The Dish

(Hat tip: Videogum)

This interactive chart on the scale of cells and atoms is making the rounds.

(Hat tip: Flowing data)

Tyler Cowen makes a list.

Dreher's argument against the death penalty:

If Willingham really did kill his three daughters, he deserved his 2004 date with death at Huntsville. Anyone who takes the life of another in cold blood should pay for it with his own. But being found guilty by a jury is not the same as actually being guilty of the crime – which is why I reluctantly oppose the death penalty. This is no longer the Wild West. If we are going to send a man to his death, an irrevocable punishment, the margin of error must be vanishingly small.

It’s unlikely we will ever devise a capital punishment system guaranteed to smite only the truly guilty. DNA evidence greatly enhances the possibility of accuracy, but those results are only as reliable as crime lab technicians. Remember Joyce Gilchrist, the incompetent Oklahoma City forensic scientist whose work helped send 11 convicts to their deaths – and who has seen numerous inmates, some on death row, exonerated since authorities learned what a disaster she was?

Granted, Gilchrist’s expert testimony concerned less sophisticated kinds of lab analysis, which was refuted later by DNA testing. The point is that perfection is an impossible standard for anything involving human beings. We can live with something less than perfection when it doesn’t involve ending someone’s life. But how can the state’s executing a thousand killers compensate for the moral horror of putting to death a single innocent person?

(Hat tip: Ordinary Gentlemen)

… and what happened. We all know by now that the White House guessed wrong about the recovery and the stimulus last January. But Daniel Indiviglio presents a useful graph of unemployment predictions and outcomes (in red).

You don't want the video, do you? No – anything but the video:

Enduring America analyzes Ahmadinejad's speech on negotiations:

That is not a rejection of discussions with the “West”; it is an embrace of them. But it is an embrace based on the premise that the US and other countries have knocked at Tehran’s door, gone down on bended knee, and asked forgiveness. Iran is no longer an international outsider; it is an accepted nuclear power.

…[G]iven Ahmadinejad’s position, the political advantages of spinning out the talks are there to be grasped. If there are alterations in the plan to reduce the amount shipped below 80 percent and to send it out in stages rather than in one delivery, these will be concession to Iran’s and the President’s strength. If the “West” walks away from the table, this will be an indication of their continuing deceptions and mistakes — despite their apparent request for forgiveness from Tehran — and Iran will be in the right as it maintains nuclear sovereignty.

Of course, there will be pressure in the US Congress for sanctions (the House of Representatives, despite the ongoing talks, has already passed a measure for tougher economic restrictions). Those, however, are President Obama’s worry, as Russia and China are unlikely to give any support for multilateral steps.