SocraticGadfly

August 27, 2026

I warned you about Proposition 4 and now the "produced water" shit is about to hit the fan

Proposition 4 being the Texas constitutional amendments 2025 election Proposition 4.

I called out the Trib and librul blog sites like Lone Star Left. I called out Gang Green enviros at the Sierra Club. I called out Suzanne Bellsnyder for being a hypocrite. I called out the Texas Green Party. This year, I called out the Observer.

I said again this year, as I had before the election, that it would be an economic boondoggle as well as environmentally damaging. 

Now, especially on the latter, companies wanting to "recycle" fracking wastewater are pushing, pushing, pushing to go full speed ahead with minimal oversight from TCEQ, as well as minimal discussion of electric needs. Shocked? Why? 

Aridzona's day of water reckoning has come; or has it?


(My Photoshopped version of Glen Canyon Dam, above.)

Or, at least, the day of reckoning has come for the Valley of the Sun. Or has it?

The climate change deniers and minimalists will probably try to poo-poo this, starting with saying it's only for two years. Which moves back to the rhetorical question ending the paragraph above.

But, Aridzona losing one-third of its Colorado River water rights in the next two years, per the official Department of the Interior announcement, is serious. It takes the largest haircut among the three Lower Basin states as the price it paid to get the Central Arizona Project, which delivers water to Phoenix and Tucson.

Per a link in that story and discussion elsewhere, will the state actually sue? If so, between "slim" and "none," what are the odds of success? 

Beyond that, the day of water reckoning isn't enough. Per this New York Times piece:

The river’s flow is diminishing and reservoirs are drying up, but communities and farms still use unsustainable amounts of water.

That's the bottom line. 

Another version?

"The water usage is still too damned high." 

On the suits? The current proposal just makes firm, that same piece says, voluntary offers already on the table. 

Beyond that, as I said 15 years ago, Obama blew a chance to further cut water usage. He could have made Phoenix and Las Vegas recent homebuyers "whole" by letting them out of mortgages if they moved (back) to where the water is — Cleveland, St. Louis, Omaha, et. And, he could have done the same for homebuilders, mortgage brokers etc., to make them whole IF they took a "haircut" on how many houses they could build in places like Phoenix with federal mortgage guarantees. 

Beyond that? "Water banking" is semi-fraudulent in my opinion, and in some day will have an unpayable real bill to be paid. Sorry, California's Colorado River water sherpa, but be more honest than this.(At least he admitted California is way behind Nevada on cutting water use, while also saying nothing about WHY it’s way behind.)

Interestingly, on the issue of lawsuits, the first one has been filed — by Nevada. The reason they’re suing? No mandatory cuts for the Upper Basin.

Fully fraudulent? The Big Oil companies as climate denialists, who took a page from Big Tobacco. A new Inside Climate News piece says that Big Oil is responsible for half the Colorado River basin’s water loss in 2014-24 due to climate change causes. 

As for Aridzona? Per the second link, I have little doubt that groundwater pumping will only accelerate more, and that alfalfa farmers will beg the state for monetary help to pay for deeper and deeper wells. Soil subsidence will continue, and homeowners will ask for help on that.

Sadly, a super El Niño may provide enough snowpack for the seven basin states to continue to dodge a long-range new deal on the river. Per this story, that's why we're at where we are now — a two-year imposition by Interior based on a ten-year planning document. 

I've written before, most recently a few months ago, about the reality of the seven Basin states willing to continue to deny reality. 

Of course, Glen Canyon Dam was itself built on a lie, a lie that's inside the visitors' center:

Oops! And, maybe we should call the refusal to be skeptical about the water flow numbers used to create the Colorado River Compact a century ago a lie themselves.

If "water's for fighting over," per the old western bon mot, in modern terms, and contra Kumbaya John Fleck, who doesn't like my comments on his site. it's also for suing over. 

Per Nevada’s lawsuit, another thing Kumbaya John gets wrong is being wedded to the Upper Basin/Lower Basin division. If there’s going to be a lawsuit rumble over basin supply anyway, elect me president and my federal government will knock heads on this issue.

August 26, 2026

More Talafreako the hypocritico

Building on its revelation a week ago that James Talarico seems to be a hypocrite in his stance on pastors endorsing political candidates from their pulpits, written about here by me, we now have a part two from the Texas Monthly.

Ostensibly, the piece is about what they would want to ask both him and Kenny Boy Paxton in a debate, if one happens, but some of the best "issues" are Talafreako's.

He seems two-faced if not outrightly hypocritical on veganism. But, that's minor.

Sexually-affirming care (that's the word, not "gender-affirming," Monthly) for minors who hold themselves as transsexual (that's the word, not the truncated pronoun "trans") is much bigger. 

At a Pride event in 2023—after the Lege passed SB 14, which banned gender-affirming care for minors—he called the bill “the most dangerous” one of the session, and one that “infuriates me.” In early June, though, after clinching the Senate nomination, he appeared on the podcast of Houston lawyer Dan Cogdell, who served as Paxton’s personal attorney for a number of years. During that appearance, Talarico said, “I oppose gender reassignment surgeries for minors.” Then, when asked about his support for the LGBTQ community on Rachel Maddow’s MS NOW show in early August, his tone shifted yet again: “I don’t think we win by selling people out,” he told the host. “We’re refusing to do that in this campaign.”

Yeah, "code switching." Or worse. 

Texas Progressives talk books and cooking the books

With some reservations but much more scorn, Off the Kuff laughs at Dan Patrick's bizarre obsession with "dirty" books in school libraries.

Franklin Strong at Anger and Clarity has even more

SocraticGadfly called out Don Huffines for his immediate politicization of the Comptroller's office.

The state's maternal mortality committee's next report will omit post-Roe pregnancy death

If you're on city of Austin municipal electricity, or a rural co-op, guess what? State laws restricting cutoffs during heat alerts don't apply to them and so don't help you. The Observer notes how much this varies from utility to utility.

The Tex-ass Lege and Strangeabbott refuse to even consider serious floodplain building rules and building standard rules, even as more Hill Country type flooding remains likely. The Trib reports

August 25, 2026

But, what if Jason Arday WAS a fraud?

Yes, per the likes of The Nation, hereditarianism (formerly known as "racialism") should be called out in general, and Nathan Cofnas in particular.

That said, per the header, what IF?

Substacker Aurelien, of whom I said in restacking this piece:

On the surface, about Jason Arday, but below the surface, about much more, from someone who may be at least in the same sport, if not necessarily the same ballpark, as my skeptical leftism.

(Note the caveats.) 

Tackled just that.

Let's start here:

These ideas had been vaguely circulating at the back of my mind for a while, but they were brought into focus by the bizarre and almost unbelievable case of the late Jason Arday, the confidence trickster who secured a Chair at the University of Cambridge before being revealed as a liar, a cheat, a plagiarist and fantasist who probably needed treatment.

Painful? Yes.

Then, lots of details:

Very briefly, Arday, the youngest Black full Professor in the history of Cambridge claimed to be born autistic, not to be able to speak until about the age of about ten (the details vary) or able to write until the age of eighteen. Somehow he went on to a dazzling academic career including a Doctorate, with visiting fellowships at other universities, and he was an international athlete and an ultra-marathon runner. Oh, and he raised millions of pounds for charities and appeared a lot on TV. Again, many of these details changed over the weeks : their only common features are that they are either lies, or cannot be verified, or there are severe doubts (as with his Doctorate) about whether they were actually honestly gained.

 That's the big picture.

Assuming this is all grounded on actual claims Arday made?

Yeah, he's a confidence trickster, and if The Nation isn't going to address that, it remains partially part of the problem. 

Aurelian, who seems British, or at least from the non-American Anglosphere, by things like "-ise" versus "-ize," has more at that link. On the big picture beyond Arday, he does use the word "wokery" once. Beyond that? He does talk a lot about pomo French philosophy, i.e., Foucault, Derrida and others. He also talks about the "professional and managerial class."

But, he goes on to talk more about Arday in academia, narrowing the focus again:

To return to Arday for a second, he was awarded a Doctorate by Liverpool John Moore’s University, (previously Liverpool Polytechnic teaching trade-related skills), named after a pioneer of sports betting in the UK. A couple of things are clear. One is that he was pretty much unsupervised (it is alleged that he saw his supervisor only once), and the other is that he copied and plagiarised most of his work. It’s astounding that he was awarded his degree in the first place, but it’s actually beyond debate that he indeed copied and plagiarised, and that the university authorities knew about it, but didn’t care.

But, that's not all.

Going beyond The Nation's take on Cofnas, there's this:

[T]here are now Internet sites through which students can be instructed to submit their work, and which have an excellent record of detecting plagiarism. Arday’s work was apparently submitted to the Anglo-Saxon site known as Turnitin (there is a European equivalent called Urkund, although the two are merging.) These sites run a search, and produce a Similarity Index (SI) for each submission, flagging up extracts which directly resemble other identified texts, thus enabling the examiner to make word-for-word comparisons. In most subjects, there will be some similarities, if only because standard bibliographies and the use of common citations and a common vocabulary will produce an SI higher than zero. For the sort of subjects I’ve taught over the years, an SI of 10% isn’t necessarily a problem. Over 15% could be a problem, and if I see an SI of over 20% my heart sinks, because it means that at a minimum the student hasn’t produced work that is original enough. The risk is always, at best, of an argument held together with long quotations from other people.

In other words, somebody else, and someone not necessarily a full-bore racialist, could have outed Arday. 

Oh, but it gets worse? According to Aurelien, Cambridge knew about the possible plagiarism. The Liverpool university did before him. That, I cannot verify, so it puts him on the wrong foot.

Speaking in European political science terms, he may be a left-wing version of a classical liberal. 

But, we can turn to Arday's Wikipedia page

He claimed all this, and per the links, people other than Cofnas were wondering why:

Arday said that at the age of three, he received diagnoses of autism, global developmental delay, deafness, and dyscalculia, and was non-verbal until the age of 11.[9] The claim of being non-verbal was later contested in the media.[1] Arday also said he could not read or write until he was 18, and that he received a diagnosis of dyslexia in his first year of university.[10][11][12] The statement that he was illiterate until 18 also came under media scrutiny.[13] 
Arday reported being attacked at the age of 18 and developing epilepsy as a result. According to Arday, two of his attackers later became his students, with one asking him to be the godfather of his child and Arday "gratefully accepted".[3] He claimed that in 2006, aged 21, he went to Brazil with the charity WaterAid to install water pumps for poor communities in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro; media later disputed this, as WaterAid did not send volunteers abroad.[3][14]

There's more bullshit here: 

He claimed to have completed his PhD in two-and-a-half years,[18] and to have relearnt the content of his dissertation weeks before defending it due to memory loss following the removal of a brain tumour and suffering a transient ischemic attack, or mini-stroke.

Again, why weren't non-skeptical leftist opinion sites jumping in earlier? 

Wiki's page notes that questions arose on plagiarism back in 2023. And, when called out, he called the police and made a harassment report against the accuser. And, yes, Aurelian is at least semi-right on Liverpool giving him a pass:

Having been alerted to allegations of plagiarism in Arday's PhD thesis in 2025, Liverpool John Moores University—who had awarded him his PhD—established a misconduct panel. Arday did not dispute the allegations of plagiarism, but said he had not received adequate supervision given his autism and learning disabilities, and described the allegations against him as being part of an "insidious and relentless" strategy to undermine black academics. Accepting that there were problems with Arday's supervision, the panel concluded that the similarities between Arday's thesis and an earlier PhD thesis by another academic were the result of "honest and reasonable error", not deliberate plagiarism, and were "well within the accepted range of compliance with the academic standards of the time".

And again, where was The Nation? (The author of The Nation's piece doesn't mention any people, or dates, pre-2026.)

And, today, where are the "Why" questions?

That's the bottom line.

Assuming he was a confidence trickster, why? Is this, to go in a different direction than Aurelien, part of the social media world? Did some other Black second-generation immigrant from his neighborhood do better academically? Was he pressured by teachers?

As for his hurdles? Without being a trickster, being not only Black but a second-generation African immigrant were real hurdles. Without the lies, though, get a real bachelor's degree and a basic job, then night school on a master's if you're ready. 

As for that immigrant hurdle?

There are also others with hurdles to get over.

People who actually have autism.

People who actually have epilepsy.

People who are child abuse survivors.

People who grow up in the homes of drug or alcohol addicts. 

As for Cambridge? Yes, if it had only six Black professors at the time of Arday's hiring, that itself is an issue. That said, as his Wiki notes, Cambridge had other options on "people of color" they interviewed for the chair they eventually gave to Arday.

This gets back to the old bon mot of skepticism: If something sounds too good to be true, it usually is. 

Finally, it's a reminder of my Venn diagram piece about non-twosiderism

August 24, 2026

Tex-ass chickenshittery on Big Bend

Per the national parks and environment half of last week's Texas Progressives roundup, I am not at all shocked that Tex-ass Rethuglicans have gone semi-AWOL to fully so on a Big Bend border wall. The Monthly has the details, complete with "Texas toughness rating."

Besides the elected officials, it adds a bonus, that also doesn't shock me. Matthew McConaughey is also chickenshit, and is being called out for it.