Aggregator

Kamren Kinchens is set to begin his third season in the NFL and is reportedly set for a breakout year by some of his teammates.

The "Mad Men" alum was dating Jennifer Westfeldt at the time, whom he was in a relationship with for 18 years.

The "Mad Men" alum was dating Jennifer Westfeldt at the time, whom he was in a relationship with for 18 years.

Kyle Schwarber's second home run during Thursday's MLB Field of Dreams Game came with a little help from the field.

The last thing the San Francisco 49ers needed was another injury.

Anthony Fauci And The Collapse Of Scientific Authority

Authored by Jason Locasale via The DisInformation Chronicle,

Today's guest essay comes from Jason Locasale who looks at academia's embrace of authority over scientific data and evidence to preserve narratives and protect those in power.

Anthony Fauci is now facing intense scrutiny. His diaries, emails, and testimony have raised fundamental questions about what he knew, what he then told the public, and how he exercised authority during the pandemic. Many outside of academia read these documents and view this moment as his fall from grace, while universities and medical institutions seem willing to ignore this new evidence and continue to celebrate Fauci as a heroic public servant with unmatched scientific authority.

Academics' unconventional viewpoint cannot be ignored. Fauci matters not only because of his individual conduct, but because he exposes the institutions that produced, empowered, and continue to protect him - Georgetown rewarded him with a prestigious position after he retired from the government in his 80s.

The pandemic did not create the dysfunction inside biomedical science. It placed a magnifying glass over science institutions that had been decaying for decades. Grant politics, unfounded hype, administrative expansion, scientific gerontocracy, institutional self-protection, and the punishment of dissent were already pervasive. Fauci enabled the public to watch those forces operate through one person on television every day.

Biomedical institutions did not create a single Fauci. They created thousands. The pandemic spotlight simply made one of them famous.

What the diaries reveal

Fauci's diaries offer an unusually revealing account of how he understood his role during the pandemic. Written as notes toward a future autobiography, they show what he considered important enough to preserve about those years.

The diaries undermine the mythology of a reluctant scientist who was unexpectedly thrust into politics and celebrity. They reveal a bureaucrat celebrity preoccupied with attention, status, prominent relationships, TV appearances, reputation, his own place in history, and cash money.

His interest in how he was portrayed, whom he met, who praised him, and how his public image was developing consumes far more attention than any serious engagement with the complex science of COVID-19 and the pandemic. The office shrine, the concern with his portrait, the meticulous record of his fame, and the diary itself as material for an autobiography all expose the same fixation.

Those self-curated notes reveal his priorities. Science is less as an intellectual pursuit than as the credential supporting the public performance.

The related emails and documents complete the picture. Fauci sought nominations for cash prizes from influential friends and used federal employees to help him win those awards. These awards were then presented publicly as independent acknowledgments of merit.

One of the most important revelations in the new documents was the distance between private uncertainty and public certainty. Fauci and those around him privately discussed scientific possibilities that they publicly dismissed and even attacked as conspiracies. The authors of the Proximal Origin paper privately assigned a laboratory origin for the COVID pandemic as a substantial probability, then helped present that possibility to the public as impossible.

The same pattern appeared in pronouncements about masking, vaccine transmission, and other major pandemic questions. The issue is not hindsight. The issue is presenting uncertain claims as settled truth while privately recognizing that the evidence was unresolved.

Authority substituted for scientific judgement

Fauci projected an image of authority, and for too many, image alone was sufficient. His title, confidence, and media presence substituted for careful engagement with data..

Masking, for example, involved questions of aerosol physics, fluid mechanics, particle size, droplet formation, airflow, filtration, leakage, and fit. These are concrete scientific and engineering questions. But Fauci's own diary finds that he showed no interest in working through the scientific complexity before making definitive public pronouncements.

We can read in his own words that Fauci approached scientific disagreement more like a party in an adversarial legal proceeding than a scientist. Once an institutional position had been adopted, contrary evidence became an obstacle and dissenting scientists became opponents to defeat. The objective shifted from determining what was true to defending political ground and preserving authority.

This is the opposite of a scientific temperament. A good scientist is skeptical, including of his own conclusions. He is comfortable acknowledging uncertainty and may spend days thinking privately through a problem. He does not need a camera, a slogan, or the appearance of omniscience.

Fauci illustrates the difference between projecting authority and possessing a curious, scientific mind.

Scientific credentialism

Fauci majored in classics before earning an MD when medical education was driven by rote memorization and provided little formal preparation for scientific research. His degree was a clinical credential to treat sick people, not a degree for lab research.

When he entered laboratory research, molecular immunology was not yet a developed science and when academic physicians could obtain laboratory directorships early in their careers. He then became an NIH administrator at a relatively young age.

The issue is not that he began his career before modern technologies existed. Every older scientist did. The relevant question is whether an aging scientist continues learning, adapting, and making discoveries as the field develops.

The best scientists remain intellectually active later in life because they master new technologies and continue challenging themselves and their own field. Unfortunately, too many establish their careers by being in the right place at the right time, then coast for another twenty or thirty years through networks that make adaptation unnecessary.

By the time the pandemic arrived, Fauci had spent decades as a bureaucrat, dealing with budgets and manuevering through arcane government policies - far removed from frontline science. Nothing in that history made him a universal authority on masking, vaccine transmission, population epidemiology, viral evolution, or every other field on which he pronounced.

His real expertise was navigating institutions, consolidating authority, cultivating relationships, and projecting the image of a scientist to the public.

The scientific gerontocracy

Fauci's career fits a broader historical pattern created by universities and their research systems funded by NIH.

When the NIH budget doubled around the turn of the century, universities expanded their biomedical operations. Medical schools hired large numbers of professors whose income and laboratories depended on external grants - called "soft money" positions. Scientists who had attached their names to important genes or disease pathways during the previous era suddenly gained access to enormous new funding streams.

They built large laboratories, accumulated grants, generated indirect-cost revenue for their universities, and developed influence throughout NIH study sections, journals, professional societies, and university administrations. Money created authority, and authority attracted more money.

Many of these people later became department chairs, deans, institute directors, and even university presidents. A few continued doing important science, but most did not adapt as new technologies transformed biology. Their scientific contributions declined while their institutional influence continued growing.

The result was an academic aristocracy whose power survived long after the circumstances that created it disappeared. Seniority came to be treated as wisdom, incumbency as excellence, and grant accumulation as scientific achievement.

Fauci was the most visible member of this gerontocracy. Before the public knew his name, he had already spent nearly forty years controlling a major NIH institute, and there are countless others. The transformation of NIAID into a roughly $6 billion organization is not a self-validating accomplishment. Budget growth does not prove scientific success.

A serious evaluation must examine the priorities entrenched, the dissent discouraged, the opportunities lost, and the consequences of allowing one person to control a government agency for nearly four decades. In retrospect, J. Edgar Hoover served far too many decades running the FBI and history will likely not look kindly on Fauci's term inside the NIH.

We must also ask what was not studied because Fauci had his thumb on the funding scales for so long. Basic questions about how sleep, diet, exercise, metabolism, stress, sunlight, and other environmental factors shape immunity received far less attention than Fauci's preferred institutional agenda which was heavily focused on HIV.

The pandemic did not suddenly turn Fauci into a problem. It exposed the culture over which he had already presided for decades.

Scientific celebrity as product

The public sees a handful of scientific celebrities. Insiders know that universities manufacture them by the thousands.

Every major institution has its local circuit of people whose identities revolve around image, status, proximity to power, and the belief that they are stars. They perform the role of scientific authority even when they have shown little interest in science for years, if ever. Some convert the arrangement into wealth. Others are paid in prestige and deference.

These people are not scientists who reluctantly became administrators. They are administrators who use science as a credential. They become skilled at cultivating superficial impressions, repeating approved narratives, and moving through bureaucratic hierarchies. Their institutional rise is then treated as evidence of scientific judgement.

Fauci was the A-list version of this phenomenon. His media charm allowed him to become nationally famous, but his underlying career was familiar. He differed from thousands of university and NIH administrators mainly because he had a camera crew and never missed a moment to be on TV.

Favor-trading as independent recognition

Fauci's documented relationships with influential figures at Duke illustrate how the establishment reproduces itself.

Fauci reached out to his friend at Duke for award nominations. Duke receives hundreds of millions of dollars in NIAID funding. Organizations then rank Duke according to how much NIH money it attracts. Those rankings are presented as evidence of excellence, and Duke administrators are considered for senior positions within NIH.

Funding, nominations, endorsements, appointments, awards, and prestige circulate through the same small network. Each transaction is then presented as an independent recognition of merit.

This does not require a cinematic conspiracy with a mastermind issuing secret instructions. It just takes time and a bit of curiosity to read the documents laying this out. Aligned incentives, expectations of reciprocity, career dependence, and institutional self-preservation are sufficient. The network coordinates itself because everyone understands which relationships and financial streams must be protected.

And for all these exchanges made public in the news documents, thousands of similar arrangements remain hidden but just as concrete in study sections, professional societies, journal boards, university committees, philanthropic organizations, and government agencies.

Anyone who challenges the arrangement risks being marginalized or blacklisted. Those who participate are promoted as respected scientific leaders.

Narrative management replaces truth

Universities, NIH, journals, scientific societies, medical organizations, biotech, pharma, venture capital, and science media form a self-reinforcing network. Each organization looks to the others for validation. A prestigious paper creates enthusiasm. Academics repeat the narrative. Investors interpret that consensus as reduced risk. Companies raise capital. Advisors and board members reinforce the story. Pharma later treats the institutional excitement as evidence that the underlying biology is sound.

Everyone benefits from optimism until the science fails. Then the network moves on to the next target without confronting why they got the previous consensus wrong. Because self-examination might lead to loss of prestige, authority, or cash to keep the scientific enterprise afloat.

The same institutional structure rewards grant volume over insight, compliance over skepticism, and institutional pedigree over independent judgement. Peer review is not a neutral mechanism floating above these incentives. It is embedded within them.

Fauci made this process visible. Information was accepted or discarded according to whether it advanced the preferred narrative, protected institutional authority, or preserved reputation. Contrary evidence was not evaluated neutrally. It was treated as a political and professional threat.

Labels such as "conspiracy theory" became tools for dismissing plausible evidence without answering it. Institutional authority was used to define what could be discussed, and then the resulting silence was offered as proof of consensus.

Mythology survives inside academia

Many outside academia say Fauci has fallen from grace, that his legacy is destroyed, and that his reputation has collapsed. Nothing could be further from the truth inside academic medicine and biomedical research.

Within universities, medical societies, and the organizations controlling credentials and prestige, Fauci remains a celebrity and hero. He continues to receive invitations, prestigious platforms, awards, and public praise. Major universities still present him as one of the nation's most important public-health leaders.

The managerial class sees Fauci as the embodiment of itself. His career validates the qualities that it rewards: institutional longevity, bureaucratic influence, narrative discipline, media skill, prestigious relationships, and the ability to present authority as expertise.

Fauci is not merely protected by that class. He is its idealized self-portrait.

These institutions can maintain their own universe of facts because their revenue streams continue regardless of their performance. Taxpayers, donors, tuition, hospital income, grants, and endowment returns allow them to survive without admitting error. There is no effective mechanism of accountability.

The ship is not sinking because the public discovers misconduct. The ship can take on water indefinitely because someone else keeps paying to repair it.

Why Fauci remains important

I keep returning to Fauci not because I claim expertise in every aspect of the pandemic. I do not.

I return to him because he gave the public a rare view of how scientific authority is manufactured and protected. Most people never see the senior administrators, grantmakers, journal editors, society leaders, and local scientific celebrities who shape permissible narratives inside biomedicine. Fauci placed this old way of doing science with TV appearances and shaping of the media.

His diaries and records offer a watershed opportunity. The lesson should not end with deciding whether one man lied, exercised bad judgment, or deserves punishment. The more important question is why the institutions surrounding him showed so little interest in determining the truth and remain so committed to protecting his mythology.

Scientific integrity cannot be partisan. Every person should demand honesty and accountability from institutions that claim the authority of science.

Public-health messaging must be honest before it is clear. Real leaders explain uncertainty, earn trust, and rally the public toward sound action. Manufactured certainty is not leadership. Clarity without honesty is propaganda.

What reform requires

The administrative machinery cannot investigate or reform itself. Its leaders know how to convert criticism into committees, reports, mission statements, listening sessions, and carefully worded promises while leaving the underlying structure untouched.

Reform requires enforceable transparency, external oversight, public accountability, and meaningful consequences for failure. Funding must move away from administrative empires and toward scientists capable of producing important knowledge.

The NIH-centered, large-institution model should face competition from smaller, independent research institutes with lower overhead, clearer missions, and greater accountability. Philanthropy should stop enlarging university endowments and begin building alternative institutions for science, education, and career development.

Scientific leadership should not become a throne occupied for decades. Older scientists should be judged by whether they continue learning, adapting, and contributing, not by the authority accumulated from work performed thirty years earlier. Dissent must be treated as part of science rather than a threat to institutional reputation. Uncertainty must be communicated rather than edited out. Scientific merit must be separated from grant volume, celebrity, political alignment, and bureaucratic skill.

Fauci is not the entire problem. He is just its clearest illustration. He placed the biomedical establishment under a spotlight, and they have failed to confront the harsh light.

Jason Locasale is an American biochemist and former tenured professor specializing in cancer metabolism, nutrition, and the application of AI to health and longevity research. With over two decades in academia and more than 200 peer-reviewed publications, he is recognized as a Highly Cited Researcher (top 0.1% globally) for six consecutive years. He has held advisory roles with biotech firms, the National Cancer Institute, and the National Institutes of Health, and has contributed to textbook chapters and patents.

* * *

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/13/2026 - 22:35

Boston Red Sox CEO Sam Kennedy shut down rumors of a potential sale, declaring that owner John Henry and his family are "never selling" the team.

Over 18 months have passed since the Palisades fire destroyed our town. Twelve of our neighbors died. Over half of residents lost everything they owned –– nearly 6,000 homes burned to the ground. Others remain standing, but sustained major damage.

Hart and Parrish tied the knot in a lavish Santa Barbara, California, ceremony in 2016.

Hart and Parrish tied the knot in a lavish Santa Barbara, California, ceremony in 2016.

A federal judge may have forced the Trump administration to keep funding the LA Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA), but the day of reckoning is coming.

US Sending Fresh Carrier To Relieve Over-Extended USS Lincoln Amid Reports Of Sailor Burn-Out

Below we've detailed the immense strain placed on the long-deployed USS Lincoln aircraft carrier, which has been the main floating naval hub of operations amid the Iran war. The past weeks have seen growing US media coverage of the immense strain placed on the some 5000-member crew, and given the typical port calls have been nearly absent for the extended deployment and operation. But on Thursday the Wall Street Journal is reporting than an urgent relief operation is in the works, as the USS George Washington is being rapidly prepared to take over operations in the region:

The U.S. is preparing to send the aircraft carrier USS George Washington to the Middle East to replace the USS Abraham Lincoln as part of a previously scheduled rotation plan, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter. The Lincoln has undergone an extended deployment with few port calls, prompting lawmakers to raise concerns about living conditions aboard the ship.

The Lincoln began a scheduled deployment in November and was redirected to the Middle East in January ahead of the U.S. war against Iran. The carrier and its embarked aircraft were instrumental to the U.S.’s Operation Epic Fury bombing campaign, and the ship has since participated in the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports. 

The high tempo of operations and the strain of an extended deployment have weighed on sailors, according to lawmakers who are pressing the Pentagon for more information about the living conditions and reports of mental-health issues aboard the carrier.

Below we provide further details of the growing hardships, and the fact that Congressional leaders have gotten involved. It seems the Pentagon and Trump administration are now responding to the reports.

More than five months into a US-Israeli war on Iran that was supposed to last less than five weeks, a rising toll is being paid by deployed members of the US armed forces. Beyond the pointless deaths of 18 service members and wounds inflicted on more than 600 others, family members say sailors aboard the USS Lincoln aircraft carrier are suffering from a variety of detrimental effects of going more than 28 weeks without a port call -- so much so that multiple crew members have tried leaping off the mammoth vessel.   

Amid the growing firestorm over conditions on the nuclear-powered, Nimitz-class carrier, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) on Wednesday fired off a letter to acting US Navy Secretary Hung Cao. A member of the Senate armed forces committee, Blumenthal summarized the accounts that have been making their way from the ship's sailors to their concerned family members: 

There have been widespread reports of shortages of basic supplies, water contamination, plumbing issues, deteriorating mental health, deck safety concerns, and disruptions in the mail system, which have caused many care packages in route to the ship to be lost in transit for

The Lincoln departed its San Diego home base on Nov. 21, 2025, on what was supposed to be a seven-month deployment. That deployment is now in its ninth month, but what's far more remarkable is that the Lincoln went more than 200 days without a port call to give sailors a chance to walk on land and unwind away from the claustrophobic conditions aboard their huge ship. Here's how former Navy SEAL Matt Bracken described life on a carrier in a discussion of the Lincoln situation on X: 

"Look at the cross section, then imagine a new set of compartments connected in all directions but in different ways every 15 to 30 feet. With the human passageway and berthing compartment ceilings no more than about 6'4" high, and the passageways just wide enough for men to pass. You have to duck your head and lift your foot high constantly over open p-way hatches. Miss, and you smack your skull or your shin.

It becomes incredibly oppressive and claustrophobic for the 5,000 who live inside. Many sailors don't see the sky for a week at a time, living entirely inside that steel warren. It works on the mind in a pernicious way. It's always humming and throbbing and vibrating. It's hard to describe. Most would go nuts in there after a month."

After departing, the Lincoln made a mere one-day stop in Guam two weeks before Christmas. "[It] was so brief that much of the crew likely never went ashore," observed the War Zone's Ian Ellis-Jones. Typically, a carrier crew might expect a port call every 30 to 45 days, with each break spanning around 3 to 5 days. Way back on June 16, an officer aboard the Lincoln said his ship had "claimed the title for most consecutive days at sea for any modern aircraft carrier." The previous such record -- 206 days -- was set by the USS Eisenhower in 2020, a feat in part forced by the Covid pandemic that limited port access.  In early July, the Lincoln finally made a brief port call in Oman, where a resupply helped end an apparent several-month span without serving fresh fruits or vegetables. Many sailors got off the ship, but were stuck in a secure compound at the port. 

Over recent weeks, family members of the Lincoln's 5,000-sailor-and-Marine crew have grown increasingly vocal about what they're hearing about conditions on the ship -- to include claims that multiple sailors are so despondent about being relentlessly cooped up that they've tried leaping off the ship, the flight deck of which stands about six and a half-stories above the sea.  

One of the accounts came from the wife of a would-be suicidal sailor. Her husband is now in a medical hold, and she says she hasn't had an update from the Navy in weeks. “He’s scared,” Annabelle Loma told the Navy Times. “He thinks he’ll get a dishonorable discharge, and just because he was burnt out, his 13-year career is ruined, just like that." Of course, one's ability to hold up under stress is a material factor in suitability for continued service, and we have to wonder how her husband will feel about her going public about his suicide attempt.

Another family member said her husband prevented a different sailor from going overboard, calling out to the sailor and then grabbing their arms and pulling them down to the deck. For every sailor who's stepped up to the edge of the deck, there are apparently many more suffering from endless monotony. “I’m just actively watching my (sailor) kind of break down, like they’re losing hope and everything,” one spouse told Stars and Stripes.  

So glad Trump decided to do this war. https://t.co/wdANwojqMg

— Brandon Weichert (@WeTheBrandon) August 12, 2026

Last month, an anguished parent shared a perspective with Stars and Stripes that indicates frustration with prolonged sea duty is being compounded by bewilderment over why President Trump decided to join the State of Israel in launching a war on Iran:   

“My son is currently on that ship and listening to him say that he and his shipmates constantly think about jumping off the ship just for relief is so hard to listen to. We are all tucked in at night in our beds at night meanwhile our loved ones are out there fighting with no understanding as to what they’re defending.”

Beyond the sheer time at sea, long shifts, and going many days without a break, the quality of life on the Lincoln is said to have declined, with complaints about moldy showers, rationing of food, and a lack of basic hygiene supplies like toothpaste, deodorant and soap. One woman says her son told her the food situation has been so bad at times that a meal consists of only a half-cup of rice and two tortillas.  

Last week, more than 200 family members took part in town halls hosted by Navy Secretary Cao. One woman tearfully recounted how her husband messaged her that morning, saying "he hopes he doesn’t wake up tomorrow." 

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/13/2026 - 22:10

Lakefield Copper Beech Middle School employee Francis John Teeling, 69, allegedly uploaded and stored the creepy kiddie porn involving female elementary-aged children.

It looks like Netflix listened to baseball fans’ demands after getting criticized for its Opening Day coverage.

California faces potential water shortages if the states that use the Colorado River can’t make a deal.

They’re on the other side of the whistle now.

How often do Democrats thunder that “people will die” if Republicans get their way on issues such as healthcare, climate change and gun control?

Babylon Bee Sues New Mexico Over Restrictions On AI Satirical Posts

Authored by Kevin Stocklin via The Epoch Times,

The Babylon Bee, a satirical online publication, is suing the state of New Mexico over a law that bans artificial intelligence-created misrepresentation of political figures and issues, including satire and parody, in the months leading up to an election.

(L-R) Timothy Head, executive director of the Faith & Freedom Coalition talks with Seth Dillon, CEO, of the Babylon Bee and Kyle Mann, editor and chief, at the annual "Road To Majority Policy Conference" held by the Faith & Freedom Coalition at the Gaylord Opryland Resort & Convention Center in Nashville, Tenn., on June 18, 2022. Seth Herald/Getty Images

In a lawsuit filed on Aug. 11, the Babylon Bee charged that the law criminalizes speech that is protected by the First Amendment.

"We're used to getting pulled over by the joke police, but comedy isn't a crime," Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement.

"The First Amendment protects our right to create AI satire poking fun at political candidates," Dillon said. "We'll never stop fighting to defend that freedom."

New Mexico's law, passed in 2024, makes it illegal to post "materially deceptive media" generated with AI, within 90 days before an election, without a state-mandated warning label. The law specifically includes satire and parody, and covers flyers, social media posts, and memes, with violators liable for fines up to $20,000.

AI has become increasingly adept at creating media that is difficult to distinguish from actual photos and videos, prompting many officials to call for restrictions on AI-generated posts in order to shield the public from false information.

But New Mexico's law also aligns with other efforts by government officials to control what they deem to be "misinformation." This includes efforts by the Biden administration to pressure social media companies to suppress statements during the COVID-19 pandemic that conflicted with official narratives on topics like the source of the virus and vaccines, as well as the creation of a Disinformation Governance Board within the Department of Homeland Security in 2022.

Similarly, the European Union's Digital Services Act, which also applies to American companies, contains provisions that compel tech companies to suppress what the act calls "disinformation."

Attorneys representing the Babylon Bee say that laws like these often violate Americans' First Amendment rights.

"When these laws are framed as broadly as they are, it really is state censorship of political speech, which is the highest rung of speech that our Constitution protects," Logan Spena, an attorney with Alliance Defending Freedom who is representing the Babylon Bee, told The Epoch Times. "We want to make sure the government is not in the business of trying to decide what's true and false in the matter of political debates."

The lawsuit against New Mexico states that, while there are exceptions to the First Amendment, such as obscenity, incitement, defamation, and threats, "the government's declaration that speech is false does not empower it to restrict that speech."

"As [AI] gets more realistic, I think states are getting a little more concerned, but the problem is that they're overreacting in ways that unconstitutionally restricts protected speech," Spena said. As artificially generated images proliferate, people will become more discerning about what they see online, he said.

New Mexico officials did not respond to a request for comment as of press time. A statement provided to media outlets by a state Ethics Commission spokesperson said that "the Commission has never taken action to enforce the AI-disclaimer requirements in Section 1-19-26.4 of the Campaign Reporting Act, much less for political parody and satire. While the Babylon Bee has a First Amendment right to mock New Mexico, it does not have a right to extract attorneys' fees from the State."

Tyler Durden Thu, 08/13/2026 - 21:45

This season has the potential to be a bit better, though it is more likely that plenty more losses are on the way. 

Time stopped when Malachi Fields left his feet to catch a dig route over the middle of the field.