My family got its Christmas tree yesterday. Since moving up to my wife’s hometown‚ the little seat of a rural county perched on the top of Maryland‚ we’ve taken to cutting our own trees at one of…

We all know that to have life on a world‚ you need three critical items: water‚ warmth‚ and food. Now add to that a factor called “entropy”. It plays a role in determining if a given planet can sustain and grow complex life. Scientist Luigi Petraccone‚ a chemistry researcher at the University of Naples in Italy‚ looked at planetary entropy. He’s interested in how scientists select planets that could be habitable. He released a paper that examines something called “planetary entropy production” (PEP). Here’s how it works. A habitable world needs a biosphere with stuff living inside it. All life grows and expands‚ using the available water‚ warmth‚ and food resources. As it turns out‚ entropy plays out inside a world’s biosphere. And‚ it needs a relatively high PEP. That makes it more likely to have complex living systems and means it would be a good target for exploration. And‚ according to Petraccone’s paper‚ it doesn’t matter what the chemical basis for that life is—whether carbon‚ silicon‚ or some other element. What matters is how life proceeds to greater complexity. Illustration of Kepler-186f‚ a recently-discovered‚ possibly Earthlike exoplanet that could be a host to life. Scientists could use this one or one like it to measure planetary entropy production as a prelude to exploration. (NASA Ames‚ SETI Institute‚ JPL-Caltech‚ T. Pyle) What’s Entropy? Before we dive into Petraccone’s paper‚ let’s talk about entropy. The dictionary definition in physics is: “a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system’s thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work.” The second law of thermodynamics requires that the universe moves in a direction in which entropy increases. That seems a little complex‚ so let’s think of entropy as a measure of randomness or disorder in a system. An orderly system has exactly enough energy to do the things it needs to do. If it produces (or gains) more energy‚ that gets expressed in a higher state of entropy. Living things are highly ordered and require a constant input of energy to maintain a state of low entropy. They produce waste and by-products and‚ of course‚ lose energy as part of the process of life. The more energy coming into a system and subsequently lost by that system to its surroundings‚ the less ordered and more random things get. Essentially‚ the higher its entropy state becomes. Entropy in biology comes into play when you look at the systems that contribute to life on a planet. Petraccone writes‚ “The extent of entropy production is proportional to the ability of such systems to dissipate free energy and thus to ‘live’‚ to evolve‚ to grow in complexity. Generally‚ a certain threshold of entropy production must be exceeded for the emergence of complex self-organizing structures. Thus‚ the entropy production can be considered as the thermodynamic thrust that drives life emergence and evolution.” That brings us to the “planetary entropy production” (PEP) value that can help scientists target likely life-friendly planets. The most habitable ones will be where life can generate the most entropy. The more complex and dynamic the life forms are‚ the more entropy they’ll produce and the higher PEP value they maintain. Petraccone proposes that different planets will have more or less of an energy potential‚ predicting which planets are most likely to be habitable. Applying Planetary Entropy Production to a Life Search Figuring out where and if life happens on a planet is important. First‚ it needs to be within the circumstellar habitable zone (CHZ) of its star. That’s where water can exist on the surface in a liquid state. It also matters where in the CHZ the planet orbits. If it’s too close to the inside edge‚ it may lose whatever water it has due to stellar heating (and a runaway greenhouse effect). If it’s closer to the outside edge‚ it might not be as hospitable as one in the central area of the CHZ. In addition‚ a given planet may be in the perfect part of the zone but have other challenges to supporting a biosphere. Artist’s illustration of the circumstellar habitable zone around different types of stars. The CHZ plays a role in the planetary entropy production of a given planet. Credit: NASA Why not search for planets throughout the CHZ? There are thermodynamic differences between the inner and outer edges of the CHZ. The inner edge is more advantageous for the development of complex biospheres. Both PEP and the available free energy for Earth-like planets increase with stellar temperature. With that information‚ Petraccone and his team applied their calculations to evaluate the PEP and free energy for a selected sample of proposed habitable planets. Scientists also need to figure out the upper limit to a world’s PEP value and the corresponding free energy it receives as a function of stellar temperature and planetary orbital parameters. Petraccone writes‚ for example‚ that only Earth-like planets in the CHZ of G and F stars can have a PEP value higher than the Earth value (Earth is what we use for comparison). That means they’d be likely to support life‚ as opposed to planets in other parts of the habitable zone. Why Use PEP as a Rationale for Planetary Habitability? Interestingly‚ among the recently proposed habitable exoplanets‚ so-called “Hycean” worlds appear the thermodynamically best candidates. These are planets with liquid water oceans and hydrogen-rich atmospheres. Our planet is a good example and can be used as a “roadmap” to evaluation. Scientists are already studying the best mix of land to oceans for a habitable world‚ using Earth as an analog. It lies close to the inner edge of the Sun’s CHZ‚ which puts it in the right place to have a higher PEP value. Artist’s impression of Earth in the early Archean with a purplish hydrosphere and coastal regions. Even in this early period‚ life flourished and was gaining complexity. Credit: Oleg Kuznetsov If we assume Earth’s PEP value is required for life‚ then it allows planetary scientists to come up with an “entropic habitable zone” (or EHZ). It includes the distance from a star where a planet has liquid water plus a high PEP value. Apply those criteria to planets‚ and it appears that worlds around low-mass stars wouldn’t develop a high enough EHZ to sustain life. Nor could M and K stars. However‚ some fraction of worlds around F and G stars could land in the lucky “zone” and proceed to develop life. Selecting Those Possible Habitable Planets These days we see more and more discoveries of exoplanets around nearby stars. Examining them all to search for life is well-nigh impossible. So‚ scientists need some useful criteria to prioritize targets for study. Along with other factors‚ entropy production seems to be a good indicator of whether or not a given world can host life—and how complex that life is. Interestingly‚ a major advantage to using PEP and presence in the EHZ as a way to evaluate a world is that it doesn’t require assumptions about its atmospheric condition. Nor do these factors imply any conclusions about the chemical basis of the living systems on any given world. They simply provide a way for scientists to rate a world as they sift through thousands of exoplanets for further study. For More Information Planetary Entropy Production as a Thermodynamic Constraint for Exoplanet Habitability The post Entropy is the Key to a Planet’s Habitability appeared first on Universe Today.

Have they tried turning it off and on again?

Space is CRAZY.

"I'm really making an effort to kind of leave my past in the past and move forward‚" he says following his elimination on the show. Continue reading…

When I was a cute‚ sweet little boy back in 1960s Brooklyn‚ every Friday night after family Shabbat dinner I would lie on the floor in our living room. My dad would be lying right there‚ nearby on a couch‚ reading Newsweek to catch up on the news he could not follow all week since he was gone 12 hours daily from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. six days weekly‚ working from 8 a.m. until 6 p.m. at his brother’s wholesale store on Manhattan’s Lower East Side at 114 Ludlow Street (now a parking lot)‚ selling toys‚ games‚ and paper reams to retail storeowners who then sold those things to the public in an era before Toys “R” Us‚ Office Depot‚ OfficeMax‚ and Staples. (The longest sentence I have written in three years.) I lay alongside‚ spreading out our weekly issue of the Jewish Press‚ a 100-plus-page newspaper that had all the news and inside dope on everything interesting Brooklyn Jews‚ who in those days were all the Jews who mattered. There was news‚ zillions of ads for wig makers to cover the hair of married Orthodox women‚ clothes stores with modest dresses‚ skirts‚ and tops for Orthodox women‚ travel agencies offering flights to Israel (some even offering flights back!)‚ kosher foods‚ hotels and bungalow colonies in the Catskills‚ and other stuff. (Good news to Harvard‚ Columbia‚ Penn‚ and MIT anti-Semites: Those bungalows since have been decolonized.) There was news about Israel‚ about Jews in Brooklyn‚ about the small diaspora in Queens‚ Lower Manhattan‚ and the Bronx. If there were any Jews on Staten Island‚ they did not count anyway. As for the rich Upper East Side “Reform Jews‚” we deemed them all “Goyyim” — that is‚ non-Jews. No point in reading news about them. There still isn’t. And there was Arnie Fine. READ MORE: Why Laughter Will Win Us the Cultural Battle I got my sense of humor from four sources: (i) my father of blessed memory‚ (ii) Sunday nights alongside my dad‚ watching Nat Hiken’s NBC weekly series Car 54‚ Where Are You?‚ (iii) Arnie Fine‚ and (iv) Jackie Mason. Arnie wrote a weekly column called “I Remember When.” In it‚ he would reminisce in the 1960s about stuff in the Brooklyn and Lower East Side of the 1910s and 1920s. Ten years of reading Arnie was like a college course in New York Jewish history. And Arnie wrote with a sly and clever eye for humor. I think back to Arnie because I never expected to be an old man reminiscing and wistfully thinking back 60 years. I still am not an old man in the Era of Biden. Me? This old man‚ he plays two‚ he thinks back as an older Jew‚ with a knick-knack paddy-wack give a Jew a bone‚ now it’s time to change my tone. Those were the days‚ my friend. We thought they’d never end. I miss an America when comedy was funny. When did we lose comedy? I can forgive the Left for ruining basketball. I am only 5-foot-10 anyway. I can forgive them for ruining football. It’s only four months‚ and I am surprised how little I care about it now that I stopped watching a few years ago‚ thanks to Kaepernick. I can forgive the Left for ruining most news media; we still have The American Spectator (and also much else: Daily Wire‚ Free Press‚ Power Line‚ Israel National News‚ Federalist‚ American Thinker‚ New York Post‚ Townhall‚ FrontPage‚ Commentary‚ City Journal). I can forgive the Left for ruining the movies and TV. I can still stream oldies‚ and I never will have the time to see all those I want plus all the Ken Burns documentaries I want to see again. I can forgive the Left for ruining theater. There are so many revivals and excellent touring companies doing the great musicals and great classic comedies and dramas to keep me happy. I can forgive the Left for ruining awards shows like the Emmy‚ Oscar‚ Grammy‚ and Tony awards. Honestly‚ who needs ’em? (READ MORE from Dov Fischer: Goodbye Liz Magill‚ and Good Riddance‚ You Bastard) But I can never forgive the Left for ruining nationally unifying American comedy. Yes‚ I miss doctors’ house calls (so convenient‚ but I hated Dr. Lipsett’s frightful needle in the tuchus that is replaced today by “Tylenol” or “Advil.” I miss the Catskills and Grossinger’s and the Pioneer Hotel‚ with their baked herring‚ baked apples‚ chiffon pies‚ and unlimited portions of everything. I do not miss phone booths and the state of panic engendered by needing to call ahead to report an unanticipated delay in getting to a meeting or court hearing because of a highway/freeway car pile-up and‚ therefore‚ needing to drive off at the exit to find a phone booth to make the call‚ which meant you would not be 20 minutes late but an hour late — and then you had no dimes‚ so you had to pump in quarters. But I miss comedy. “I Remember When” all of America tuned into Johnny Carson at 11:30 p.m. for some inoffensive celebrity small talk‚ some great new stand-up comedians‚ and an occasional music number — all augmented by Carnac the Magnificent‚ and the insane way he blew the envelopes open‚ and sidekick Ed McMahon repeating the Answer for which Carnac would guess the absurd Question. Late-night TV continued its magic when Jay Leno took over for one audience and David Letterman for another. Jay did “Headlines‚” reading unbelievably moronic news stories or ads‚ often the result of typos or poor grammar or spelling that resulted in Doozies‚ and “Jaywalking‚” where he predated Watters’ World by asking simple questions to idiot pedestrians at Universal City or on Hollywood Boulevard. And there was Dave’s “Top Ten” list. There was Don Rickles. He insulted everyone — very un-PC — but no one minded because you knew he was not serious‚ and he never really aimed below the belt. There was Rodney Dangerfield (name changed from Jacob Cohen)‚ and for a guy who “got no respect‚” so many of us loved the guy and his constant nervous fidgeting at his neck with his too-tight tie. There was Jackie Mason. Red Buttons. Red Skelton. Joan Rivers. And then there was Saturday Night Live. Gee‚ it was so drop-dead funny‚ and an entire country would be talking about its skits on Monday morning‚ with laughter in the coffee rooms heard down office halls. Dan Aykroyd‚ John Belushi‚ Gilda Radner‚ Jon Lovitz‚ Bill Murray‚ Dennis Miller‚ Phil Hartman‚ Dana Carvey‚ so many of them. Just plain hysterically funny. Maybe they poked fun at the president‚ but it was good-natured‚ and it did not matter whether he was Democrat or Republican. They mostly were sort of fair. How the Left has destroyed our comedy! Name five great comedians today. I will start with Steven Wright and Sebastian Maniscalco. After that‚ I draw a blank. I am conservative and so do not find Colbert or Kimmel or Meyers watchable. I don’t mind parodying my guys as long as they parody the other guys too. Go ahead and make fun of Trump and the orange stuff. But make fun of Biden and his doddering. He falls far more often than Gerald Ford ever did‚ and Chevy Chase made a career out of those pratfalls. You think Alec Baldwin was funny doing Trump? Howzabout someone doing something about Alec Baldwin teaching gun safety? Not funny because he actually killed someone? Aha. So he can mock others even though he has killed more civilians than has the entire Congress. (READ MORE from Dov Fischer: Women and Children‚ Feminists and Misandry) Tina Fey as Sarah Palin? Spot on. But what about America’s No. 1 Public Idiot‚ DEI Kamala? There are not enough episodes of SNL to laugh up that giggling moron. And‚ talking about morons‚ what about that DEI presidential spokesperson? If you can mock Trump’s spokespeople — each and every one an intelligent‚ articulate‚ able representative — why not Biden’s hyphenated moron‚ with two French surnames‚ though she more realistically is French toast? And what about a DEI SCOTUS nominee who cannot define “woman”? They destroyed SNL by making it hyper-partisan and bitter. The first sign was when SNL moved from the Washington Post Entertainment section to the actual news. SNL no longer was about entertaining and bringing a nation together in combined cultural references but instead had transmogrified into a vicious‚ nasty left-wing propaganda piece. And SNL’s degradation never was clearer than when it reacted to extraordinary congressional hearings when Rep. Elise Stefanik grilled the president of the University of Pennsylvania and elicited remarkable testimony that it can be OK to call publicly for the extermination of Jewish people. There was so much to satirize in Liz Magill’s live self-immolation. Instead‚ hateful of a Republican “who done well‚” SNL went after Stefanik for exposing anti-Semitism in the Poison Ivy league. “I Remember When” Saturday Night Live was universally and almost uniformly funny. “I Remember When” late-night talk shows were a treat. “I Remember When” America laughed together. I will never forgive the Left for taking comedy away from America. Rav Fischer’s recent high-energy no-holds-barred encore interview with the Jewish Republican Alliance appears here. In it‚ he discusses Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza‚ the uselessness of Biden and Kamala‚ the sicknesses on America’s college campuses‚ opines on Charlie Kirk‚ Tucker‚ Candace‚ and the ADL‚ and the 2024 election. Rav Fischer’s memorable two televised debates with a national leader of CAIR‚ the leading anti-Semitic Arab Muslim body in the United States‚ can be found here and here. His latest deeply moving series of three informational and inspirational programs on the Hamas Gaza War may be found here‚ here‚ here‚ and here on YouTube. Because of some sensitive subject matter and viewing content relating to Hamas terror‚ YouTube is restricting the programs to viewers 18 and up. The post I Miss Comedy in America. Just Look at <;i>;Saturday Night Live<;/i>;. appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

SACRAMENTO — Those of us who know and love San Francisco have a pretty good idea why the city continues to become less livable as rampant crime and homelessness turn its streets into (literal) cesspools of public disorder. Despite a $14.6 billion budget‚ the city struggles to handle its basic responsibilities. Officials did‚ in fact‚ quickly clean up downtown streets in time for an international conference with Chinese President Xi Jinping‚ but reports suggest “addicts and homeless swarm[ed] back” to its streets after the event. READ MORE: Governor or Showman? ‘Red State vs. Blue State Debate’ Exposes Newsom. Meanwhile‚ San Francisco’s city government takes the “let no flower bloom” approach toward allowing its private citizens to do much of anything. The San Francisco Chronicle reported this week about one property owner’s attempt to build a tiny balcony on his house — a process that took almost a year and involved three community hearings‚ Planning Department reviews‚ and whatnot. A top city planning official told the newspaper that the timeline was “well within norms‚” which probably isn’t the good defense that one might think it is. A new state law that streamlines building approvals even provides special oversight of San Francisco’s building-approval process. Even legislators acknowledge it’s too cumbersome to build anything there‚ which helps explain the city’s absurd home prices and chronic underbuilding. Despite eye-popping rents‚ thousands of San Francisco apartments are vacant‚ in large part because property owners are afraid of renting out their places to strangers. Basically‚ the city’s rent-control laws make it nearly impossible to evict bad tenants. These are quite obviously government failures‚ yet San Francisco Supervisor Dean Preston said in a recent documentary that the city’s street-level disorder “is absolutely the result of capitalism and what happens in capitalism to the people at the bottom rungs.” In his view‚ the city’s homelessness crisis isn’t primarily the result of drugs or mental illness — or the city’s failure to humanely address those problems — but from evictions and people losing their jobs. The bizarre views of one elected Democratic socialist wouldn’t matter that much if the city — and the entire state‚ for that matter — didn’t constantly blame the private sector for obvious‚ repeated‚ and unfixable government failures. Last week‚ I wrote about increasing euthanasia rates at municipal-run animal shelters‚ which offers one small insight into our state’s way of doing business. Gov. Gavin Newsom earmarked $50 million to turn us into a “no kill” state. Despite that promise‚ euthanasia rates keep going up — mainly because animal shelters continue with their COVID-19 policies that limit public access to view animals in kennels. Our nationally high gas prices are‚ according to Newsom and Democratic officials‚ the result of corporate greed. Those prices apparently have no connection to the state’s exceedingly high gas taxes‚ special environmentally friendly fuel formulation (thus eliminating imports from other states)‚ and its frequently announced intention to shutter the fossil-fuels industry to create a carbon-free future. Sane refiners have understandably pulled back their refinery investments. The basic rule: The government can never be at fault‚ only the private sector. You get more of what you subsidize and less of what you punish‚ so it’s no surprise that California keeps getting bigger and more aggressive government — and businesses keep heading to other states. California cannot control its spending addiction. The latest budget is a whopping $311 billion‚ and nothing ever gets fixed. In the face of a $22.5 billion deficit last year‚ the governor avoided major cuts and employed a variety of “kick the can down the road” accounting gimmicks in the apparent hopes that a resurgent economy would bail him out. (RELATED: California’s Giant Deficit Puts Newsom in Hot Water) The Legislative Analyst’s Office reported last week: “Largely as a result of a severe revenue decline in 2022-23‚ the state faces a serious budget deficit. Specifically‚ under the state’s current law and policy‚ we estimate the Legislature will need to solve a budget problem of $68 billion in the upcoming budget process.” That’s the largest deficit in raw numbers in state history. California’s highly progressive tax system is dependent on revenues from those dreaded billionaires and tech companies — and high interest rates and reduced investment are taking their toll. Only a year and half ago‚ Newsom was proud to announce a $97.5 billion budget surplus and then embarked on a spending spree. Most of us counseled otherwise. The state could have used those dollars to‚ for instance‚ rejigger the tax system to make it friendlier to business and less dependent on boom-and-bust cycles. It could have largely fixed the state’s water problems‚ upgraded its decrepit transportation system‚ and‚ heaven forbid‚ reduced taxes for its residents. Now‚ the governor finally faces his first genuine challenge in statewide office. He could pull back on the $100-billion-plus high-speed rail system that even the New York Times termed a “multi-billion-dollar nightmare.” But the operating standard in California is to never question or even thoroughly analyze the results of past spending even as you demand more spending. Never let basic responsibilities get in the way of some pipedream. By the way‚ no one is clamoring to hop on a bullet train from Merced to Bakersfield‚ whatever the relative merits of those Central Valley cities. (READ MORE: Think Biden’s Railroad Across the Indian Ocean Is a Fantasy? Check Out California’s Vaunted ‘Bullet Train.’) Did I mention that despite record expenditures‚ the state’s public schools continue to languish? Per the Los Angeles Times last year: “Two out of 3 California students did not meet state math standards and more than half did not meet English standards on state assessments.” And note that “84% of Black students and 79% of Latino and low-income students did not meet state math standards in 2022.” The governor’s main approach has been to make it harder for those kids to attend charters. Maybe‚ just maybe‚ the answer isn’t more government and more spending. One would think that a state that prides itself on its innovation might‚ I don’t know‚ actually try something more innovative than taxing and spending more to fund the same bureaucratic systems. The only silver lining: The only time California ever tries anything different is when it has no choice because revenues have run out. They’ve run out again‚ but only a fool would have high expectations. Steven Greenhut is Western region director for the R Street Institute. Write to him at sgreenhut@rstreet.org. The post Newsom’s California: Out of Money and Out of Ideas appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Albert Hunt is urging President Joe Biden to announce that he will not run for reelection and will devote himself instead to the legal defense and personal rehabilitation of his son Hunter.   READ MORE: The Bad Boys: Hunter Biden vs. John Dean “The particulars in the tax evasion charges against Hunter Biden are sleazy‚” Hunt writes. “I don’t know if the case is strong or whether the prosecutor felt pressure to bring it; I suspect if his father wasn’t running for president‚ we never would have heard of it.” What is evident is that Hunter is a deeply troubled man‚ deep in debt and probably in need of strong support. “His father can provide that.” Well‚ one thinks‚ why not? President Biden is hardly the indispensable man. He could be easily replaced by a younger‚ fresher face. He was once the only Democrat who could win against Donald Trump‚ but now he is just about the only one who would lose to him if the election were held today. There is no signature legislative program that is uniquely his. Any Democrat could campaign on the usual mix of bigger government to be paid for by taxing the rich. The actual Biden record‚ of course‚ is bigger government paid for with more inflation that isn’t even a nuisance to the rich.   But it would be hard to make “Can’t win ’em all” into a knockout campaign slogan. On foreign policy‚ Biden is a standard issue globalist who can be relied upon to keep on keeping on. Until‚ that is‚ it doesn’t work any longer. As in Afghanistan. And‚ given the way things are going in Ukraine‚ it is hard to imagine voters who are motivated by foreign policy issues going with Biden in the belief that they are backing a winner. No voter is thinking that if Joe Biden leaves the scene‚ we will be at war in a matter of weeks‚ if not days. He was elected as a caretaker. Hard to imagine him saying to the voters‚ “Didn’t I caretake good? Don’t you want four more years of the same?” (RELATED: It’s Joe Biden’s Fault He Can’t Get the Ukraine Funding) If his record in office doesn’t inspire confidence and motivate one to vote for Biden’s reelection‚ there is also the matter of his age‚ about which there is not much that can be done‚ even by the most gifted of political image-makers.  Biden has gotten old.   He didn’t mean to‚ but it happened anyway. He is in his 80s. His young 80s‚ to be sure. But 80 is a long way from the new 60s or even the new 70s. Biden acts his age‚ and that is troubling to many voters‚ young and old. Perhaps especially to voters who are old and think‚ “I wouldn’t want that job even if it does come with the White House and that airplane.” President Biden soldiers on‚ and while it is possible to admire his grit‚ there is something selfish about it. After all‚ it is not — as they say — just about him. Meanwhile‚ his son is looking at criminal charges that‚ if he is found guilty‚ could get him as much as 17 years in prison. The automatic response of almost any father confronted by this would be to think‚ “What can I do? I’ll do anything.” And mean it. Well‚ in President Biden’s case‚ he could pardon his son.   It would finish him politically‚ of course. But so what? He’s had a good run. Gone as far in his chosen field as it is possible to go. There are no more mountains to climb or rivers to cross. Just thousands more hands to shake and forgettable speeches to give. His son‚ meanwhile‚ fights off the prosecutorial wolves and tries to stay sober and out of jail.   If President Biden quit now and made way for someone younger and more electable who then won and kept Trump out of the White House‚ he would be a hero to his party and‚ perhaps‚ to his son. And he would be an example of selflessness that might even be an inspiration to other fathers. And who knows? There might even be a book deal in it.   The post If Biden Loves His Son‚ He Should Resign appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Disney has spent the last year developing and refining its destructive habit of producing films infected by woke themes — and it’s become surprisingly good at it. The result‚ of course‚ has been disastrous for the mega-entertainment company; almost every film Disney sent to theaters this year flopped at the box office. It didn’t seem to matter that most of Disney’s new releases were nostalgic replays or add-ons to beloved series with loyal fans. It turns out that audiences‚ loyal or not‚ are not interested in watching Indiana Jones’ female sidekick take shots at capitalism‚ nor do they appreciate the #MeToo-inspired changes made to The Little Mermaid (the CGI was also disappointingly distasteful‚ which certainly didn’t help). (RELATED from Aubrey Gulick: Can Conservative Entertainment Not Be Cringe?) It’s taken far too long‚ but maybe Disney is finally getting the hint. Nobody Wants a PC Snow White The latest controversy at Walt Disney’s old stomping grounds has been the studio’s remake of its classic 1937 cartoon Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. The studio selected Rachel Zegler to fill the titular role — even though Zegler‚ who is Latina‚ is a far cry from the demure fairytale princess with “skin as white snow” — and she quickly made it clear that she had no intention of being anything like the dreamy Snow White of the cartoon. “People are making these jokes about ours being the PC Snow White‚ where it’s like‚ yeah‚ it is — because it needed that‚” she told Variety Fair a few months ago. In a 2022 Entertainment Weekly interview‚ Zegler made it clear that she thinks the classic is “extremely dated when it comes to the ideas of women being in roles of power and what a woman is fit for in the world.” She promised that “[w]hen we came to reimagining the actual role of Snow White‚ it became about ‘the fairest of them all’ meaning who is most just‚ and who can become a fantastic leader.” (READ MORE: Disney Lives in a Small World‚ After All) While Zegler was busy complaining about the original cartoon’s lack of 20th-century wokeisms‚ Peter Dinklage was griping about the role dwarfs played in the film‚ so Disney promptly got rid of them‚ apparently opting to replace the traditional characters with “magical creatures” of varying heights. What Disney quickly discovered‚ however‚ was that audiences aren’t interested in a story about a power-hungry young woman; they want the classic‚ romantic fairytale they grew up with — complete with its cast of lovable dwarfs. The film received backlash from all sides. The son of the director of the original cartoon‚ 91-year-old David Hand‚ told the Telegraph‚ “It’s a whole different concept and I just totally disagree with it‚ and I know my dad and Walt would also very much disagree with it.” He added: “[Disney’s] thoughts are just so radical now. They change the stories‚ they change the thought process of the characters … they’re making up new woke things and I’m just not into any of that.” Meanwhile‚ some conservatives decided that Disney’s impending disaster of a film was the perfect opportunity to score a point in the war for good entertainment. The Daily Wire announced in October that it would be releasing its own version of Snow White on its new kids’ entertainment platform‚ Bentkey‚ in 2024‚ the same year Disney’s live-action was scheduled to be released. Announcing Bentkey's first live-action feature film: Snow White and the Evil Queen starring @imbrettcooper pic.twitter.com/HpYoskemAG — Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) October 16‚ 2023 Disney apparently realized how embarrassing it would be if its film were to perform worse than the conservative alternative‚ and‚ within weeks‚ it announced that Snow White would be delayed by a year (now scheduled for March 21‚ 2025). Ostensibly‚ the delay was caused by the SAG-AFTRA strikes that halted Hollywood business for months‚ but‚ according to the Daily Wire‚ it had more to do with fears of financial failure. (RELATED from Aubrey Gulick: Hollywood Shut Down for Five Months. Here’s What We’ve Learned.) The conservative entertainment company was quick to take credit for Disney’s about-face. “Disney’s rapid change of course is encouraging because it shows the kind of impact we can have when we apply the right kind of pressure. Our only hope for taking back the culture from the Left is to build alternatives that force these institutions to have to compete for conservatives’ business again‚” a spokesperson for the Daily Wire told The American Spectator. “Though the fight is far from over‚ these wins should serve as encouragement to all conservatives that victory in the greatest cultural battles of our time is possible if we stay the course.” The Dwarves Are Back Meanwhile‚ Disney has opted to make other substantial changes to the film. In a recent still photo released by the studio‚ Zegler appears in the iconic yellow and blue dress flanked by seven dwarves — a de-wokifying miracle worked by CGI. NEW: Disney's Snow White has been pushed from March 22‚ 2024 to March 21‚ 2025. Disney also shared a first look at Snow White (Rachel Zegler) and (alphabetically) Bashful‚ Doc‚ Dopey‚ Grumpy‚ Happy‚ Sleepy‚ and Sneezy. pic.twitter.com/7jgxGtb1Ri — Scott Gustin (@ScottGustin) October 27‚ 2023 The language around the film has also changed dramatically. In a recent interview with Variety‚ Zegler seems to have had a remarkable change in attitude. During a conversation with actress Halle Bailey — who starred as Ariel in the live-action The Little Mermaid — she praised the original story for being “an iconic thing that people really care about — I don’t want to mess this up for anybody.” Zegler added: It was the first feature-length cartoon movie. It won honorary Oscars. And all these amazing things that happened for that film are the reason that you [Bailey] and I get to sit here today‚ because it made Disney what it is…. [T]here’s a very dedicated group of people who love Disney cartoons. I’m one of them. I love everything that the Disney Co. has put out in the past 100 years. Those statements are‚ of course‚ a far cry from Zegler’s original demeaning comments about the story. The Daily Wire’s remake of Snow White‚ based on the trailer‚ is likely to be quite good — but even if it isn’t‚ Disney’s about-face on the woke direction in which it was originally taking this film is already a small culture victory. The post Snow White Changes Her Tune Under Pressure from Conservatives appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.