and employment have a direct correlation on how we formulate opinions. To say if someone is drawing an Government pension while advocating for a continual shutdown is wrong, is not a Ad hom attack. It’s pointing out that you cannot commiserate who those who aren’t drawing paycheck as you’re in guaranteed and therefore your opinion on the matter should be held accordingly.

            “these ARE personal guy and yes I have returned the favor when I felt you were.”

            No, you’ve lashed out when it was pointed out that you didn’t understand the concept you were trying to discuss.

            “You HAVE engaged in non-stop personal attacks guy..”

            That is a fallacious statement, merely because you can’t defend your opinion doesn’t make my comments “personal attacks”.

            I have not problem with you “returning” the favor as long as you do so in a reasoned, researched and rational manner. I don’t tend to comment unless I have a grasp of a topic.

            “Show me where I called you PERSONALLY anti-govt and I WILL apologize but I suspect what I said was that your VIEWS were anti-govt or people that hold certain views are anti-govt.”

            The fact that you don’t realize that in and of itself is an ad hom attack is humorous. Attacking someone for their views is an ad hom attack, as you didn’t address there views and why they are “anti-government” but rather the person.

          • These were personal attacks because you were using them to impugn my views and you were bragging on your own education and employment.. as if it validated your views.

            You can believe what you want, I don’t care.

            I will converse with you if you refrain from it.

            Otherwise, I will ignore you.

            your choice.

          • “These were personal attacks because you were using them to impugn my views and you were bragging on your own education and employment.. as if it validated your views.”

            Again, false. You refused the answer the question, so I had to make an assumption. I used my own personal experience and education to give weight to my opinion on the matter (science based topic in that instance and the scientific method).

            How benevolent of you, if you spout something that is demonstrable false I feel no need to hold my tongue on the matter. If you cannot handle the valid criticism of your view, again you should stop commenting.

            PS: C when regarding the use of fiber optics is assumed to always be the same value as it occurs in a vacuum. C in other mediums is different.

          • no benevolence.. you clearly have a different standard and that’s fine – it’s not mine… find some middle ground or get ignored.

            You can differ on the view but if you personalize it, you’re done. got it?

            re: fiber-optic – yes.. it does vary depending on medium but it starts with the basic constant just like electricity or radio signals do.

            The entire point is that some science is “settled enough” so that we can and do use it in our technology while other science is still being learned… it’s an evolving body of knowledge with a wide range between what we think we know and can and do use in our everyday world and at the other end – a lot we do not yet fully understand but continue to work on.

          • A different standard? Not really, I just am very aware of what an ad hom attack is.

            C used for any calculations is regarded as usual the vacuum value. I’m not sure what “constant you’re referring to in Electricity or radio waves. As Electricity has several constants, theorems and assume values. Radio waves depend on the frequency and modulations there are infinite possibilities for frequencies.

            The term “settled-science” is an oxymoron. By sciences very definition it is not and cannot be settled. The scientific method is an infinite loop of proof disprove.

            We use 9.81 m/s^2 for gravity of earth it’s 9.80665 m/s^2.
            We round and use significant digits in all aspects because that’s the only answer we have.

            Quantum field theory suggests that vacuums aren’t empty and completely disproves lots of things.

            “it’s an evolving body of knowledge with a wide range between what we think we know and can and do use in our everyday world and at the other end – a lot we do not yet fully understand but continue to work on.”

            Your own statement disproves your initial claim.

          • Like I said, you got your own definition of Ad Hominem and reject others.

            Here’s another:

            Similarly you have other views and just reject others.

            data constants describe the world as science understands it and we use them in every field from EE to Geodesy to science in many other areas.

            Wikipedia is a decent source of information – which are referenced at the bottom of it’s articles. Wikipedia does not create information – it references it – widely and what it references is considered factual.

            You said this: ” Latitude and Longitude predate GPS, GPS is accurate because greater number of satellites have been launched into space. Accuracy is the result of triangulation, the more points you have the greater the accuracy is.”

            yep.. and it’s all based on science and data constants… and equations that describe the geodetic attributes.

            Why do we not have enough “accuracy” for fewer satellites?

            what’s the reason?

          • That pyramid says the exact same thing as my like and myself, Larry.

            Wikipedia takes citations and condenses them into snippets of information for those not familiar with topics to understand and or edit.

            “You said this: ” Latitude and Longitude predate GPS, GPS is accurate because greater number of satellites have been launched into space. Accuracy is the result of triangulation, the more points you have the greater the accuracy is.”
            yep.. and it’s all based on science and data constants… and equations that describe the geodetic attributes.

            Definition of geodesy
            : a branch of applied mathematics concerned with the determination of the size and shape of the earth and the exact positions of points on its surface and with the description of variations of its gravity field

            What is a “data constant”? I am assuming you’re referring to physical constants used in physics and mathematics, but I cannot tell. You seem to use terms interchangeably when they are in fact are not.

            “Why do we not have enough “accuracy” for fewer satellites?
            what’s the reason?”

            I don’t even know how to understand that question, it’s nonsensical.

          • suit yourself.. when you violate it, I ignore you.

            yes.. you do know WHY you need more satellites.. it has to do with the measureable accuracy of data constants –

            I use the term data constants because that is what they become when put into a computer model… but yes they are formally called physical data constants for things that CAN be “measured” that are static. Other things are dynamic, not static but their behavior can be observed and estimated/deduced… like how a body or other objects behave in different environments and different dynamics.

            For instance, you may have a river and you know that the water has volume and moves at a certain measureable speed and you want to calculate the flow rate in cubic feet per second.

            you start with data constants like how many gallons of water are in a cubic foot… and that depends on other things like the density and temperature of the water and how many digits of accuracy you have in measuring that volume… i.e. is it 7.5 or 7.48052 ? Beyond that you have the bottom of the river so you have to measure the width of the river and the area under the curve. And you have to decide if you are going to measure the depth of the river every foot or every yard or what distance between points. Then the rate of flow at these points will vary – it will be faster in some places and slower in others. And you end up with a calculated answer that may be only so accurate.

            This is science… this is how we understand things.. and use that information to design other things.. like how big a pipe you’d need to convey a river under a causeway or similar.

          • When I “violate it”? I haven’t violated it, you however have.

            “yes.. you do know WHY you need more satellites.. it has to do with the measureable accuracy of data constants –” That is another nonsensical statement.

            “I use the term data constants because that is what they become when put into a computer model… but yes they are formally called physical data constants for things that CAN be “measured” that are static. Other things are dynamic, not static but their behavior can be observed and estimated/deduced… like how a body or other objects behave in different environments and different dynamics.”

            This statement is completely devoid of factual information. They aren’t “data constants” period. They are physical and mathematical constants. Nothing that we measure is static, we take snapshots in time and provide a value at that given time.

            Archimedes constant (pi) for instance is considered a constant even though it’s an infinite number.

            Gallon and cubic feet are units of measure, that is a conversation that doesn’t take into account density or temperature. That also has very little to do with sig figs. Sig figs are determined by the least accurate number in the equation.

            I’m not sure what integrals has to do with this or a river. Flow is also a completely separate topic. You seem to be jamming several topics into a single paragraph that is going nowhere.

            “This is science… this is how we understand things.. and use that information to design other things.. like how big a pipe you’d need to convey a river under a causeway or similar.”

            Just stop, please just stop.

            “Definition of science
            1: the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding
            2a: a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study
            the science of theology
            b: something (such as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge
            have it down to a science
            3a: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method
            b: such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : NATURAL SCIENCE
            4: a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws
            cooking is both a science and an art”

          • we just do not agree – on virtually anything.

            So we’re done…… go find something else to do

            😉

        • No. You have your own definition of what an ad hominem is.

          and you’re welcome to it – but I do not accept it.

          ” (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.”

          when you ask about education of someone in a debate – that’s NOT about the position they are arguing..

          in terms of settled science.

          I don’t know what to say to you. Just about every scientist and engineer I ever worked with had a book of data constants and they represented what science had determined to that point in time.

          How do you actually measure the semi-major diameter of the earth and then put it in a book to be used when working on spherical trigonometry problems?

          I consider those constants to be “settled”. It’s not that they wont change. It’s not that there are not every different values for the same thing – there are… but they are “settled” to the point when we launch missiles and put things in orbit – and generate GPS lat/longs that are accurate enough to be useful in our everyday world – like a GPS navigation device in a car or on a trail.

          Any Geodesy computer model is basically a bunch of data constants and equations based on data constants…

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Geodetic_System

          Now, I’m going to warn you again – keep this to the subject and not to me. Stay on topic or else be ignored.

          • There is only one definition of ad hom attack.
            https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

            Asking your education isn’t an personal attack, it was a question to determine your understand of the concept your were trying to use. Which happens to be part of what I have a degree in.

            “I don’t know what to say to you. Just about every scientist and engineer I ever worked with had a book of data constants and they represented what science had determined to that point in time.”

            I just discussed constants, how they are used with assumptions and sig figs. Than I asked you what constants you were referring to in Electricity and radio waves.

            “How do you actually measure the semi-major diameter of the earth and then put it in a book to be used when working on spherical trigonometry problems?”

            That statement isn’t relevant nor are the two concepts related.

            They are constants for calculations, if something is “settled” it becomes Law. My gripe is that you keep bringing up topics which are unrelated and you don’t seem to understand.

            Latitude and Longitude predate GPS, GPS is accurate because greater number of satellites have been launched into space. Accuracy is the result of triangulation, the more points you have the greater the accuracy is.

            Geodesy is the study of measuring of the Earth.

            I would highly suggest refraining from using Wikipedia as a source of information.

            I’ll remind you again, I hold a degree in EE.

        • I’m certainly lost on what’s to agree upon. Everything I’ve stated is rooted in facts and science.

          You’ve made several assertion which I asked you kindly to provide and or clarify and you’ve not done either.

          As for doing something different, I will feel free to point or inaccuracies in yours and others statements till the cows come home.

  12. Whatever. Hope you enjoy the blog

Leave a Reply